Go to If I get smart with you....how will you know?
- Add a comment
- Go to Anti-Wal-Mart Law passed over Maryland Governor's Veto.
Blah....blah....blah......blah blah....Is that all you ever have to say...is there never anything of substance.....
How about you answering my question..... What should the minimum wage be.....$10.00...$15.00...$20.00...per hour?
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on January 17, 2006 at 5:54 PM
| link to this | reply
according to you then
and man conservatives,
employees aren't worthy anything
and should be there just to be slaves to the corporation.
that's what you're saying
as I have said, we spent the whole 20th century attempting to eradicate this bullshit -- a damnable policy that belongs buried in the 1800's where it came from.
your corporate ethic is showing
posted by
Xeno-x
on January 17, 2006 at 2:19 PM
| link to this | reply
Pat_B
What do you think a minimum hourly wage should be? $10.00? $15.00? $20.00?
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on January 17, 2006 at 2:08 PM
| link to this | reply
That would mean then that we tell a business how to pay their executives and employees....it's a corporation...and it's no body's busniess except for the stockholders......
It amazes be how the solutions are alway additional governmental controls.......how do you think we have gotten where we are as an economy....by the good and kind guidance of the Fereral government??? Yeah, right.
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on January 17, 2006 at 2:06 PM
| link to this | reply
Seems to me this exemplifies
how Wal-Mart is running not only its own show, but public policy. Could it be another example of the transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich? Is this why the company, like Enron and others, is being sheltered by high-level officials? Wal-Mart keeps prices low and puts local companies out of business by paying its workers bare subsistence dollars (slave wages). I wonder if company policies would change if the corporate bosses were limited to an annual wage and benefits package no greater than 6 or 8 times that of the average employee.
posted by
Pat_B
on January 17, 2006 at 7:44 AM
| link to this | reply
The law will have the effect of lowering demand for labor which in turn will increase supply which in turn will lower wages or prevent them from keeping pace with inflation.
On the surface, it's just exactly that simple. In reality, the world is a little more complex than that and there are other variables involved. But no matter how you work the equations, after the primary effects have rippled into the secondary effects, in the end its the workers that are hurt by laws such as this.
posted by
Giskard
on January 16, 2006 at 9:51 AM
| link to this | reply
I would favor what Maryland did if they dropped the size of the
companies in the program to way less than 10,000 employees! WalMart will make up the difference by charging higher prices that will hurt poorer people. Just do like I do. Don't shop there.
posted by
sarooster
on January 16, 2006 at 5:26 AM
| link to this | reply
Mixed Views
I read Jim Collins' book that indicated that Fulmar was among the best. A few months ago when I saw on the news that it now holds the practice of hiring part time employee and if in a high risk category chance of employment was slim to none. Where once they were known to hire senior citizen "meeter/greeters, that seemed to be a thing of the past.
Now, if they are required to make provisions for employee insurance should that not be there responsibility as opposed to tax payers? I may need more informtion on this to know what is best! lol 
posted by
Dr_JPT
on January 16, 2006 at 4:42 AM
| link to this | reply
Corbin_Dallas,
I just saw John Murtha on 60 Minutes, giving his opinion on troop strategies. I still say I think that as far as gravitas, he's a much better personification of the stately "father figure" than our current leader: he's warm, folksy, has (I believe) a genuine drawl, and has actual military experience. How can you not believe him?
posted by
Blanche.
on January 15, 2006 at 7:57 PM
| link to this | reply
Corbin - the MD legislature acted because ....
they studied who was showing up at county hospitals needing healcare and discovered a large portion were full-time Wal Mart employees.. You say that the additional heal-care cost will be shifted to consumers in the form of higher prices. Sounds fair to me. That means that the taxpayers who don't shop at Wal-Mart have to subsidize Wal-Mart's employee health care cost!
posted by
fwmystic
on January 15, 2006 at 7:03 PM
| link to this | reply
Corbin Dallas
Hi.. I do not know enough about Wal-mart policies to give a informed opinion. I do know that I avoid the store as much as I can.. I just don't like being in there!
posted by
BrightIrish
on January 15, 2006 at 3:28 PM
| link to this | reply
Corbin,
Hmm, I'd need to find more information. However, although we agree that something is not right here, we're just not on the same page as to who is doing what to whom. Now, I need to go fix breakfast. Happy Sunday.
posted by
Blanche.
on January 15, 2006 at 10:44 AM
| link to this | reply
Blanche
It certainly wouldn't be the Walton family...their company is the one getting screwed by the state of Maryland.....as to pockets....in this case the LIBDem controlled legislature would be reaching into the Service Employees International Union and the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union pockets.
