Message boards :
Politics :
How tight is the United States budget, really?
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
KWSN - MajorKong Send message Joined: 5 Jan 00 Posts: 2892 Credit: 1,499,890 RAC: 0 |
It is starting in a few markets but will likely expand soon. The reason? I don't know if its what Gary had in mind or not. I am awaiting his answer. |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30639 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Gary, it's amazing how it seems Costco prospers paying a living wage with benefits and without all the predatory practices on it's vendors. A different and successful business model. The Costco I go to is a full union shop. Costco does engage in the same predatory practices on its vendors, it just is too small to have the monopoly power that Walmart does over the vendors. |
betreger Send message Joined: 29 Jun 99 Posts: 11361 Credit: 29,581,041 RAC: 66 |
Gary, in talking to many company reps over the years I get the impression that they are much friendlier to deal with than Walmart. The local Costco is not union, my state is not a right to work state, and yet they pay very well for retail. |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
Guy, something is wrong big time. "Walmart workers, as a group, are the largest food stamp recipients in the country totaling $2.66 billion annually. That’s right, Walmart, a company that makes more than $400,000,000,000 a year is taking more than $2,660,000,000 out of tax payers pockets annually because they have refused to pay their workers a living wage. Not only has Walmart callously expected the taxpayers to pick up the slack, but the government has allowed them to get away with it! In fact, reports say Walmart has direct knowledge of this and directly assist employees in applications for both food stamps and Medicaid." Hayleys Comments But you've just said that business won't pay benefits and a decent wage unless forced to do so. Surely we need to have employment protection for part-time workers as well as full time workers like they do in Europe? Reality Internet Personality |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30639 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
It is starting in a few markets but will likely expand soon. The reason? The ACA is brand new, obviously this has been going on for some time. As to benefits a company need not have any for full time workers unless the government mandates something. The government pre-ACA did not require health care. However it does mandate other things. Go look at the poster on the wall where you work. Here is one section. |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
Suppose I were to suggest to you I was one who has always thought of my future and made decision earlier in my life to prepare for later in life? Suppose I were to suggest to you that because of my sacrifices earlier in life, because I chose to work instead of going out and partying on Friday night, I now have a little more than many? And now suppose I told you that just because you did that, it was not a guarantee of success, and there exist people who also did the same/similar who are not reaping those benefits. Suppose I told you a little thing called "chance" exists, no matter how much a certain poster likes to deny that. Suppose I remind you and others, again and again and again that we are not the sums of ourselves and our efforts. Our environment undoubtedly influences us. |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30639 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Gary, in talking to many company reps over the years I get the impression that they are much friendlier to deal with than Walmart. The local Costco is not union, my state is not a right to work state, and yet they pay very well for retail. You can still ask for a lower price than last order and not be a jerk doing it. As for Union or not, the Costco I go to is a former Price Club, and Price Club was union when they merged with Costco. I suspect that has rubbed off onto Costco and they offer the same across the board as a matter of course. A good example to study might be Fedco. Fedco no longer exists. Got squeezed out as they couldn't quite beat Walmart / Target and they didn't have the advantage Costco / Price Club had in customers. |
KWSN - MajorKong Send message Joined: 5 Jan 00 Posts: 2892 Credit: 1,499,890 RAC: 0 |
Uhh... No. That is the exact opposite of my point. Es, we have not always gotten along, so lets please try to be civil now, ok? Ok, 'benefits' (esp. health insurance through the employer) began as a way to increase compensation to workers without running afoul of certain legalities (namely income tax and certain wartime wage freezes). Being legal dodges, benefits need to stop. A decent wage? Define decent in this context. Remember, a business can only pay a(n) (prospective) employee a portion of the profit the employee earns for the business, or else they will either not hire, fire the employee, or go bankrupt/out of business (depending on the exact circumstances. If a person cannot earn enough for an employer to justify minimum wage, they are not employable. If a person can only earn enough for an employer to justify minimum wage, then that is it. If a person does not earn enough to make ends meet, then they have a range of choices. They can tighten their belts, if possible, and live on a lower standard of living. Or, they can work more hours, if possible (overtime or a 2nd job). Or, they can improve themselves (university or a trade school) and pick up a skill that is worth more to employers. Or, well... there is charity if nothing else is possible. The answer is not 'more regulation and taxes'. The answer is less regulation and taxes. A LOT less. Let the government get out of the way and let business do its thing. Prices will adjust so stuff would be affordable again. Sooner or later. |
