How much is Walmart costing you?

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: Pablo
Some really poor understanding of basic economics in this thread. And some really scary "solutions" proposed. If people really think our ills come from Walmart and take such sources of information as truth, then we are indeed up the feces creek with nary a paddle to be found.



Except that this isnt really an economics discussion. It appears that in your apologetics for big business, you will prefer bigger government and more taxes to support these people in terms of health and other benefits.

Which is exactly my problem. I pay enough tax, and there is enough bureaucracy already - why are people so intent on shifting costs from the employer to OTHER taxpayers? No thanks.

And if this push is so "wonderful" then quit the gripes about taxes, big government, bureaucracy, how many people are unemployed, etc.

 

[jcwit]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: refaller
And where would all these people work without Walmart? Do we really think there will be a wealth of jobs that pay well?


Are you implying that if walmart didnt exist there would be none, zero, zilch stores/retailers to take their place?

Because retailers came before, and retailers will be again.

The difference is the basis of full time jobs and benefits versus shifting that off onto the government which everyone already hates, and the resultant onus on taxes that others pay to provide benefits.

If Wal-mart is so great and beneficial for your son, good. But wouldnt it be better if he had long term surety of having benefits, healthcare and full time employment? Isnt that something that he should have based upon his employment, rather than the taxes that you and I pay?


Why certainly, is the young man not "entitled" to it?

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: jcwit


Why certainly, is the young man not "entitled" to it?


So how is it any different if someone is collecting government entitlements?

If these people are pulling medicare and related social payouts, because Wal-mart business model is to shift these costs to the government, how is that any different? An entitlement from another payer.

All it is doing is shifting those costs from the business and those who shop there, to the government and taxpayers. Frankly I dont want to be stuck with that burden.

Im for cutting all government payouts of all kinds for any and all reasons to everyone, in the interest of reducing overall cost and taxes. But I fear there will be many dead in the streets if that happens.

 

[Pablo]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2


Except that this isnt really an economics discussion. It appears that in your apologetics for big business, you will prefer bigger government and more taxes to support these people in terms of health and other benefits.

Which is exactly my problem. I pay enough tax, and there is enough bureaucracy already - why are people so intent on shifting costs from the employer to OTHER taxpayers? No thanks.

And if this push is so "wonderful" then quit the gripes about taxes, big government, bureaucracy, how many people are unemployed, etc.


Twist words much?

First of all, what the heck is "apologetics"? No such word. I am in no way "apologizing" for WM, nor do I even think they need to apologize. Why? They are in business to make money. Not provide jobs, insurance or anything else other than a product for sale at a profit. Not sure why people think this is a bad thing. Sure they should be ethical and obey laws, but not fit into some communist grand plan for the masses.

The real problem here is all this garbage, this totally behemoth Obamacare health care scheme, minimum wage, welfare, WIC, food stamps, all of it is just founded on a really squishy foundation. A false foundation that the Government is good and can provide all our wants and needs, and when another problem comes up, we can just add another layer.

 

[Bambam]

From the land of opprotunity to the land of hand-outs. The snowball is mid-way down the hill with no chance of stopping. "Death in the streets" is most likely the only way this madness stops...

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: Pablo


The real problem here is all this garbage, this totally behemoth Obamacare health care scheme, minimum wage, welfare, WIC, food stamps, all of it is just founded on a really squishy foundation. A false foundation that the Government is good and can provide all our wants and needs, and when another problem comes up, we can just add another layer.


No, thats the whole point. So stop twisting and making this go political.

The whole issue here that is so hypocritical is that these employees, because of the way that they are employed and prevented from access to get enough hours to be full time with benefits, FORCES THEM to go to the government to get healthcare (long before any obamacare scheme, so that's not a valid argument) via entitlement programs. Sorry, not every WM employee is a retired person with an old-time pension. Just like the person before whose son is autistic, and WM may be the best job he can get - well, if thats the case, how will he have healthcare long term if his employer wont provide it? Buy $8000 policies with $8500 in wages? LOL. And that's a long standing question, far before any semblance of obamacare existed. Its a reasonable question. It is purely mathematics. Mathematics that dont add up and force him either to the emergency room (public burden) if sick, or dead. Great scenario for a civilized society.