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on January 15, 2006 at 10:33 AM
| link to this | reply
Corbin,
I'm sorry, I misread that. It's the governor vetoing who would be the one looking out for Walmart's interests here. The legislature is trying to get Walmart to pony up their share, instead of using Medicaid as de facto emplyee health benefits. I understand that Walmart hands out instructions on how to apply for Medicaid as part of it's new employees benefits package.
posted by
Blanche.
on January 15, 2006 at 10:27 AM
| link to this | reply
Corbin,
And whose pocket is the Maryland legislature in? Sam Walmart and family are listed as right up there with Bill Gates in terms of personal wealth. Is is the Maryland legislature impervious to that, or is there some sort of graft going on here?
posted by
Blanche.
on January 15, 2006 at 10:24 AM
| link to this | reply
Corbin you spin everything, this is about health care and who will pay
Walmart or the state medicaid program
Scoop...your missing my point.......you pay, I pay, we all pay....whether it provided by Wal-Mart (we pay through higher prices) or the state (we pay through increased taxes)
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on January 15, 2006 at 10:19 AM
| link to this | reply
CORBIN I never said that, you are ridiculous good bye
So much for carrying on an interesting discussion......to me your statement was asking where were they supposed to get their insurance....it sounded like you felt they were entitled to some kind of coverage. ft that wasn't the case....I misunderstood you...but getting emotional doesn't contribute to anything.....
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on January 15, 2006 at 10:16 AM
| link to this | reply
Corbin you spin everything, this is about health care and who will pay
Walmart or the state medicaid program
posted by
scoop
on January 15, 2006 at 10:14 AM
| link to this | reply
CORBIN I never said that, you are ridiculous good bye
posted by
scoop
on January 15, 2006 at 10:10 AM
| link to this | reply
Lucy
Don't get me wrong....I still don't like shopping at WalMart....but I'm trying to point out that all of this is a calculated organized effort by a couple of the largest unions in the country......they have not been able to break Wal-Mart through organizing efforts....so they're doing an end around.......
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on January 15, 2006 at 10:10 AM
| link to this | reply
Scoop
to get his or her health insurance and if Walmart or Kmart or whoever doesn't cover it, where do they go? They go to Medicaid. it isn't a Democrat thing, it is a fact.
Tell me where anything says we are entitled to anything? The constitution guarantees the pursuit of happiness....but not happiness itself.
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on January 15, 2006 at 10:07 AM
| link to this | reply
I-Am-Free
Not really....I'm just getting started.....
What we see here is how this country has developed a huge "dependency" class that expects everything to be an entitlement.......the addition of health care as an expected entitlement is the next step towards pulling in the rest of the middle class in the the dependency club......
They view retail corporations as monsters operating with margins of 100 - 400%. I ran a wholesale warehouse club for 4 years before starting my own business....our margins seldom rose above 7%...That means for ever dollar in cost...the sale price would be $1.07. Out of that 7 cents we had to pay the personnel and operational bills and still make a profit. The numbers being bandied about here today are simply not accurate.
I'm not saying these folks are doing that intentionally....they're good people.......but they've picked up a really bad perception.....
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on January 15, 2006 at 10:04 AM
| link to this | reply
So Corbin no matter what or where, the employees have to turn to someone
to get his or her health insurance and if Walmart or Kmart or whoever doesn't cover it, where do they go? They go to Medicaid. it isn't a Democrat thing, it is a fact.
posted by
scoop
on January 15, 2006 at 10:00 AM
| link to this | reply
CORBIN
Dang, that information changes the landscape a lot for this girl. I have to check it out, but anything that Kerry's lot would support would be not in the best interest of anyone!!
posted by
Offy
on January 15, 2006 at 9:56 AM
| link to this | reply
Corbin no I don't have figures for Home Depot or Sears but I also don't
have figures for Ford, GMC or Chrysler but I bet they pass all the benefit costs on to the consumers also just like any other business. Nothing is free you know that someone is going to pay. Even state and federal workers with their benefits, it is passed on to the taxpayers.
posted by
scoop
on January 15, 2006 at 9:55 AM
| link to this | reply
I Am Free,
Hate to bust your bubble but our country was founded and is run on Capitalism, not Socialism. Remember Enron? Do you think the government is going to actually "clean up" the big corporations so drastically that they starve them out or let the "big men" loose? I think not. Its called kickbacks and its called greed. Shadow
posted by
Keshet
on January 15, 2006 at 9:54 AM
| link to this | reply
Scoop
In that comment only the first line....the question...which I found the answer for myself.....was addressed to you.....
