• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Opinion on Wal-Mart to pull of of Washington D.C.

Freedomelf

Active Member

DC is more affluent than America as a whole, since the poverty rate in America is over 15 percent while the rate in DC is around 12 percent. Compare that with Chicago's over 22 percent rate.

In areas where there is more affluence, the poor need higher incomes just to be able to survive, since those areas have higher prices in general, and for those who won't shop at Walmart on principle, there aren't many options with limited resources. So I'm all for what the government is doing. The minimum wage, if it had kept up with corporate greed, would be over 22. an hour right now. We don't need any more greed. We need to get back to the economy of the 50s, when one earner could afford a home.
 

Brickjectivity

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
They can pull of of DC if the don't like the deal, but DC is within its purpose to set a requirement. Lots of localities make deals with corporations. I don't blame Walmart for being competitive and doing well in business, and I don't blame DC for trying to improve employment conditions.
 

tytlyf

Not Religious
In all fairness, isn't that the purpose of running a business in the first place?
Yep, profit is the lifeline. But when a business gets so big, it become more than just profit, it means running over your employees to reach every single penny of profit you can manage.
 

I.S.L.A.M617

Illuminatus
Yep, profit is the lifeline. But when a business gets so big, it become more than just profit, it means running over your employees to reach every single penny of profit you can manage.

Then the employees can either unionize and fight you for higher wages, or find other jobs. There is a "checks and balances" system of sorts in business. If all of your employees leave, you either have to pay them more, find different employees willing to work for the same wage, or stop making money altogether. Corporations don't hold all the power in the market; the employees are an key piece of the puzzle. It's just like Rev Rick said; if nobody wanted to work for low wages, there would be no low-paying jobs.
 

Brickjectivity

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
ISLAM617 said:
if nobody wanted to work for low wages, there would be no low-paying jobs.
Apparently very few people want to work for high wages, because there aren't many high paying jobs.
 

Monk Of Reason

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Then the employees can either unionize and fight you for higher wages, or find other jobs. There is a "checks and balances" system of sorts in business. If all of your employees leave, you either have to pay them more, find different employees willing to work for the same wage, or stop making money altogether. Corporations don't hold all the power in the market; the employees are an key piece of the puzzle. It's just like Rev Rick said; if nobody wanted to work for low wages, there would be no low-paying jobs.
You can't just "unionize". You make it sound easy. Its not. The hospital I used to work at would fire anyone who even was associated from anyone with a union. They have had 2 different "purges" where they fired as many as 50 people for just being seen talking to the Union reps that tried to come in. Walmart is in a similar position. Also "right to work states" have pretty much gutted union rights so......

There is not a checks and balances system for the employees to owner. The owner in even a unionized business has about 80% of the power. They have 99% of the power if no Union is there.
 

I.S.L.A.M617

Illuminatus
You can't just "unionize". You make it sound easy. Its not. The hospital I used to work at would fire anyone who even was associated from anyone with a union. They have had 2 different "purges" where they fired as many as 50 people for just being seen talking to the Union reps that tried to come in.
And everyone fired has a right to sue the hospital for wrongful termination, and will most likely win. They would have a great case. People just lack the ambition not to give up so easily.

Walmart is in a similar position. Also "right to work states" have pretty much gutted union rights so......
I honestly don't know too much about the "right to work" states, but there are always options, and lawyers willing to help people act on them (for the right price, of course).


There is not a checks and balances system for the employees to owner. The owner in even a unionized business has about 80% of the power. They have 99% of the power if no Union is there.
Sure there is. The employees can refuse to work, they can file a lawsuit, they can tank the business by spreading bad publicity. Owners don't like anything that jeopardizes their profits; a smart business owner will try to find a happy middle ground rather than taking the hit and attempting to rebuild. If all else fails, there's also always good old-fashioned blackmail and extortion. Maybe some pictures of a certain owner doing a certain something he certainly shouldn't be doing get leaked on the internet :D...
 

Monk Of Reason

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
And everyone fired has a right to sue the hospital for wrongful termination, and will most likely win. They would have a great case. People just lack the ambition not to give up so easily.
Not if the buisness knows what they are doing. Two people tried lawsuits and failed. Now no lawyer will take up the case.

I honestly don't know too much about the "right to work" states, but there are always options, and lawyers willing to help people act on them (for the right price, of course).
Not really. The law is the law and lawyers are only able to work within those parameters. It also is terrible because no one person can make a difference. You have to convergence every working person (who is paycheck to paycheck probably with kids, medical bills, mortgage, car payments, debt ect and can't afford to take a single short check) as well as every potential person who would take your place.

