Chicago requires big-box stores to pay 'living wage'

[Slayer 0]

With a company like Wal-Mart, nothing they do is in the interests of anyone but their bottom line, their shareholders, and their profits.

Someone took Business 101

[NoCalMike 0]

One of the main concerns always lost in the minimum wage argument is the fact that inflation is outgrowing the true value of the dollar. That is the main problem, not so much that wages themselves are low, but the fact that inflation is not slowing down anytime soon, thus trying to make the dollar stretch that much more is nearly impossible.

 

Also like I said before, when a place like Wal-Mart pays so poorly that it's workers still need state assistance and state healthcare, how is that helping a local government at all? The burden of Wal-Mart's business practices is being pushed to the tax payers, we as the taxpayers basically are the ones that keep a place like Wal-Mart in business because by paying our taxes we allow Wal-Mart the ability to fuck over it's workers.

 

Or you just raise the minimum fucking wage for the entire fucking area. Aren't Mom & Pop's Video store pushing the same thing onto the state since they generally don't offer health insurance either?

 

Hell fucking yes.

 

 

Right, except Mom & Pop stores usually employ 1-2 people to help during the "busy days" of the week, usually teenagers, if not members of their own families.

 

I know here in California they tried to pass a mandatory Health Benefits clause for any business that employed 100 or more people. I am pretty sure most Mom & Pop stores would not qualify.

[Prophet of Mike Zagurski 0]

I think he's saying make money off them in spite of disliking them? I can't tell.

 

Yeah actually. I made 300 off of CVS pharmacy today. All my other stocks suck though, I don't have Wal Mart stock because it isn't doing that well. I think Wal-Mart will eventually collaspse and something else will take its place.

 

My professor said that Wal-Mart doesn't make that much money but they have a high turn around on what they sell. Also because tjey sell a high volume of stuff they make money.

 

Personally, I don't like shopping at Wal-Mart and I don't go there that much.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

I think he's saying make money off them in spite of disliking them? I can't tell.

 

Yeah actually. I made 300 off of CVS pharmacy today. All my other stocks suck though, I don't have Wal Mart stock because it isn't doing that well. I think Wal-Mart will eventually collaspse and something else will take its place.

 

My professor said that Wal-Mart doesn't make that much money but they have a high turn around on what they sell. Also because tjey sell a high volume of stuff they make money.

 

Personally, I don't like shopping at Wal-Mart and I don't go there that much.

 

See, and that's your choice to make. To hear some people tell it, once a Wal-Mart opens up in your town, you're absolutely forced to shop there.

[Guest Felonies!]

Well not immediately, but after they've run everyone out of town, yeah, then you have to. I avoid going to Wal-Mart whenever I can. I just don't like being there.

[EricMM 0]

Are people really trying to deny that they run other businesses out of town?

 

Or that their market share isn't big enough to dramatically effect suppliers?

[Prophet of Mike Zagurski 0]

My grandma has a Wal-Mart in a small community and she says they haven't affected any of the businesses in area.

I live in a city with a pop of 80,000 and I don't think it's hurt local businesses.

 

I think it depends where you live. I am sure some business have gone out of business. In Economics, we watched a 20/20 special on Wal-Mart and they caused the demise of the Rubbermaid Corporation. Wal-Mart was unforgiving of them when they wanted to raise prices and Rubbermaid lost a huge account.

[MrRant 0]

So? A store does not have to accept higher prices. Are you saying that a company has to just sit there and pay a higher price if it doesn't want to and there are other alternatives?

[EricMM 0]

The point is: Walmart has other alternatives, but Rubber Maid does not.

 

And Walmart is just going to go with the company that manages to cut costs the most, no matter what they need to do to get there, be it produce everything in China or what have you.

[MrRant 0]

Every company has alternatives. Rubbermaid should have had strengthened it's US distribution to not rely soley on Walmart.

[EricMM 0]

Wal Mart directly impacts US distribution.

 

Directly.

 

Don't you get it?

[MrRant 0]

I get it.

 

However, YOU don't get that other companies dig their grave by basing their income soley on Walmart.

[2GOLD 0]

So Walmart was evil because they didn't want to carry a product that would have a high price tag attached to it and wouldn't sell well anyway because of the tag?

 

As for the small businesses that get run out of town, if they were worth a damn then people keep shopping at them. We have quite a few small businesses here that survived and actually flourished even after Walmart showed up. If your small business was good, people keep coming to you. But if it sucked and your prices were crazy because you were the only thing in town, then yes Walmart will drive you out.

[snuffbox 0]

Well not immediately, but after they've run everyone out of town, yeah, then you have to. I avoid going to Wal-Mart whenever I can. I just don't like being there.

 

Liberal.

[EricMM 0]

Its not just that Walmart won't carry brands that cost a certain amount, its that they will insist that their suppliers cut costs.

 

As previously stated (many times) Walmart is a race to the bottom, and the bottom invariably equals outsourcing.

 

Where is the counter to that?

 

Its in trying to keep Walmart out of your town, or at least in check.

[snuffbox 0]

But the Patriotic thing to do is to give millions of our jobs to foreigners...as long as they're in other countries, of course.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

So Walmart was evil because they didn't want to carry a product that would have a high price tag attached to it and wouldn't sell well anyway because of the tag?

 

As for the small businesses that get run out of town, if they were worth a damn then people keep shopping at them. We have quite a few small businesses here that survived and actually flourished even after Walmart showed up. If your small business was good, people keep coming to you. But if it sucked and your prices were crazy because you were the only thing in town, then yes Walmart will drive you out.

