@Rick, a living wage is still the lowest wage. Intended to provide for the bare minimums. No extras, no college funds, no movies, etc. still plenty incentives.
@NS: per Obamacare questions. The Walmart issue has been addressed above. Every question you could have is answered at “healthcare.gov”. Starting Oct 1st the site will include insurance company offerings for each state, prices,plans etc.
I have neither time or patience to be your health are nanny.
“Sansa: There are a lot of people who have been conditioned to not even want to work, to want to be reliant on the state for their entire lives... ”
So what, steve? We’re not talking about them. Shut up.
dezlboy said: “I think workers salaries should provide a living wage whether they be cashiers, laborers, security guards, accountants, or doctors.”
Serious question for you dezlboy, if my passion is making balloon animals and I decide I want to make that the source of my livelihood, do you believe “the market” should be required to pay me a “living wage” for whatever balloon animals I produce? Why or why not?
@JohnFontain, we can pick this issue apart forever. :-) I don’t apply “living wage” to workers who are self-employed. I differenciate the small business owner (or self-employed) from corporations, goverments, and the like. Especially from large corporations whose CEOs make zillions of dollars and who can afford to pay decent wages.
@John, I believe in Compassionate Capitalism. Employeers that can afford to pay a living wage should pay a living wage. I haven’t thought out a complete position on any and all possibilities or situations.
@John — self-employed people don’t get a wage at all. They are the employer.
If a business owner employs you to make balloon animals, yes, you should get a living wage. I imagine some party companies do employ balloon animal blower-uppers…
dezlboy said: “Employers that can afford to pay a living wage should pay a living wage. I haven't thought out a complete position on any and all possibilities or situations.”
So if Walmart was less profitable, you’d be okay with them not paying a living wage?
rankin said: “self-employed people don't get a wage at all. They are the employer. If a business owner employs you to make balloon animals, yes, you should get a living wage.”
So whether one earns enough to live should depend on what career path they choose? And those that take the more self-reliant path of being self-employed deserve less protection than those who take the less self-reliant path? What’s the logic behind that?
John Fontain said: “So if Walmart was less profitable, you'd be okay with them not paying a living wage?”
Dezlboy replied: “Yes”
So the receipt of a living wage has nothing to do with performance or merit of the employee, but solely with whether someone happened to land a job with a highly profitable company? A store associate at Walmart would get the living wage while a store associate at Sears would not, simply based on the profitability of the employer? Even if the Walmart employee didn’t work as hard or contribute as much to his store as the Sears employee did at his store, the Walmart employee would “deserve” the living wage?
@John, the living wage issue is very complicated as your questions indicate. But, I don’t have the time (HA!) or inclination to figure it all out on this forum. I appreciate your interest, and very cordial discussions. But, I need to move on and make trouble elsewhere.
Good column in yesterday’s Washington Post about the overwhelming demand for the new jobs that Wal-Mart will bring to the District:
Here are a few excerpts:
“They were there just after daybreak Monday, a line snaking down the sidewalk in Northeast Washington. And they kept coming, by the hundreds.”
“By the end of the day, there were hundreds and maybe even a thousand applicants…”
"If they pay $8.25, $8.75, whatever. A job is a job and I need a job," said Ronald Knight, 52, who has been unemployed since he left a job at a grocery deli counter to take care of his dying mother. "All I want is to work, and I'll take anything."
“In the District, Wal-Mart isn't killing off mom-and-pop stores and sweet little groceries. It is going into places that have nothing and have had nothing for decades. And it is providing an anchor for other redevelopment to follow.”
“I wish all the folks who bashed Wal-Mart this summer had spent the day talking to the city's forgotten, struggling, unemployed residents. They came looking for work, with resumes in hand and hope on their faces.”
I’m glad the DC City Council finally let DC residents decide for themselves whether Walmart jobs were “good enough” for them. Hopefully Arlington will do the same if Walmart ever builds in Shirlington.
John, the issue isn’t whether the Walmart jobs are ‘good enough’ for the people, the issue is the race to the bottom where working at Walmart is the only option for the people.
Have you seen this video about wealth distribution?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.