There was a book I read a year or two back,
Barbara Ehrenreich's Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0805063897/104-7241810-1498354?v=glance&n=2
83155
The author decided to see how it worked to be one of America's low wage
workers. In it, she does a stint at Walmart. One of the stories she tells
is a woman who keeps coming back to the women's wear department to see if a
collared shirt is on sale. The manage refuses to mark it down, (it has some
sort of defect) and the woman can't afford to buy it at the price it is.
The quote I remember is "Alyssa looks crushed, and I tell her, when Howard's
out of sight, that there's something wrong when you're not paid enough to
buy a WalMart shirt,"
So the question really starts to become. Is Walmart making a profit
(3rd quarter result is "sales for the third quarter of fiscal 2006
increased 10.1% to $75.4 billion from $68.5 billion in the third quarter of
fiscal 2005." http://biz.yahoo.com/e/051202/wmt10-q.html,
and if so, are they doing it at the expense of their employees?
For a company that employees more than 10,000 workers in my state, I have no
problem thinking that they need to provide some minimal benefits to these
employees. Otherwise, when those employees become sick and can't work, its
my state taxes that are paying for it. Why should I subsidize Walmart?
Hidden Cost Of Wal-Mart Jobs
Use of Safety Net Programs by Wal-Mart Workers in California
Arindrajit Dube
UC Berkeley Institute for Industrial Relations
Ken Jacobs
UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education
A Study for the UC Berkeley Labor Center
August 2, 2004
http://www.dsausa.org/lowwage/walmart/2004/walmart%20study.html
Sandy
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 2:08 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: [signs of sanity] MD no longer subsidizing Walmart
Unfortunately while I agree with you in principle, the problem is that
Walmart takes advantage of people like you who have ideals of how gov't
should operate. They have absolutely no qualms about tromping on those
ideals as long as it makes them a profit.
It's the same kind of deal as the pacifist argument. Pacifists say, "nobody
should fight". so people who just want to take over say "great! that means
you won't fight back when we tromp all over you!"
Take a step back from the idealism and look at how they actually operate.
Sure they offer jobs, but they're like strip miners in small communities.
They come in, demand the local government subsidize their new store in
exchange for creating jobs and offering products, put all the local
businesses out of business, then when the local subsidies run out they pick
up operations, fire all the people and move on to the next local economy
leaving a dead town in their wake. And even if they don't move on, the've
become the only game in town for jobs in many small communities so people
don't have an option to go get another job with good benefits.
Steps like this legislation are simply corrections to a system suffering an
equilibrium problem.
On 1/13/06, Tim Heald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well that's a positive at least.
>
> Still don't think it's right.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Sandra Clark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 1:19 PM
> > To: CF-Community
> > Subject: RE: [signs of sanity] MD no longer subsidizing Walmart
> >
> > Actually, the legislature didn't single them out.
> >
> > The bill states that any company with more than 10,000 employees in
> > the state of MD shall spend at least 8% on health benefits
> >
> > It just so happens that all the companies with more than 10,000
> > employees in MD do spend 8% or more on health benefits with the
> > exception of WalMart.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tim Heald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 12:42 PM
> > To: CF-Community
> > Subject: RE: [signs of sanity] MD no longer subsidizing Walmart
> >
> > Also, how can this legislature single out a single company for this?
> >
> > At least, shouldn't it be for every company?
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:192352
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