If you think that we could get people to ban together like that then we would not have these problems. You are severely underestimating the powerlessness of workers. What you and reverend Rick are insinuating is in a perfect world with no problems. Its completely unrealistic and doesn't happen in the real world.


Sure thereggh is. The employees can refuse to work, they can file a lawsuit, they can tank the business by spreading bad publicity. Owners don't like anything that jeopardizes their profits; a smart business owner will try to find a happy middle ground rather than taking the hit and attempting to rebuild. If all else fails, there's also always good old-fashioned blackmail and extortion. Maybe some pictures of a certain owner doing a certain something he certainly shouldn't be doing get leaked on the internet :D...
It only works on small buisnesses. It does not work on large businesses. Walmart Employees can't do that to discredit walmart in a large enough scale to make any bit of difference.

Lawsuits are often lost. Something about corporations having millions while employees are living in poverty or something.

Blackmail and exploitation is illegal...unless your a business owner and then its called business.
 

I.S.L.A.M617

Illuminatus
Well it certainly wouldn't work with that pessimistic attitude of yours... The only think keeping workers powerless is the fact that they think they're powerless. Whenever I want something from my boss, I go right up to him, demand what I want, and threaten to walk out on the spot if I don't get it (I currently work 4 different positions at my job). I have yet to lose my job, and I work for a good-size corporate chain restaurant. The problem with people today is that they don't have any balls.
 

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
Monk, would you work for a penny an hour? Why not? Using your logic, you would have to take the job no matter what it paid, right?

If NO ONE worked for low pay, there would be no low paying jobs.

This doesn't take into account reality. People accept minimum wage jobs because they know that they won't get any better offer for unskilled labor.
 

I.S.L.A.M617

Illuminatus
This doesn't take into account reality. People accept minimum wage jobs because they know that they won't get any better offer for unskilled labor.

Not with that kind of attitude, they won't... People need to stop playing the victim. This is the land of opportunity, one need only have ambition.
 

moodys

Member
Well it certainly wouldn't work with that pessimistic attitude of yours... The only think keeping workers powerless is the fact that they think they're powerless. Whenever I want something from my boss, I go right up to him, demand what I want, and threaten to walk out on the spot if I don't get it (I currently work 4 different positions at my job). I have yet to lose my job, and I work for a good-size corporate chain restaurant. The problem with people today is that they don't have any balls.
Are you kidding me? I would fire you right there where you stood and showed you who is boss. Low-skilled workers don't have much power at all, there's an infinite supply of low-skilled workers.
 

I.S.L.A.M617

Illuminatus
Are you kidding me? I would fire you right there where you stood and showed you who is boss. Low-skilled workers don't have much power at all, there's an infinite supply of low-skilled workers.

I have yet to lose my job because I make myself extremely useful and I'm really good at my job(s). My boss would have to hire 3 new people to replace me. People that show no balls are easily replaceable, but my boss wouldn't give me up when all he has to do is keep me happy.
 

Brickjectivity

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Hmm. So we should just let people go hungry if they are stupid or in some way socially unskilled. If they don't have both the balls and ability to stand up to their bosses, then to hell with them. That way only the strong will survive. Sounds like a plan.
 

I.S.L.A.M617

Illuminatus
Hmm. So we should just let people go hungry if they are stupid or in some way socially unskilled. If they don't have both the balls and ability to stand up to their bosses, then to hell with them. That way only the strong will survive. Sounds like a plan.

That's America. If you don't like it, make more money.
 

moodys

Member
I have yet to lose my job because I make myself extremely useful and I'm really good at my job(s). My boss would have to hire 3 new people to replace me. People that show no balls are easily replaceable, but my boss wouldn't give me up when all he has to do is keep me happy.
Trying to show some balls would get you an instant dismissal in many firms, I would think you are extremely lucky to have a boss who can have his workers push him around like that.
 

I.S.L.A.M617

Illuminatus
Trying to show some balls would get you an instant dismissal in many firms, I would think you are extremely lucky to have a boss who can have his workers push him around like that.

Or it'll get you a promotion; you never know until you have the balls to try. From my experience, people respect confidence. I've always been the type to speak my mind, regardless of the authority of the person I'm speaking to, and it has yet to get me into any real trouble.
 
Top