• 🛑Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
    Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community! 💪
  • 🔥Check Out Muscle Gelz HEAL® - A Topical Peptide Repair Formula with BPC-157 & TB-500! 🏥

Wal-Mart Cares

Bowden

Elite Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2009
Messages
1,798
Reaction score
736
Points
0
Location
Volunteer Moderators of the world unite, you have
IML Gear Cream!
11-24-lineart-KOS.png
 
Walmart profit 2012 = 17 billion

Walmart employees = 2.2 Million

17 billion divided by 2.2 million = a raise of $7,727 per employee per year.

Equals a raise of $3.71 per hour per employee.


That's with Walmart making NO PROFIT.


it's hilarious how people with no business ownership or experience are telling Walmart how to operate. they are clueless....
 
Last edited:
Walmart profit 2012 = 17 billion

Walmart employees = 2.2 Million

17 billion divided by 2.2 million = a raise of $7,727 per employee per year.

Equals a raise of $3.71 per hour per employee.


That's with Walmart making NO PROFIT.


it's hilarious how people with no business ownership or experience are telling Walmart how to operate. they are clueless....

Scamming the government and the people is not a business model.
 
Scamming the government and the people is not a business model.

you're delusional. it's a shame you've been brainwashed by your democrat party.
 
you're delusional. it's a shame you've been brainwashed by your democrat party.

Who is delusional? I don't subscribe to either major party, which happen to be the same party once you think about it. I've stated that many times here. Talk about being brainwashed, you believe running a scam is a business model.
 
thanks for making my point. completely two different business models. apples, oranges
 
you're also forgetting most of the people who shop at Walmart can't afford to shop at Costco. their business model discriminates against the poor. :)

and just look at all the products Walmart offers compared to Costco. They have so many different kinds of products, there's no comparison.

you should be praising Walmart for supplying cheap goods and jobs to people who can't get a jobs anywhere else.
when Walmart puts an ad out for a new store to hire they get thousands of applications for just a few hundred positions. applications from people who can't get work anywhere else. so you can say their actually over paid, according to the market.
 
Scamming the government and the people is not a business model.

enough of the democrat talking points.
what would be a fair wage per hour for a Walmart worker? I'm waiting....
 
IML Gear Cream!
enough of the democrat/republican talking points.
what would be a fair wage per hour for a Walmart worker? I'm waiting....

Fixed it for you.
 
enough of the democrat talking points.
what would be a fair wage per hour for a Walmart worker? I'm waiting....

One that would keep me from paying higher taxes to support Wal-Mart employees on welfare.
The ones that Wal-Mart directs to welfare offices to get welfare due to Wal-Mart low wage and benefit compensations.
 
One that would keep me from paying higher taxes to support Wal-Mart employees on welfare.
The ones that Wal-Mart directs to welfare offices to get welfare due to Wal-Mart low wage and benefit compensations.


you people keep talking about fair wages and refuse to say what a fair wage per hour is. I'm STILL waiting.....
 
you people keep talking about fair wages and refuse to say what a fair wage per hour is. I'm STILL waiting.....

This has nothing to do with fair wages.
It has everything to do with taxpayer subsidized Wal-Mart corporate welfare.

I could care less what Wal-Mart pays their employees.
I care a great deal when they direct their employees to welfare offices and intentionally have me subsidize through increased taxes and increased government debt and deficits that fund welfare programs related to their low wage and benefits compensation model.

That is the point to all of this that you are intentionally ignoring.

Some conservatives detest welfare when it directly benefits low wage people.
They support it like in this case when it allows low wage and benefit compensations that increase corporate profits and benefits the rich, wealthy and investor classes through capital flows related to passive income that is taxed at 15% capital gains and dividend tax rates.

What these conservatives fail to realize or intentionally ignore is that the corporate profits and increased capital gained by the upper economic class from low wage and benefit employees is being off-set by increased taxes on them and higher government deficits and debt to fund welfare programs due to low wage and benefit employee compensation models.

They blame the employees for being on welfare, instead of being critical of the corrupt capitalism and free market forces that put them on welfare and maintain them there in the first place.
 
This has nothing to do with fair wages.
It has everything to do with taxpayer subsidized Wal-Mart corporate welfare.

I could care less what Wal-Mart pays their employees.
I care a great deal when they direct their employees to welfare offices and intentionally have me subsidize through increased taxes and increased government debt and deficits that fund welfare programs related to their low wage and benefits compensation model.

That is the point to all of this that you are intentionally ignoring.

Some conservatives detest welfare when it directly benefits low wage people.
They support it like in this case when it allows low wage and benefit compensations that increase corporate profits and benefits the rich, wealthy and investor classes throuhg capital flows related to passive income that is taxed at 15% capital gains and dividend tax rates.