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on January 15, 2006 at 9:53 AM
| link to this | reply
I found your site for you scoop.....
It's called Wake-up Walmart.....some interesting information about this group.....
From Bloomberg.com:
What's going on is a highly coordinated and heavily financed political campaign. One report puts the total spending on publicity and negative advertisements at $25 million.
It's no fun having enemies in this world, especially those with fat wallets. Guess where the money is coming from?
At the center of the crusade are two organizations, ``Wal- Mart Watch'' and ``Wake Up Wal-Mart.'' Wal-Mart Watch was started by Andrew Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union. Wake Up Wal-Mart is a project of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union.
And who's working for these groups? Democratic campaign operatives.......
For example, Paul Blank, former political director for Dean's presidential campaign, is now managing the anti-Wal-Mart crusade for Wake Up Wal-Mart. John Kerry's former presidential campaign manager, Jim Jordan, is a political consultant for Wal-Mart Watch. Tracy Sefl, former deputy director of research for the Democratic National Committee, is the group's communications director.
The very same organizations that are funding the crusade against the retailer are among the most reliable financers of the Democratic Party and they have hired the closest advisers of the same leaders bashing the company.
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on January 15, 2006 at 9:51 AM
| link to this | reply
They are cutting you up on this one!
These kinds of issues demonstrate just how far we have come from taking Personal Responsibility and being self reliant. We as a group have excepted more and more that Government or the rich guy should take care of us. Having said that if we get the waste out of our Government systems their would be more then enough prosperity to go around. For example we would be able to totally support disabled people that cant do much for them selves instead of the poor job we do now. 
posted by
I-Am-Free
on January 15, 2006 at 9:45 AM
| link to this | reply
Corbin I didn't say anything about profits I was talking health care and
medicaid. The workers have to turn to their state medicaid programs which is paid for by the taxpayers. So either way someone will pay, the consumer at Wal-Mart to pay any increase due to health costs or the taxpayers to pay for medicaid
posted by
scoop
on January 15, 2006 at 9:44 AM
| link to this | reply
Scoop.....since the site is obviously concerned about this problem......did they also have figures for Home Depot......Target....K-Mart....Sears.......
I'd venture a guess that the site is one of the 2 or 3 Union Funded sites purposely disseminating this kind of information.......
The bottom line is how much would the states be paying if the employees weren't working at all....at least through their withholding taxes their paying part of the burden......
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on January 15, 2006 at 9:43 AM
| link to this | reply
Where at on the web scoop?
First of all discount stores do not operate at that kind of profit margin.......Grocers mark up their goods at a margin of less than 10%...the numbers being mentioned here are just not accurate.
WalMart is the success story of the Century.......Wal-Mart has led a productivity revolution in retailing which supercharged the American economy. Warren Buffett even declared that Wal-Mart -- not Microsoft -- has contributed more than any other business to the health of the economy.
Since when is health care an entitlement?
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on January 15, 2006 at 9:36 AM
| link to this | reply
Scoop,
If I hadn't of been a full-time college student I wouldn't have had any kind of health care at all. Thank God the majority of universities have in house medical clinics and provide medicine to students for free or at small cost. I just think about all those employees who can't afford the insurance and what its doing to the states' health care system. Tennessee just cut Ten Care over 1/3 because they just can't afford to keep it floating. Wal-Mart is a major industry in Tennessee, including two super Wal-Marts in my town, including a large distribution center in Middle Tennessee, but yet they refuse to give employees a decent wage or provide care. Shadow
posted by
Keshet
on January 15, 2006 at 9:21 AM
| link to this | reply
Most all of the Big Box stores work like this, they have their employees
work just enough hours under the full time banner so they don't have to pay benefits.
With Wal Mart workers making about $8 an hour and 29-32 hours of work a week, the employee must rely either on state Medicaid or simply go without health insurance.
