Posted on 05/26/2005 6:27:37 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
Because of Wal-Mart's inadequate wages and benefits, Wal-Mart employees are eligible for $2.5 billion in Federal assistance, which comes from your tax dollars.
(Excerpt) Read more at wakeupwalmart.com ...
You look it up. I'm tired. It's in there somewhere, probably in several places. My religion is none of your business, but since you decided to get into my face about it, I attend a conservative catholic church on the weekends I can manage to drag myself there because my heart is no longer in it.
Freedom is the right to be your own oppressor.
Many kids, due partly to the lax, politically-laced, self-esteem-happy educational establishment coupled with the lack of parental awareness and the debauchery of culture creates many snotty, egotistical entry workers with limited workplace attraction (not all, there are still alot of good kids). If you are ambitious you can ride the Walmart ladder all over the country.
And face the fact: many kids today are going to be low-wage earners for the rest of their life. I'm not so much giving up on them as I am saying that you will never have a workforce where everyone is in a comfortable financial circumstance and more often than not it is because of bad decisions, lack of work ethic and a constant outlook that says the world owes them. The educational system has created a cadre of new workers that have low tolerance for the education and/or work needed to achieve financial security.
It's not a feeling Gabz, it's the truth. Idiots will always be amongst us! lol
I see you can't make a coherent argument on THE POINT without attacks or trying to beseige an arguement because someone you don't like made it.
You are so intellectually inferior I'm surprised you can even type. And you can't even spell. That P is supposed to be an H.
That's ridiculous and you are being arbitrary. Wages are tied to cost of living. When the cost of living demands $60 per hour to live and be able to hold one's head up with the living conditions suggested in my previous posts, then I will take you seriously.
Okay I see I'm going to have to spell it out for you.
Why is a $100 minimum wage not logical?
Answer: Because everybody who makes less then $100 would simply become unemployed and many of the businesses that use such employees would shut down.
Now stay with me here...
Why is a $17 minimum wage not logical?
Answer: (fill in this space)
In debate class this was called "losing". It was proof the other side had exhausted every aspect of their point and thus forced the winner to prove a negative.
Great post!
How much money does it take to hold one's head up? I think the amount is $60 an hour.
He gets free med coverage? That's nice.
My husband's employer only pays half, and we were thrilled to get that. (Still are -- it's Blue Cross, and his previous employer didn't pay for any of it at all.)
"How much money does it take to hold one's head up? I think the amount is $60 an hour."
LOL... this kid just isn't getting the point. He stops thinking as soon as he sees that he's lost.
Bolshie
Your #226. You get it. I would like to see more of a model like that and hope it's not too late to make something like that work for us. Otherwise, all the the very elite are going down the tubes with everyone else.
Since neither of you could answer... I'll repeat my question.
Why is a $100 minimum wage not logical?
Answer: Because everybody who makes less then $100 would simply become unemployed and many of the businesses that use such employees would shut down.
Now stay with me here...
Why is a $17 minimum wage not logical?
Answer: (fill in this space)
A person's true worth cannot be measured by his paycheck.
Hey fellas, I may be losing it, but I swear I remember hearing something about the "Third Way" back in the nineties.
You guys remember anything about that?
So do millions of us. I did it for years, as did my husband. Even though he now works for a company that pays part of it, it is still expensive and we wouldn't have the particular plan we have, except we have a child.
If medical costs weren't so sky high, I would try to pay as I go.
And who's fault is it that it is so sky-high? It sure is not WalMart's fault, or the fault of other employers.
Outrageous lawsuit claims have caused the problem, not the employers. Go after the real culprits for these problems - trial lawyers and legislators that refuse to do anything in the realm of tort-reform. And the first step to that is a loser-pay system.
It's up to the employer to treat their employees fairly, starting with paying them enough money to live on or they are nothing more than exploiters....
What are you talking about? No one is forced to work for a wage they are not happy with. And what consititutes "paying them enough money to live on"? That is an arbitrary number depending upon how one chooses to live, including where one chooses to live and what one chooses to do for a living.
Yes it was the love child of Blair and Clinton.
Lemme guess, you read "The Communist Manifesto".
You're an anti-business, anti-capitalist, Bolshevik.
And I have questions about your conservatism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.