What these conservatives fail to realize or intentionally ignore is that the corporate profits and increased capital gained by the upper economic class from low wage and benefit employees is being off-set by increased taxes on them and higher government deficits and debt to fund welfare programs due to low wage and benefit employee compensation models.

They blame the employees for being on welfare, instead of being critical of the corrupt capitalism and free market forces that put them on welfare and maintain them there in the first place.

thanks for your honesty for clarifying you have no problem with the wages paid at Walmart and that they're fair.
 
thanks for your honesty for clarifying you have no problem with the wages paid at Walmart and that they're fair.

There is no such thing as "fair".
Nothing is "Fair"
"Fair" depends on the perspective of the individual.

However as to the answer to your question, Wal-Mart employees should be compensated at a level that keeps them ineligible for public welfare .

I see no reason why the taxpayers should have to subsidize through a type of corporate welfare Wal-Marts low wage and benefits compensation business model in-order to allow them maintain/increase their profit margins and ROI to their owners, executives and shareholders.

That is my problem with the wages paid at Wal-Mart.
 
There is no such thing as "fair".
Nothing is "Fair"
"Fair" depends on the perspective of the individual.

However as to the answer to your question, Wal-Mart employees should be compensated at a level that keeps them ineligible for public welfare .

I see no reason why the taxpayers should have to subsidize through a type of corporate welfare Wal-Marts low wage and benefits compensation business model in-order to allow them maintain/increase their profit margins and ROI to their owners, executives and shareholders.

That is my problem with the wages paid at Wal-Mart.

you're contradicting yourself on every post.

what's that compensation level?
 
while completely ignoring my question. still waiting....

Bowden answered it for you.

One that would keep me from paying higher taxes to support Wal-Mart employees on welfare.
The ones that Wal-Mart directs to welfare offices to get welfare due to Wal-Mart low wage and benefit compensations.
 
IML Gear Cream!
There is no such thing as "fair".
Nothing is "Fair"
"Fair" depends on the perspective of the individual.

However as to the answer to your question, Wal-Mart employees should be compensated at a level that keeps them ineligible for public welfare .

I see no reason why the taxpayers should have to subsidize through a type of corporate welfare Wal-Marts low wage and benefits compensation business model in-order to allow them maintain/increase their profit margins and ROI to their owners, executives and shareholders.

That is my problem with the wages paid at Wal-Mart.

There's no such thing as fair? How do you figure?
 
again, what hourly rate is that? it's not a trick question. lol.

Take the answer Bowden gave you and figure it out.
 
Last edited:
you're contradicting yourself on every post.

what's that compensation level?

I am not contradicting myself.
Your problem is that you are looking at a complex issue like this from a political conservative perspective, rather than looking at it from a complex socioeconomic perspective which it is.
 
So if walmart had to raise wages to help employees get off welfare, and pay them in line with Costco, they might have to lay off say, 500,000 people.

Now you've got 1.6M people employed by Walmart, and 500,000 newly unemployed people.

Which situation would be better for the employees and taxpayers alike?

I get the numbers by using the figures posted earlier for costco vs. walmart.

If they were more relative in scope. I mean, the money has to come from somewhere, right?
 
There is no set hourly rate.
It depends on the state / city that someone lives in and the size of their household'.

The income levels to qualify for food stamps are indicated on the SNAP site:

Eligibility | Food and Nutrition Service

The income requirements for section 8 housing vouchers are indicated here:

Income Limits | HUD USER

Wow. It depends on the size of their household? So if Bob (20yo, single, no kids) gets a job as a checker, he should be paid less than Bill (50yo, married, 8 kids), doing the same job?
So apparently job performance should not be an important criteria anymore, being quickly knocked off by the size of your household.
 
I am not contradicting myself.
Your problem is that you are looking at a complex issue like this from a political conservative perspective, rather than looking at it from a complex socioeconomic perspective which it is.

I'm looking at it by the numbers. if you take the average pay per store employee and give everyone $3.71 raise Walmart be out of business.
 
So if walmart had to raise wages to help employees get off welfare, and pay them in line with Costco, they might have to lay off say, 500,000 people.

Now you've got 1.6M people employed by Walmart, and 500,000 newly unemployed people.

Which situation would be better for the employees and taxpayers alike?

I get the numbers by using the figures posted earlier for costco vs. walmart.

If they were more relative in scope. I mean, the money has to come from somewhere, right?

They won't have to lay-off anyone. Walmart already stated they could easily raise wages without hurting themselves.
 
Back
Top