Then you aren't looking at the numbers correctly.
-
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 IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex
Wal-Mart Cares
- Thread starter Bowden
- Start date
Then you aren't looking at the numbers correctly.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 52
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
He took the net profit, divided it by the number of employees, and came up with a number far below the $15 mark. I'm pro-wage increase and was going to make a case for it by doing those numbers, but then I realized that the numbers don't work. The only way it's going to happen is if Walmart increases its prices.
like yourself.
Why don't you explain in detail how paying people as little as possible aids in sustainability with constantly increasing prices for goods and services and the loss of purchasing power over time due to the effects of cumulative inflation on the USD.
If they paid their employees in line with what Costco pays their employees, and didn't want to lose profits, they would have to lay off some employees.
Bingo. The money has to come from somewhere. They aren't going to become a non-profit either.
"Always moderate Prices. Always."
Just doesn't sound as good.
Bowden
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 736
- Points
- 0
Welfare benefits are based in part on income and household size related to federal guidelines as to poverty levels.
Check the links I provided and look at the data.
it's not even an option. Costco has 190K employees and Wal-Mart has over 2 million.
the fact is that there are a lot of people that work at Wal-Mart that deserve and should be payed more. I've worked in every type of facility that Wal-Mart has and I've seen what they all do with my own eyes and have talked to hundreds of employees and know that they get paid. And the vast majority of them that work hard, and I mean the people in shipping and receiving at the stores are all under paid for the work that they perform. The people that work at the big distribution centers are much better paid but there is also less of them and the labor is higher skilled.
You missed the part where Walmart said they could increase wages without affecting themselves.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 52
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
Do you have a link?
I don't have a link but many top large firms across the US are doing the same thing. They forgo real investment back into human capital for stock share buybacks which then increase market dominance, its nothing more than a form of economic rent seeking. it's an illusion of increased productivity in US firms by using cheaper and cheaper global supply chains which then artificially inflate the domestic "value added".
So many economic indicators in use today are no longer accurate and it's why the OECD asked Jospeh Stiglitz to come up with new indicators as seen in the OECD social justice report.
take that net profit and tax it by 35% then start from there. even less.
I'm aware of that. But that still doesn't answer my question or solve the problem.
Bowden
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 736
- Points
- 0
The issue is not compensation for performance, its that the base level salary of the employees below management level is below the federal poverty level.
Many of these employees are not granted by their employers 40 hour work weeks, they are working below 30 hours a week at under 9 an hour and that will place someone in the working poor economic class and qualify them for welfare benefits.
Wal-Mart is the largest employer in the U.S. and it has the greatest percentage of corporate employees in the working poor economic class that qualify for welfare.
It's not just Wal-Mart, it's also any employer that pays employees below the federal poverty line that is adding to the problem.
The question is, do taxpayers want to pay more for a product at a price that would allow a corporation to stay in business and also pay a wage at a level that would keep employees from qualifying from welfare, or do they want to pay taxes and fund welfare for those low wage and benefit employees?
When you see a condition in which the largest employer in the United States employs the largest number of employees in the working poor economic class that qualify for welfare, it is easy to see why the level of income inequality in the U.S. is accelerating, as well as why the number of people on food stamps and other forms of welfare is accelerating as well.
This is a huge socioeconomic problem.
It is also a great way to increase the appeal of big government socialism as all of those people are going to vote in their own best self interests.
If capitalists will not provide for them a living wage then they will vote for politicians that will.
Last edited:
Bowden
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 736
- Points
- 0
Walmart Blames Sluggish Sales On Taxes, Enjoys Lower Effective Tax Rate - Forbes
The effective tax rate for the retail giant for the year was 31.0%, down nearly two points from last year. Walmart saw its biggest drop in the effective tax rate in fourth quarter, a nearly three point drop to 27.7% as compared to 30.9% last year. The company touted a number of discrete tax items, including positive impact from fiscal 2013 legislative changes, most notably the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012″ for the dip in tax rates.
