Skip to comments.DC Democrats Pass $12.50 Minimum Wage Law… Wal-Mart Cancels Three Store Openings
Posted on 07/11/2013 6:22:37 AM PDT by servo1969
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Isaac Newtons Law of Motion
Washington DC Democrats passed a bill that would require retailers to pay workers at least $12.50 per hour.
Within hours of the decision Wal-Mart announced it was canceling three store openings in the area. Nice work, Democrats. WTOP reported:
The D.C. Council has passed a bill that would require large retailers like Wal-Mart to pay workers at least $12.50.
The bill now goes to Mayor Vincent Gray for his consideration. The 8-5 vote was short of the votes needed to override a veto from the mayor.
In a statement, Wal-Mart says the Council has forced the retailers hands and it will abandon three planned projects in the District.
We will not pursue Skyland, Capitol Gateway, and New York Avenue and will start to review the financial and legal implications on the three stores already under construction. This was a difficult decision for us and unfortunate news for most D.C. residents but the Council has forced our hand, the written statement says.
So now, instead of letting people work for $8.25 per hour with a chance to move up, you get nothing. Good job, DC.
Oh, but they feel good about themselves. They’re “good people” because they support a “living wage”.
Doesn’t matter what actually results from their support - the real goal was accomplished - they feel good about themselves.
How can Liberals go their entire lives so completely clueless about basic economics?
Glad this worked out this way.
Those Walmarts were going to end up screwed, it is good this happened up front and that Walmart got out of them.
Now to decide on where to send them...
They are educated well beyond their intelligence..........
THIS is all part of the great humanitarian concern Liberals have for the poor and it’s part of their drive for full employment!!! :)
It's called pre-operational egocentrism. It's a stage of development found in most toddlers.
As I understand it, it is not “large retailers like Wal-Mart” but in fact tailored so it is ONLY Wal-Mart. There is a Target store already in the District, no? And there is zero mention of them falling under this bill.
And I haven’t heard any grousing from the other minimum wage workers in DC, no “hey, what about us? We want $12.50 too.” Now why might that be? /rhetorical
Good for Wal-Mart! Tell them to stick it.
Why not set the minimum wage at $20? Now, that’s a living wage.
In a statement, Wal-Mart says the Council has forced the retailers hands and it will abandon three planned projects in the District.
We will not pursue Skyland, Capitol Gateway, and New York Avenue and will start to review the financial and legal implications on the three stores already under construction. This was a difficult decision for us and unfortunate news for most D.C. residents but the Council has forced our hand, the written statement says
Killing opportunity for all ...what Democrats do best!
Oh, but they will never get blamed for the cutback in jobs; the evil anti-union Walmart will be demonized.
I don’t know of any plans for WalMart in Detroit but they did just open a Meijer on the corner of Woodward and 8 Mile bringing some 400 jobs. (Meijer is a regional store comparable to Walmart)
That tells me that despite Detroit’s problems, economic freedom wins out over economic oppression.
Inner city residents ought to protest. Two family members could get jobs, get married, stay together and earn $16 per hour combined. Their kids could get jobs and save for college.
Oh, well, no ...we can’t have that.
A lot of congressional staff is going to love this law up until the time they get replaced with unpaid interns.
Particularly stupid because with the extreme cost of living in D.C., market forces probably would have eventually forced Walmart to pay something close to $12.50 to get competent help anyway.
Meijer is a unionized company that has deep ties to all the major unions in Michigan. The Woodward store is likely a political favor, and at the end of the day I suspect you’ll learn your Michigan taxes are helping to pay for it.
If it is not a bill of Attainder, it is awfully close.
If not that, or in addition, it does seem that it violates the 14th amendment.
Walmart has threatened to stop construction on three stores in Washington D.C. and to cancel plans for three more if Washington goes ahead with a dramatic increase in minimum wage to $12.50 an hour. Walmart argues that the bill arbitrarily discriminates against large retailers, and that is at least partly true. The measure under consideration would only apply to stores of at least 75,000 square feet and $1 billion in annual corporate profits. This net catches Walmart, Best Buy, Home Depot, Target and Macys, but not Starbucks (enough profits, but under 75,000 square feet) or local supermarkets like Giant Foods (possibly enough space, not enough profits).