So youre all against WIC, healthcare handouts, etc., yet for these people to survive, they are going after those exact entitlements. And youre advocating that walmart is doing right by effectively using that plan as their business model. This isnt hard to see.

This isnt an advocation of government programs or entitlements, it is a disgust that I have to pay healthcare for someone so that their employer can "maximize profit". A business model that shifts overhead costs to the government or the taxpayers at large is treacherous. And that is exactly what is happening here.

 

[jcwit]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: jcwit


Why certainly, is the young man not "entitled" to it?


So how is it any different if someone is collecting government entitlements?

If these people are pulling medicare and related social payouts, because Wal-mart business model is to shift these costs to the government, how is that any different? An entitlement from another payer.

All it is doing is shifting those costs from the business and those who shop there, to the government and taxpayers. Frankly I dont want to be stuck with that burden.

Im for cutting all government payouts of all kinds for any and all reasons to everyone, in the interest of reducing overall cost and taxes. But I fear there will be many dead in the streets if that happens.


Thanks for downgrading Disabled Veteran benefits, or at least attempting to.

BTW, did you serve? Just wondering.

 

[JHZR2]

Stop putting words in my mouth. Where did I downgrade DV benefits? Youre not in this discussion so stop talking about yourself. Or do you work at WM? Last I checked, veteran pensions and benefits based upon work performed and time spent in a position/job were defined, not random entitlement payouts due to some underemployment and shifting the burden of costs in the here and now. What a cheap shot to skew a discussion away from the actual basis of conversation. And if you only knew what I do as a day job... Dont speak of things that you dont know about, when others devote their careers and life to the Military and the warfighter.

We were talking about government payouts for entitlements of various sorts from healthcare to food stamps to whatever else these people are on; "entitlements" just like you stated and I quoted.

You asked entitlements.

Were talking about WM and shifting of employment costs to the taxpayers. Dont skew arguments.

 

[FXjohn]

Originally Posted By: jcwit


BTW, did you serve? Just wondering.



nope. just another cradle to grave govt handout.

 

[stockrex]

Originally Posted By: Pablo
Originally Posted By: JHZR2


Except that this isnt really an economics discussion. It appears that in your apologetics for big business, you will prefer bigger government and more taxes to support these people in terms of health and other benefits.

Which is exactly my problem. I pay enough tax, and there is enough bureaucracy already - why are people so intent on shifting costs from the employer to OTHER taxpayers? No thanks.

And if this push is so "wonderful" then quit the gripes about taxes, big government, bureaucracy, how many people are unemployed, etc.


Twist words much?

First of all, what the heck is "apologetics"? No such word. I am in no way "apologizing" for WM, nor do I even think they need to apologize. Why? They are in business to make money. Not provide jobs, insurance or anything else other than a product for sale at a profit. Not sure why people think this is a bad thing. Sure they should be ethical and obey laws, but not fit into some communist grand plan for the masses.

The real problem here is all this garbage, this totally behemoth Obamacare health care scheme, minimum wage, welfare, WIC, food stamps, all of it is just founded on a really squishy foundation. A false foundation that the Government is good and can provide all our wants and needs, and when another problem comes up, we can just add another layer.


The real problem is cost of doing business, I agree with Pablo, wallys is a business and is JUST like any other business which employs part-time staff instead of full time staff to get around paying for benefits.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: stockrex

The real problem is cost of doing business, I agree with Pablo, wallys is a business and is JUST like any other business which employs part-time staff instead of full time staff to get around paying for benefits.



