Wal-Mart's Non-Living Wage
Here is the cusp of what bothers me most about yet another illogical article from the Liberal press (linked at the bottom):
LaTasha Barker, single mother said she earned "so little that she could not afford the $1860 per year for family health insurance." (Thats... $155 per month for FAMILY COVERAGE???--WOW that's cheap!!!). So she made a decision to take a $15 per hour social work job-she got a good "govmint" job as my relatives would say.
Let's see, Ms. Barker chose to work for Wal-Mart, and then chose to apply for a job that pays more somewhere else???? I would strongly bet that Ms. Barker also shops at Wal-Mart and is the first to complain when prices go up.
Now, let's review the logical side of the argument of the "living wage": why restrict the minimum wage to $6... why not make it say $9... or $10... or $50 per hour? I think I could live on $50 per hour. Do any of us think that quarter pounder meal would still be $4.99 if McDonald's was shelling out $50 per hour per employee? Um, not likely! How much more would Wal-Mart have to charge customers like Ms. Barker if their mandatory wage pay out doubled or tripled?
This isn't 1970's Russia or 2005 China... we live in America. We are not told where we will work and for how much. We are totally free to go out and work for whomever will hire us for our abilities. We choose to accept the wages offered or we go somewhere else. Those wages are a cost that are factored into the prices you pay for the products bought from the provider/employer. Remember fondly when a cheeseburger, fries and coke at McDonald's would set you back $1.50? How much was the minimum wage then?? Is there a connection?? YES!
Another quote from the same NYT article linked at bottom:
""Henry Ford made sure he paid his workers enough so that they could afford to buy his cars," said William McDonough, executive vice president of the United Food and Commercial Workers union. "Wal-Mart is doing the polar opposite of Henry Ford. Wal-Mart brags about how its low prices help poor Americans, but its low wages are helping increase the number of Americans in poverty." "
If true market forces apply then you have two things happen: people earn what their job is worth to someone. Second, people get paid what their efforts are worth or they find someplace that pays what they are willing to work for. To Mr. McDonough I say "thank you for opening your mouth and revealing yourself for the fool you are". Comparing dog food, t-shirts and canned goods to cars? Profit margin retail is less than 5%, versus the car business where the dead net cost of building a corvette is about $14000 versus the $45000 price tag... (including wages, benefits and retiree costs-I actually fudged up the number as it was $8500 per unit in 1993) you do the math!
In my area there is a labor shortage and my grocery store is paying $10 per hour for clerks and baggers because they want people to work and stay there! They have to pay more to attract workers! Perfect example of market economics. Another reason why you should never listen to a liberal when it comes to money.
d
LaTasha Barker, single mother said she earned "so little that she could not afford the $1860 per year for family health insurance." (Thats... $155 per month for FAMILY COVERAGE???--WOW that's cheap!!!). So she made a decision to take a $15 per hour social work job-she got a good "govmint" job as my relatives would say.
Let's see, Ms. Barker chose to work for Wal-Mart, and then chose to apply for a job that pays more somewhere else???? I would strongly bet that Ms. Barker also shops at Wal-Mart and is the first to complain when prices go up.
Now, let's review the logical side of the argument of the "living wage": why restrict the minimum wage to $6... why not make it say $9... or $10... or $50 per hour? I think I could live on $50 per hour. Do any of us think that quarter pounder meal would still be $4.99 if McDonald's was shelling out $50 per hour per employee? Um, not likely! How much more would Wal-Mart have to charge customers like Ms. Barker if their mandatory wage pay out doubled or tripled?
This isn't 1970's Russia or 2005 China... we live in America. We are not told where we will work and for how much. We are totally free to go out and work for whomever will hire us for our abilities. We choose to accept the wages offered or we go somewhere else. Those wages are a cost that are factored into the prices you pay for the products bought from the provider/employer. Remember fondly when a cheeseburger, fries and coke at McDonald's would set you back $1.50? How much was the minimum wage then?? Is there a connection?? YES!
Another quote from the same NYT article linked at bottom:
""Henry Ford made sure he paid his workers enough so that they could afford to buy his cars," said William McDonough, executive vice president of the United Food and Commercial Workers union. "Wal-Mart is doing the polar opposite of Henry Ford. Wal-Mart brags about how its low prices help poor Americans, but its low wages are helping increase the number of Americans in poverty." "
If true market forces apply then you have two things happen: people earn what their job is worth to someone. Second, people get paid what their efforts are worth or they find someplace that pays what they are willing to work for. To Mr. McDonough I say "thank you for opening your mouth and revealing yourself for the fool you are". Comparing dog food, t-shirts and canned goods to cars? Profit margin retail is less than 5%, versus the car business where the dead net cost of building a corvette is about $14000 versus the $45000 price tag... (including wages, benefits and retiree costs-I actually fudged up the number as it was $8500 per unit in 1993) you do the math!
In my area there is a labor shortage and my grocery store is paying $10 per hour for clerks and baggers because they want people to work and stay there! They have to pay more to attract workers! Perfect example of market economics. Another reason why you should never listen to a liberal when it comes to money.
d
posted by Possum at 10:12
<< Home