Always Low Wages? Wal-Mart's Other Choices - Bloomberg
Always Low Wages? Wal-Mart's Other Choices
By Barry Ritholtz
"Can Wal-Mart afford to increase employee salaries? Let's crunch the numbers. The retail giant does $474.88 billion a year in sales; across their 2,200,000 employees, that nets out to $213,255 sales per employee. Given a 5.93 percent operating margin, that nets out to $12,646.02 profit margin per employee. Adding $3 per hour per full-time employee would consume almost half of that profit."
Last edited:
I agree it's a huge problem. And I also think that is why the political tides are going the way they are. I think the real questions should be:
Should ALL employees in the US be able to be completely financially independent? If so, then we are a socialist society. If not, why not? Should skills, education, and experience play a part in this? Are there no "entry level" jobs?
I believe there are entry level jobs not intended to sustain a family. I also believe, anecdotally, that the majority of people are not financially smart.
I know a dude that was imprisoned from age 16-24. He got out, was favored into a job, and moved in with his gf. She was on all forms of welfare. They had no transportation. 3 months out of the joint, she and her parents gave him a 65" TV, xbox whatever, and some games for his bday. Spent about 3 grand. For the next few months that I knew him, he still had no transportation cause he couldn't afford it. Why didn't they buy him a car, pay rent, food, etc? That money could've gone a LOT farther at sustaining himself as an unskilled, uneducated, non-existent experienced worker and provider for his unemployed gf and 1 yr old.(conjugal visit).
Unfortunately, although this is an extreme case, look around at all the "wants" that people have while struggling to pay for the "needs".
How will that help those poor, poor, poor motherfucking part time employees who depend on that part time job and welfare to support their families?
They should just eliminate the part time positions and move everyone to full time. Would that work? I guess high school and college kids don't work at walmart? I wasn't aware their employees were all people with dependents. Seems discriminatory.
I'm glad I chose not to work at Walmart. I wonder why someone would subject themselves to such low wages. I guess because that's the best job they can get with the skills they have, otherwise they wouldn't be working there.
maybe because there are 3 unemployed workers for every job opening. the same people that say a determined person would take any job they can get are the ones asking why people work shit jobs. somehow, sometime, somewhere.... it needs to stop being just words with no meaning.
Walmart was my first official on the books job, started my Junior year as a Cart Retriever and that shit built me up more than any weight training. I was barely 140 and by the end of JR year I was a solid 165-170. By the time Two-a-Days came in August all my team mates were soft and struggling and I was running circles around them. After practice I would hit the gym like Lassiter the maniac in that movie the program, then go to work from 2pm to 10pm pushing up to 80 carts at a time in 100+ Texas heat..... What I'm trying to say is consistent hard work does a body good...just like the gym its hard to get in that groove again especially after you milk unemployment for months. People just gotta get their ass in gear and start peddling this tandem bike we call the economy...
Sadly, in America, it is.
and that's the consequence of the big govt welfare state you voted for.
devildogusmc
Registered
Anyone voting for democrats these days is basically voting for the ultimate salve master. Today's democrat is about big government, which is completely broken, as well as taking away our freedom.
I must disagree. Voting either republican or democrat is voting for big government.
devildogusmc
Registered
Im Libertarian. I don't like either, but it's well known to anyone with two brain cells that the dems are about massive government, and pure control over the sheep. And yes, both parties have sadly forgotten that they serve us, not visa versa. None the less, the dems are the worst for America. I'll be voting Libertarian, and for republicans in November. I wouldn't be caught dead voting for today's nazi democrat!
The largest concentration of big government money is in subsidies to large companies, SS, military, and Medicare/Medicaid. Calling the crumbs the dems let fall to the bottom feeders massive government is a bit of a stretch.
This is the case. The abuses of power are perpetuated on both sides. Barry and George are equally shitty and in regards to freedoms, Barry shit on GW with all he has done with the NSA not to mention the things he's done to journalists and his use of the espionage act to stop all whistleblowers. All the presidents of late are more corrupt than the next; it's fucking disgusting. Party affiliation or blind following of some made up party guideline tells me a person's eyes are closed and they already drank the slave koolaid.
