Community Chat

[terrier3]

On 3/3/2015 mominohio said:

Government NO NO NO!

And the two opposing forces idea is, unfortunately necessary (should't people be able to do what is right, fair, without being forced? But it often doesn't happen, I know). Those two forces are the company, and the worker. Workers who aren't well paid, aren't given the benefits they need, will walk. They will go to someone who knows how to attract and keep good help. Competition will raise the bar. Original employer either looses out and goes out of business, or does what is necessary for the business to survive and thrive. It doesn't always take a third party to be involved. Third parties like unions and government have agendas that get in the way of either of the two originals getting what they need.

We are coming out of a huge recession. People are working at big box stores who NEVER expected they would be there.

When I was presenting health insurance at Target, I met an older worker -50s I would guess. He had been a development manager at a museum - he lost his job because it got too difficult to raise funds from corporations and they cut back. He was lucky to have his Target job...but planned on getting out as soon as the economy got better.

Until we have competition for jobs (just starting now)...must people make sub-living wages????

Corporations have never had the kind of profits they are making now. They are rolling in money...it takes something better than "trickle down" to share those profits with the rank and file workers.

If companies are smart - they will rectify the situation on their own....they have gone too far and become too greedy, IMO.

One worker up against a large corporation has no clout...united workers do.

[Mominohio]

On 3/3/2015 brii said:

These are always such horrible threads. I guess the OP got what she wanted...

I don't see the horrible in it. A true exchange of ideas on business, how it works, should work, the state of the American worker, how we got where we are, the fact that individuals have to bear the brunt of the responsibility of their success and advancement, the reminder that there are others with a view opposite mine.

I just learned that Terrier (who often comes in on the opposite side of an issue from my point of view) and I do share some common ground here. Government out of the wage game, and the opposing forces idea. I had no idea we had these thoughts in common, and it makes me desire to hear her (?) side and consider what is said and thought.

I think this is exactly what Viewpoints is for. More calm and mundane topics belong in the kitchen or home forums and such. I like this one for the thought provoking discussions and opinions.

[terrier3]

On 3/3/2015 mominohio said:

Trickle down does work. I've never cashed a paycheck from a 'poor' man. If these businesses didn't exist, where would all those people find jobs? If small, locally owned business took over the gap of these now missing huge corporations, how much better would the pay and benefits be? While small business does provide most new jobs and employment in most areas, they aren't notorious for high wages and Cadillac benefit packages either.

Without workers...the businessman would make NO profit. He needs workers to succeed.

It's a two way street.

It's not the benevolent company "giving" money to workers. It's companies thriving and succeeding because of their strong workforce. American workers are more productive than at any time in history....they deserve to share in the profits of their hard work.

[VioletEyes]

On 3/3/2015 mominohio said:

On 3/3/2015 terrier3 said:

On 3/3/2015 mominohio said:

As to the picture in the OP, the billions received in government assistance isn't because of Walmart's low wages, it is because a large portion of those receiving those benefits are too lazy to do better, don't want to do better, and purposefully set themselves up in a job with hours and wages that fall just within the guidelines to keep getting that federal assistance.

I Walmart paid double, those people would still be on the dole, as they would be sure to only work half the amount of hours, in order to continue their eligibility for the programs.

As the mom of a former Walmart worker, you couldn't be more wrong.

Many, if not most, Walmart workers are just people trying to make a living and this was the best job they could find. Most Walmart workers are p/t - the company does this on purpose to limit benefits. They cut medical benefits in 2015 - prior to that you could get a VERY rudimentary health insurance policy if you had worked for them either f/t or for 2 years p/t. This year they changed the long term p/t requirements to 30 -39 hours a week p/t only. They didn't notify their employees in advance - they just said that if you averaged less than 30 hours/wk. in 2014 you were ineligible for HI in 2015. Since many p/t Walmart employees work 3 days a week (24 hours), they were shut out of HI this year. They were directed to apply for Medicaid on the ACA exchange.