Yes, as I said earlier, Ive seen this with local governments and school districts too. That doesnt make the scenario any better. They all know what they are doing.

The problem still stands - shifting of the burden of costs onto the general public, which really is less than 20% of the population who actually pays real taxes.

 

[Pablo]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2

This isnt an advocation of government programs or entitlements, it is a disgust that I have to pay healthcare for someone so that their employer can "maximize profit". A business model that shifts overhead costs to the government or the taxpayers at large is treacherous. And that is exactly what is happening here.


I know what you are saying, but you aren't holding your head right. You are not getting to the true root cause.

Actually a Government that openly encourages businesses to not hire, or hire people for so many hours, is dangerous and stupid. Our tax code and our welfare state have been like this for years, this latest go-round makes the previous years look like laissez-faire by comparison. This will not end well. The people are already addicted to free stuff. Too late.

 

[Mr_Incredible]

That's ok. This welfare stuff (democrat-bait and corporate) will all work it's way out in a couple of decades. It can't last forever, the Desparate Times will play out, and it will be like Europe after the plague subsided - not much gov't left and plenty of job openings.

Happy times again...

 

[rjundi]

Originally Posted By: Mr_Incredible
That's ok. This welfare stuff (democrat-bait and corporate) will all work it's way out in a couple of decades. It can't last forever, the Desparate Times will play out, and it will be like Europe after the plague subsided - not much gov't left and plenty of job openings.

Happy times again...


Running on the next bubble or government policy(war typically) leading to spend.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: Pablo
Originally Posted By: JHZR2

This isnt an advocation of government programs or entitlements, it is a disgust that I have to pay healthcare for someone so that their employer can "maximize profit". A business model that shifts overhead costs to the government or the taxpayers at large is treacherous. And that is exactly what is happening here.


I know what you are saying, but you aren't holding your head right. You are not getting to the true root cause.

Actually a Government that openly encourages businesses to not hire, or hire people for so many hours, is dangerous and stupid. Our tax code and our welfare state have been like this for years, this latest go-round makes the previous years look like laissez-faire by comparison. This will not end well. The people are already addicted to free stuff. Too late.


Well, perhaps you can build upon this without letting it go P.

How the government enables this is to me a stretch. Sure, the government could give zero payouts for any sort of entitlement programs. But the fact that places hire and then limit hours to prevent paying a dime more than they need to is not a government-created thing. It is some sort of attempt to create "shareholder value" by shifting the burden of certain costs to a paying entity. Sure, the government is that "willing" paying entity... But if the government wasnt - paid zero entitlement payouts for anything, would it matter? Its not like these employers would all of a sudden pay for benefits and the world would be a happy place.

So the situation is still the same.

 

[buster]

I'm somewhere in the middle on this one. It's an interesting discussion. I do shop at Walmart.

I find it interesting how WM's model did not work in Germany.

Quote:
Cultural Hubris

“The problem was the company’s business philosophy, which had always worked so well,” wrote Frankfurt’s Börsenzeitung in what pretty much amounted to an obituary. “It’s people-centered – but that doesn’t actually work when the people aren’t American.

The company gave the job of masterminding Wal-Mart Germany to an American who didn’t speak a word of German.

The Germans weren’t fond of the Walmart practice of hiring old people to accost greet them at the door, nor were the German workers impressed with morning warm-up sessions (“Higher Profits Uber Alles! — Can I get an Amen there Fritz!!”)



Quote:
1. You can’t sell below cost in the Eurozone countries just to run your competition our of business, even if you have a billion dollars to give it a go. Helps to level the playing field. Gives the small guys half a chance to compete with the bigger players.

2. You can’t abuse the workforce with “falling wages” and expect the government to subsidize your slave-wage workforce with food stamps and healthcare just to make ONE corporation rich at the expense of the society at large. Something else the German workers were repulsed by? A ban on flirting in the workplace. Germans to Walmart: You Don’t Own Us.

