Wal Mart's Exploitive Practices Attacked By Website

Wake Up Wal-Mart ^

[Clintonfatigued]

Because of Wal-Mart's inadequate wages and benefits, Wal-Mart employees are eligible for $2.5 billion in Federal assistance, which comes from your tax dollars.

[A. Pole]

Just keep raising the minimum wage until the argument falls apart. $100 dollars an hour? $1000 dollars an hour?

It is not logical at all. There is such a thing like starvation diet, sufficient diet and overeating. Numbers game will not disprove this fact.

[Modok]

Why do you want to set the reasonable and fair minimum so low?

[Aliska]

Is that true in both Manhattan New York and Lacombe Missisippi?

Is what true? Wages are lower in Lacombe Mississippi because poor people are trapped there and could never make it in New York. Cost of living in Manhattan is so high only the best paid people can afford to live there. The others have to scrunch up in dilapidated, slumlord apartments out in the Bronx or over on the Jersey side.

[Betaille]

"Because it would not be just (or possible). Wages should not be equal."

See, once your confronted with a specific example, you answer your own question.

[Modok]

What is a sufficient diet for these people?

[Nowhere Man]

A living wage does not include two cars. It should include one dependable car, money to pay for insurance, modest housing, adequate food, a night out once in awhile, internet access and computer, can get by without cellphone and cable tv. You can take classes on the internet to get a college degree, if they have your IQ.

Some decent people just don't have the intelligence to quaify for the better jobs, or they have handicaps you don't know about. That does not make them lesser beings and they deserve a minimum quality of life. Anyone with an IQ above 100 can make a good living. Most don't even try.

It's a shame that some even here would tell people "to go jump in the lake" if they can't make it on their own. I know there are times I have been humbled and it makes me show more humility and compassion. I know there are limits, I mean if someone just wants to sit there even with the help out there, well, even I can get angry at the lazy but if someone is trying to make a go at it but get nowhere, I can see giving them a helping hand.

I might get into trouble with this but I see myself as a social, moral and military conservative but an economic centrist. I think Just Third Way (website - Center of Economic and Social Justice) has a lot of good points to offer where it would open up more paths to ownership for the average working person. We have gone beyond the paradigms of pure socialism/communism and pure capitalism, we need to accept that and think outside the box. In short, concentration of political and/or economic power in too few hands is not good. In short, we need some form of "Capitalism with a human face."

I think if we keep going down the path we are on, we are just handing the socialists and libertines the ammo that will eventually hurt us. Welfare should be geared as a hand up to responsibility as well as accountibility, not a hand out that leads to no production and laziness.

I don't know, maybe it is me getting closer to a more Christian based outlook, perhaps it is my roots in being a working class "Pittsburgh Hunky" and seeing industry die here (although one of my friends has a similar take, he grew up in rural Indiana where a lot of family farms disappeared) and my willingness to ask questions and help to come up with ideas that will benefit the most here in America and a brighter future.

[Betaille]

You're missing the point. Answer, why couldn't we set a $100 minimum wage and you will also answer why we couldn't set a $17 one.

[A. Pole]

Why do you want to set the reasonable and fair minimum so low?

Because they should be low. Please, do not play games.

[Chef Dajuan]

What are you some kinda union goon?

Unions suck and are communist inspired threats to free enterprise.

If you don't like Wal Mart, don't shop there or work there. Otherwise, ciera la boca.

[MARTIAL MONK]

Sixteen dollars an hour is about right for a living wage today in our country unless you have something going on the side.

I think that your employer should pay you what you are worth. Unfortunately, there are minimum wage laws.

[Gabz]

Unfortunately, I get a feeling that your well thought out post is going to fall upon deaf ears where it was directed.

[stands2reason]

Why do their workers choose to work there when they can make a living wage working for ______?

[A. Pole]

Answer, why couldn't we set a $100 minimum wage and you will also answer why we couldn't set a $17 one.

I see that you listen too much to Hush Bimbo.

[dts32041]

Just read a few books about politics of the demo rat party in the 20's and 30's, the days when the knight riders were riding for them.

you may also want to read the valochi papers.

Or a brief history of jimmy hoffa.

[Betaille]

"It is not logical at all."

Okay you're on the right track. Now tell us why a $100 minimum wage is not possible or logical? You're getting closer to understanding.

[Aliska]

In the region I live in (straddling 3 states) the average starting pay for a burger flipper job is about $6.00 and hour. Last I checked a part-time cashier at Walmart starts at over $8.....higher at some of the stores closer to the beach.

You can't live on $8 an hour unless you live in a bad part of town where there are lots of drug dealing and drive by shootings. Even then you usually have to live with somebody, lots of time still with your parents if they are still alive. Widowed mom gets a social security check which helps.

But since you're all into the "morality" of wages paid, why not pick on the places that don't pay anywhere near what Walmart pays? Is it any wonder they have 10 applicants for every position open?

This thread is about Wal Mart. If you want to talk about McDonalds, start a new thread. You can't live on their pay either unless you are the manager. 10 applicants for every position open, you say? That's because ten better paying jobs have been lost by local companies who have been forced to close their doors or move south of the border.

[Modok]

I think you are unfairly hampering their life by asking that the living wage be set so low. I believe $60 per hour is a good and fair start.

[A. Pole]

I see that you listen too much to Hush Bimbo. I have to go to sleep, I need to work tomorrow.

[Fledermaus]

Why so little, I think the living wage should be closer to $60 per hour.

Because it would not be just (or possible). Wages should not be equal. Living wage is defined as reasonable and fair minumum. Don't you have common sense? ?

HA! You just fell into the trap.

You are no longer arguing about the justification for a "living wage", you are haggling over the price. Once you do that you've lost.

It's the same as the old joke about offering a woman $1 million for sex. She says yes. Then you offer $1 and she says, "what do you think I am? A whore". Of course the answer is, "we've determined that, now we are just haggling over the price".

To agree that a "living wage" at some point is ridiculous, then it's ridiculous on all levels since you, or the government, cannot ever possibly define "living" for every single individual living in the United States of America. Thus you have to constantly change the definition by creating parameters based on arbitrary variables to the point it's incomprehensible.

The fact you use the word "sufficient" completely proves my point because that term is totally subjective.

[Betaille]

You're repeating inanities now. You were on the right track. Why is a $100 minimum wage not possible? You're getting closer to the answer here.