Bill of Attainder
Definition: A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.
The Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 provides that: “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will be passed.”
“The Bill of Attainder Clause was intended not as a narrow, technical (and therefore soon to be outmoded) prohibition, but rather as an implementation of the separation of powers, a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function or more simply - trial by legislature.” U.S. v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437, 440 (1965).
“These clauses of the Constitution are not of the broad, general nature of the Due Process Clause, but refer to rather precise legal terms which had a meaning under English law at the time the Constitution was adopted. A bill of attainder was a legislative act that singled out one or more persons and imposed punishment on them, without benefit of trial. Such actions were regarded as odious by the framers of the Constitution because it was the traditional role of a court, judging an individual case, to impose punishment.” William H. Rehnquist, The Supreme Court, page 166.
“Bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and laws impairing the obligations of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation. ... The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. They have seen with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative interferences, in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands of enterprising and influential speculators, and snares to the more-industrious and less-informed part of the community.” James Madison, Federalist Number 44, 1788.
Supreme Court cases construing the Bill of Attainder clause include:
Ex Parte Garland, 4 Wallace 333 (1866).
Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wallace 277 (1866).
U.S. v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437 (1965).
Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, 433 U.S.425 (1977).
Selective Service A
14th amendment. Excerpt of Section 1
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
actually, this isn’t an example of the liberals shooting themselves in the foot. they are simply exposing their true colors.
publicly, they scream out that “the rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer”. the dirty secret is that the liberals don’t give a damn about poor; but they desperately want to destroy the “rich”.
Maybe they can have the Bakers Union come in and represent them with those non-existent jobs. What’s really sad is the D.C. Council doesn’t care if people work or not because they always have the Federal Government as Nanny to make sure the welfare spigot is never turned off.
If I were WalMart I would not just be canceling construction of new stores, I would be closing one already in operation (as a cost saving measure of course).
I don’t care if its a union company. Their prices are very competitive with Meijer and they bring jobs period. BTW other stores that will be built on site are Marshall’s and K&G Fashion.
They aren't......with their own money. But they get elected by "sticking it to the man" and their minions stumble over each other voting for them.
In DC, you either are an SEIU Government "employee" (I use the term very loosely), or, you collect Food Stamps, EBT's, Daycare/Childcare/Child subsidies and FREE Medical, Section 8 housing, etc., etc.
We need a civil war to get the country back on the track of personal responsibility, and EARN YOUR OWN WAY.
How can anyone live on $12.50/hr. Why not $100 or $200? Now that’s a living wage. Attica! Attica! Free Mumia! Attica! Attica! Down with Evil Walmart! Attica! Attica!....jackasses.
Who was the wacko who wanted $25 an hour? Was that the imaginary indian Elizabeth Warren? Yeah I think it was her, she wanted $25 an hour minimum wage lol! “Hey why does a Big Mac at McDonalds cost $20 bucks?”
And, the people making $8.25 / hr at other places get to pay government-inflated prices for necessities.
And the real estate hustler pals of the council are circling the commercially developed sites to be divested by wally world. Graft, corruption and maintaining the extreme cost of living DC is known for so that only the few elite and foreign cantonments can be there served by people who are made poor and the dope dealers who prey on them. Nice work DC.
The price advantage of simple day to day things wallmart could have delivered greatly outweighed a “labor” wage issue. This was a cabal of socialist union types and true thugs pushing this. The rainbow coalition.
It’s a fine line. I’m sure WalMart studies every possible financial of each store. “It’s only business” still applies and the leadership I’m sure is looking at near-term and extended-term regarding profit margins. If they could make a profit with $12.50 it would be irresponsible to the stockholders not to proceed. Of course other factors like shoplifting exposure needs to be addressed as will as the potential of flash-mobs. I suppose WalMart insures itself but they still would have cost-center to address increased risk with D.C. Bottom line is they didn’t get to be where they are by being emotional but rather analytical.