BarryAZ Send message Joined: 1 Apr 01 Posts: 2580 Credit: 16,982,517 RAC: 0 |
Major -- I'd suggest that *your* answer is less taxes and less government. For many, that may be precisely what we need -- something of an oligarchy perhaps. For many, that may be precisely not what we need. Your mileage (and vantage point) may vary. I'm objecting to the characterization of your view as THE answer. I've seen a lot of 'THE' answer 'opinions masquerading as Truth with a capital T' over the past few years. It irks me. |
betreger Send message Joined: 29 Jun 99 Posts: 11361 Credit: 29,581,041 RAC: 66 |
Major, can you point out a country that adheres to the Ayn Rand utopia you desire? |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
Somalia Reality Internet Personality |
betreger Send message Joined: 29 Jun 99 Posts: 11361 Credit: 29,581,041 RAC: 66 |
Es, sadly you think like I do. |
Ex: "Socialist" Send message Joined: 12 Mar 12 Posts: 3433 Credit: 2,616,158 RAC: 2 |
My thoughts exactly. Anyways, if we look back to the US's golden years (mid 40s- early 70s, give or take a few), this was not accomplished in any way by allowing a totally free market. This was accomplished with the right combination of free market, taxation, and regulation. Somewhere in the 80's a guy came along and was elected, and he opened the floodgates. It's all been downhill since, no matter how great people thought it/he was. I don't think heading further in that direction is any answer to the problem. #resist |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30639 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Somewhere in the 80's a guy came along and was elected, and he opened the floodgates. It's all been downhill since, no matter how great people thought it/he was. Would this be the same guy who signed TEFRA? In 1988, libertarian political writer Sheldon Richman described TEFRA as "the largest tax increase in American history." In 2003, former Reagan adviser Bruce Bartlett wrote in National Review that "TEFRA raised taxes by $37.5 billion per year", elaborating, "according to a recent Treasury Department study, TEFRA alone raised taxes by almost 1 percent of the gross domestic product, making it the largest peacetime tax increase in American history." I don't think heading further in that direction is any answer to the problem. I think I agree with you. |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30639 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
No. Russia today. |
betreger Send message Joined: 29 Jun 99 Posts: 11361 Credit: 29,581,041 RAC: 66 |
Welcome back MajorKong. I was starting to feel lonely in here. Guy, I too welcome back the Major, now onto your post. I shall ignore your rather long list of straw man arguments and center on personal experience. An organization hires when it has more profitable business than it can deal with, with the current staff. Demand for goods and services is the determinant not the cost of labor per se. The quality of the labor matters much more than the cost. Most of the time the best deal is not the cheapest. |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30639 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Guy, I too welcome back the Major, now onto your post. I shall ignore your rather long list of straw man arguments and center on personal experience. An organization hires when it has more profitable business than it can deal with, with the current staff. Demand for goods and services is the determinant not the cost of labor per se. The quality of the labor matters much more than the cost. Ah, if that were the case. At least you are trying to see it, but it isn't the 1950's anymore. Consider the Walmart customer. The Walmart customer cares not in the quality of the goods; his only care is the price tag. So having good skilled labor that produces quality goods is a determent to a company that wants to sell to Walmart consumers. Having cheap labor that makes low quality goods is an asset. And for another reason. The shorter something lasts the faster a replacement is needed and more profit can be generated in repeat sales. |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
Guy, I too welcome back the Major, now onto your post. I shall ignore your rather long list of straw man arguments and center on personal experience. An organization hires when it has more profitable business than it can deal with, with the current staff. Demand for goods and services is the determinant not the cost of labor per se. The quality of the labor matters much more than the cost. Guess that explains why some people ... young people ... 20s and 30s ... avoid WalMart? And why I, mid-40s, rarely enter it? |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
... my meager success was based purely on luck ... That's you response to me? You twist my words. And you wonder why people ignore you or insult you (or you perceive them to insult you)?!? You insult me when you lump that brief response into a rant against "Liberals", when you know ... YOU KNOW!!! ... I am not. Barry is not. So on and so forth. |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.