 

[JHZR2]

#2 is interesting - exactly what Ive been saying. Expense of society at large.

For all the economies of scale, efficiencies, etc. from the WM organization, or any large organization, I have a hard time accepting that I should have to pay with my tax dollars for their benefits, because their employer is too stingy. Billions in profits are good, but when they are at the expense of the population at large, or really at the expense of about 20% of the population, then its not profiting from a good business model, its profiting from theft out of my pocket.

If prices were raised a few cents to support the workers, then it is my choice whether I want to buy, and support the workers, or not. If that few cents is more than I can afford, then the workforce, profits, etc. will all naturally line up to what the population can support... All the population.

 

[buster]

Originally Posted By: Bambam
From the land of opprotunity to the land of hand-outs. The snowball is mid-way down the hill with no chance of stopping. "Death in the streets" is most likely the only way this madness stops...


How about bank/corporate handouts?

People that just blame gov. just don't know enough about how it all works. It's so easy to blame gov. for all our problems.

Globalization
Technology
Demographics

...all of these things play a role. It's not just government. That's your typical comment among those that dont know any better.

Many challenges ahead for the U.S. but I'm not about to write the U.S. off.

I also hate hearing from 50 year old baby boomers that were the generation that really put us in the hole, rode the wave and now want to lecture us on what the problems are. They now want to shift the blame to younger generations, when it was they who created a lot of this mess. Just do a search on Baby Boomers and look into the data that's out there.

 

[buster]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
#2 is interesting - exactly what Ive been saying. Expense of society at large.

For all the economies of scale, efficiencies, etc. from the WM organization, or any large organization, I have a hard time accepting that I should have to pay with my tax dollars for their benefits, because their employer is too stingy. Billions in profits are good, but when they are at the expense of the population at large, or really at the expense of about 20% of the population, then its not profiting from a good business model, its profiting from theft out of my pocket.




I think that's a very valid point.

In this country bankers never go to jail and one group continually tries to sell the same economic philosophy that is proven not to work.

We don't need to worship CEO's and Bankers.

Studies also show that it's a myth that that the ultra wealthy flee from taxes.


People don't understand the demands being put on our job creators. (sarcasm) After all there are only so many hours in a day.

Building a $20 million mansion is a lot of work. Endless meetings with architects, so many decesions to be made. How much space shoudl be allocated for vehciles. How many elevators?

The yaht broker called from Nice. A 300 footer has just been put on the block by some Greek guy.

The fnancial guy called. Says S.A.C. Capital has been charged with insider trading, thinks it would prudent to withdraw our funds asap. Says we need to move the money. Where? Maybe we should get into one of those mortgage REITS that everybody is talking about. Has a new idea. Wants to discuss about sheltering income in the Channel Islands.

Taxes are more time consuming than just about anythign else. Must spend 30% of his time on taxe issues

The best thing that can be done for job creators is TAX SIMPLIFICATION.

Decisions decisions...

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: buster


I also hate hearing from 50 year old baby boomers that were the generation that really put us in the hole, rode the wave and now want to lecture us on what the problems are. They now want to shift the blame to younger generations, when it was they who created a lot of this mess. Just do a search on Baby Boomers and look into the data that's out there.


I know. Its the kick the can philosophy. Its horrible really. Im on the hook for decisions I had zero say in? Really?

And then expected to pay so that some corporation can have higher profits? Really?

So then we get stuck between the rock and the hard place of saying no - you dont get money because the cupboard is bare, which is a humanitarian nightmare in a civilized society; and paying MORE out for their stupid, unsustainable choices years and years ago, which severely impedes my QOL.


I have an anniversary party to attend and a baby to play with on my day off, which is the first in weeks (worked many full weekends recently supporting military so that I could be hassled over it here where it is completely irrelevant). I hate to think what bills our baby will have to pay in 2083 so that wal-mart could have profits in 2013. So time to step away and just fear for our nation.