Largely because they started out with trust funds and never had to work— the leaders anyway. And their co-marketers for a “decent wage” carried water for the unions.
Someone needs to tell them about “profit-sharing” models, but then, profit is a dirty word.
LOVE this kind of stupidity.
Wally World should open up locations 50 feet outside the DC border. DC gets their box box retailers and the DC city council can go on with this nonsense.
There are few jobs in a big box retailer that are really worth 12-50 an hour. Truth be known, there are few jobs inside a big box retailer that are worth 8-25 an hour. Legislating a “living wage” results in less jobs.
But, as pointed out aptly by others, they feel good about it, so that’s all they really need.
If you have a problem with making 8-25 an hour, don’t apply there. If you have a problem with companies that pay 8-25 an hour, then don’t shop there. Let the free market decide. The DC council will lose every time.
We don't save the US unless economic balance comes back. I'm not saying a person can't be rich and successful, but they can't do it the Walton way. JMHO
it’s kind of like the union worker mentality that no job is better than a job at less than they want to make. You’re out of work, but at least you “won”.
Try writing a check to your mortgage company for a moral victory, idiots.
Put them up in fly over country where the people will appreciate the jobs.
Well, if a baker can be sent to jail for not baking a cake for some lesbians, and an innkeeper can be fined for not letting lesbians fornicate at his inn, and a church can be made to fund abortions, what’s to stop Walmart from being FORCED to build and do business in an area that demands a certain minimum wage? I know, I know, completely different scenarios, but it seems to be the same kind of logic: don’t do what the PC/government/dictator wants, and you’ll be forced to.
The next step for the enemy is to use the force of law to compel businesses to open in hostile climates. You just know that they are thinking it.
Oh, you forgot “JUSTICE FOR SAINT TRAYVON!!
Although the St. Mumia reference was awesome.
I loved shopping at Meijer when I lived in Michigan. As you say, they are competitive. I have no particular issue with them being union either. Just pointing out this store is likely the result of some back-room deal than it making actual business sense.
Looks to me that D.C. has just helped Wal-Mart to avoid huge property loses from the pre-planned “Saint Trayvon” memorial riots.
Did you forget your sarcasm tag?
Not really. If gov't can force people to buy a product (health insurance), and religions can be forced to go against their basic tenets, and businesses can be forced to serve a certain clientele ... forcing a company to do business in a certain area is an easy stretch.
Speaking for myself, I'd not want to patronize a business who was being forced to work with me. But, that's just me, I'm smarter than your average gov't bureaucrat.
And let's face it, it's self-serving for the politicians. This action "throws a bone" at their base without really helping them, plus it generates more tax revenue, and probably elevates some union payscales, which has a ripple effect. The pols are looking to "sqeeze" the rich a little--dip into their profits, without actually making them work at a loss. Or, if they have to work at a loss, good for them. No skin off of the DC government's back.
There is nothing ‘stupid’ about it at all.
They have the outcome that they wanted. They wanted to keep Walmart out, and they have.
If Gray does not veto, Wal-Mart should pour salt in the D.C. council’s wounds.
For example, open up stores in Maryland, just outside the D.C. city limits, hiring only Maryland residents to work there, and offer discounts to D.C. residents to shop in Maryland. Then periodically publish in D.C. advertisements that show how many jobs and how much tax revenue the city has lost “because of the greed of the city council.”
“You could have a good job with us right now, but your city council wants to keep you unemployed.”
I wasn’t being sarcastic. People who work have to be able to survive on that. The WalMart model has the owners pocketing huge profits while they undermine US workers with merchandise from third-world cesspools and the taxpayer pays the bill for the low wage workers benefits.
I believe doctors and other health providers will be targeted soon, a many of them go “free market” instead of accepting insurance and Deathcare. We’re going to start seeing lots of fines, arrests and forced-back-from-retirements.
the remaining store(s), will merely raise the prices, to compensate for the extra overhead.....everyone pays, and everyone loses....
WDC’s motto: I’d rather sit around smokin’ crack than work for less than $12.50 an hour”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.