I saw this on the web;
In Alabama, Wal-Mart employees with children on Medicaid cost the state between $5.8 million and $8.2 million to cover 3,864 children.
Wal-Mart workers in California rely on the state taxpayers for about $32 million annually in health-related services.
In Tennessee, almost 10,000 Wal-Mart employees are on the state’s expanded Medicaid program.
posted by
scoop
on January 15, 2006 at 9:10 AM
| link to this | reply
I am with myddrin here
Don't kid yourself. Walmart can afford to pay that to help provide healthcare.
They will probably pass on the costs unfortunately, but I doubt that they really
need to pass it all along to the consumer.
posted by
FactorFiction
on January 15, 2006 at 9:03 AM
| link to this | reply
Corbin,
I would agree if I didn't know where the merchandise came from and what Wal-Mart pays the sweat shops. As a truck driver I loaded out of sweat shops. I reported and had one closed down in North Carolina. Half of the emloyees were children under the age of ten years old. All the employees were illegal Mexicans. You think you are getting a bargin on that nice patio cover and pillows? Think again. You pay $50 - $100 for a nice set and it costs Wal-Mart or Target or K-Mart maybe $10 - $12. You think that shirt for $10 is a buy after a mark down from $15? It costs the bigger chains maybe $1 to $2 a shirt. I'm sorry but there are too many options where I can shop so I can avoid places like Wal-Mart. The sweat shops can afford to sell to Wal-Mart because Wal-Mart can afford to negoitate and buy in tremendous bulk that small stores cannot do. O.K., sure the people who need to buy at a lower price do benefit, but damn I'm poor as hell and I sure don't mind going to Good Will or Roses or the Dollar Store which is just as cheap if not cheaper. These places may still use sweat shops but their greed is not as intense either. They benefit the poor just as much and nearly every town has at least one or two such stores or they are within driving distance. Shadow
posted by
Keshet
on January 15, 2006 at 8:47 AM
| link to this | reply
Corbin but wasn't this going to work this way or already does, that
the Walmart employees work mostly part time hours so they apply for Medicaid, therefore the Maryland taxpayers foot the bill so one way or another someone was going to pay, either Walmart for health insurance, and then pass the cost on to the consumer or the taxpayers for the Medicaid.
posted by
scoop
on January 15, 2006 at 8:38 AM
| link to this | reply
I don't have an answer here....but still the customers will pay in the long run...and the majority are people who can't really afford higher pricing....
It's similar to Cigarette taxes.....the people that make the least are being burdoned with the additional cost of the product...how is that fair?
BTW....I don't shop Wal-mart if at all possible. I just don't like the place or their product choices....
With my small business, I do shop Sams, not from choice, but they're the only show in KY. I save too much money on refreshments and supplies used in my business.
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on January 15, 2006 at 8:29 AM
| link to this | reply
CORBIN DALLAS
I don't shop Wal-Mart, won't shop Wal-Mart, or Sam's Club's. I believe Sam Walton gave birth to a brilliant business plan, but after his death the Wal-Mart name should have been changed to GREED. We have several around here...but more and more people are shopping at Marc's and other low end retailers. I used to like to like Wal-Mart until they devored the country! They should pay insurance!
posted by
Offy
on January 15, 2006 at 8:22 AM
| link to this | reply
But can the customers afford it? The facts of life about corparations are........ they will make their margins....even if it means raising prices...so poor people will be paying for the insurance......
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on January 15, 2006 at 8:12 AM
| link to this | reply
Corbin,
I had the nightmare of working at Wal-Mart for nearly a year. Their freaking insurance sucks unless they have made some drastic changes. Its been a few years since I worked there part-time to help with college expenses. I just know that when I was there part-time single employees paid just as much as full time married employees. You could not join a health care plan until you had been there for six months, meaning part-time had to wait a year. And the pharmacy! No employee could use a outside pharmacy other than Wal-Mart's, plus you had to order any daily medication by mail at least a month in advance and hope it arrives before you run out and it rarely did. And no prescription other then generic was covered. Everyone had a year's wait for any prescriptions on co-pay that was full-time, two years part-time. So sorry, but until Wal-Mart takes the responsiblity of taking care of their own, then let the government tax the hell out of them. They can afford it. Shadow
posted by
Keshet
on January 15, 2006 at 8:08 AM
| link to this | reply