 

Exactly. I think what happens in a lot of these small towns where Wal-Mart puts places out of business, is that for years they were the only game in town, got complacent, and then when Wal-Mart came in with better prices or even *gasp* better service, the small business was forced to close because of their own complacency.

[snuffbox 0]

It appears as though everyone at TSM has Eric on 'ignore'.

[NoCalMike 0]

So Walmart was evil because they didn't want to carry a product that would have a high price tag attached to it and wouldn't sell well anyway because of the tag?

 

As for the small businesses that get run out of town, if they were worth a damn then people keep shopping at them. We have quite a few small businesses here that survived and actually flourished even after Walmart showed up. If your small business was good, people keep coming to you. But if it sucked and your prices were crazy because you were the only thing in town, then yes Walmart will drive you out.

 

Exactly. I think what happens in a lot of these small towns where Wal-Mart puts places out of business, is that for years they were the only game in town, got complacent, and then when Wal-Mart came in with better prices or even *gasp* better service, the small business was forced to close because of their own complacency.

 

Ok we can all bask in Wal-Mart's low low everyday prices, but good service is certainly something I don't think anyone can say they have.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

I just meant that Wal-Mart may in fact have better service than some of the small businesses they have "run out of town." I'm not saying they do or don't.

[snuffbox 0]

America didn't even have Wal-Marts in the glory days of 50 years ago.

[Art Sandusky 0]

Wal-Mart is the symbol for the service economy. That alone should make it bad.

[NoCalMike 0]

Wasn't there a study done that the Majority of Wal-Mart shoppers are basically going there for a certain item or two. They don't just go there to do all their shopping.

[MrRant 0]

And they normally go there for specific things they know are cheaper. An example is oil/filters for your car or things of that nature.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

We don't have Costco here, so I don't know much about it. They sound like good people, though.

 

One, Costco sells a lot of stuff for other merchants. Like, cases of candy bars or whatever. Wal-Mart may sell large items, but Costco sells larger ones, and that has an effect on their pricing.

 

Also, this doesn't make any sense to me.

Costco is basically just a big warehouse where you buy everything in bulk. I think he's saying that it's a supplier for small businesses and so forth as well as just a place where suburbanites buy groceries or whatever. Like instead of buying a little bag of Snickers Fun Size like they have at Walgreen's or whatever, you get the big box of Snickers bars that high school concession stands would buy. Also, you have to pay an annual membership fee, and it's not really just a nominal one, I don't think.

 

I don't see how these differences between Costco and Wal-Mart would prevent Wal-Mart from providing its workers the type of pay & benefits (hell, even half of the pay & benefits) that Costco provides its workers.

 

I guess I just wish more CEOs would recognize the benefit of a happy, healthy workforce the way Costco's does. From what I've read, Costco has a healthy profit margin, too.

[Guest Felonies!]

Wal-Mart is the symbol for the service economy. That alone should make it bad.

I thought IBM was.

[The Metal Maniac 0]

We don't have Costco here, so I don't know much about it. They sound like good people, though.

 

One, Costco sells a lot of stuff for other merchants. Like, cases of candy bars or whatever. Wal-Mart may sell large items, but Costco sells larger ones, and that has an effect on their pricing.

 

Also, this doesn't make any sense to me.

Costco is basically just a big warehouse where you buy everything in bulk. I think he's saying that it's a supplier for small businesses and so forth as well as just a place where suburbanites buy groceries or whatever. Like instead of buying a little bag of Snickers Fun Size like they have at Walgreen's or whatever, you get the big box of Snickers bars that high school concession stands would buy. Also, you have to pay an annual membership fee, and it's not really just a nominal one, I don't think.

 

I don't see how these differences between Costco and Wal-Mart would prevent Wal-Mart from providing its workers the type of pay & benefits (hell, even half of the pay & benefits) that Costco provides its workers.

 

Because, first of all, everyone who shops there has to pay money just for the privilege of shopping there. This takes a big bite out of their overhead, and they can take that money and invest it into their worker's salaries.

 

Secondly, Costco, as mentioned before, is more of a warehouse, and since warehouses deal in bulk, their prices are lower.

 

Thirdly, if Wal-Mart paid those kinds of wages to it's workers, it wouldn't BE in the position it is right now. Yeah, they could pay those kinds of wages, but it'd take a huge amount of money out of the pockets of the people who make those kinds of decisions, so they don't do that.

 

Fourthly, Wal-Mart employees do make about half of what Costco employees make.

 

Also, question: How many of you are aware that Wal-Mart gives each employee (assuming they meet certain requirements) a profit sharing check every year? I got $800, in one check, just for having worked in the store for the year. Is that common knowledge?

[Art Sandusky 0]

I knew about that, but employers are increasingly turning to bonuses or profit-sharing checks in order to placate workers who want a raise in their actual fixed wage. It's a lot easier for them to swallow that one check each year instead of paying you more every week or two (I don't know whether they pay weekly or bi-weekly).

 

IBM isn't the symbol of a service economy. IBM doesn't have "greeters."

[The Metal Maniac 0]

Bi-Weekly.

 

Also, IBM didn't start the God-awful "The Customer is Always Right" BS.

[Art Sandusky 0]

To me, the Watsons are the opposite of the Waltons. I doubt the CEO of Wal-Mart is sitting there with a sign in his office that says "Think."