They also are notorious for changing shifts every week. It's tough to plan a college schedule (or a second job!) if you don't know from week to week when you will be scheduled. If you "block out" time due to another job/school or any other reason, your hours are greatly reduced. They basically give the most hours to people who are available 24/7 - but even then they don't get f/t!

The main problem at Walmart isn't workers cutting shifts to get benefits. Even working FULL TIME there at $8 an hour, an employee would make $16,640 a year. The income level for Medicaid is $16,100 a year for one person (138% of poverty level). If you are a single mother with one child and work there FULL TIME, you still would be eligible for Medicaid, food stamps and other assistance. Even when they raise pay to $9, a single mom would still be eligible for assistance.

So claiming the moochers who work there would just ask to have their hours cut is patently false...even working there full time (and very few workers at a store are f/t), many workers STILL qualify for gvt. assistance.

These are entry level jobs, and not intended to support entire families. People who need and want to better themselves can and will, whether within Walmart or by finding better jobs or educational opportunities that lead to better jobs.

Sitting in a minimum wage job, or just above minimum wage, and whining about your lot in life is a full time job for some, but seems to be more a battle cry from those not even living the actual life.

The wages, hours, and scheduling aren't different from much of the other restaurant and retail work available out there, but Walmart being so large and profitable seems to be the big target, while others do the same thing without being mentioned.

My statements are not patently false about the moochers. Full time, part time, whatever, they, by the millions, know the system and the level at which they must underperform to stay on the dole. Lets put the blame where it belongs for MOST, and hold responsible those that have families when they can't or won't work and achieve at the level necessary to live a decent life, and provide for them. Let's stop blaming businesses that actually provide work, opportunity to learn, earn, advance, or move on to something better.

Tell that to a young mother whose husband just left her with two children that she is unable to feed. Tell that to a person born into poverty with an educational system that has failed because they live in a school district wrought with poverty. All of your statements about the working poor are wrong on every level and just that......assumptions and a desire to put blame on people living in poverty to help your conscience. Just another example of the blame game.

None of us start on the same playing field. Some of us have had opportunities given to us from the minute we were born. Having a little empathy and using our intellect to understand that we're all in this together hurts no one.

[Mominohio]

On 3/3/2015 terrier3 said:

On 3/3/2015 mominohio said:

Trickle down does work. I've never cashed a paycheck from a 'poor' man. If these businesses didn't exist, where would all those people find jobs? If small, locally owned business took over the gap of these now missing huge corporations, how much better would the pay and benefits be? While small business does provide most new jobs and employment in most areas, they aren't notorious for high wages and Cadillac benefit packages either.

Without workers...the businessman would make NO profit. He needs workers to succeed.

It's a two way street.

It's not the benevolent company "giving" money to workers. It's companies thriving and succeeding because of their strong workforce. American workers are more productive than at any time in history....they deserve to share in the profits of their hard work.

I'm not sure where you might have gotten the idea that I was for the 'giving' of anything to workers. Businesses should earn the good workers they get and keep, and people earn the wages and benefits they receive in exchange for their work, intellect and talent.

It is exactly that, a two way street, and third parties need little input for success. As I said before third parties (government, unions) only have their own agenda, and it usually costs the business or the employee in the long run.

[Stella Dallas]

On 3/3/2015 mominohio said:

On 3/3/2015 Stella Dallas said:

On 3/3/2015 straykatz said:

Walmart among other hugely profitable business is a perfect example that the trickle down effect is non-existant despite the people who tried to convince voters of a trickle-down economy last time around.

It wasn't called Voodoo Economics for nothing.

Trickle down does work. I've never cashed a paycheck from a 'poor' man. If these businesses didn't exist, where would all those people find jobs? If small, locally owned business took over the gap of these now missing huge corporations, how much better would the pay and benefits be? While small business does provide most new jobs and employment in most areas, they aren't notorious for high wages and Cadillac benefit packages either.

1) You probably have and you just don't know it.

2) When did Voodoo Economics work? how? it sure didn't for my family. My husband has a science PhD and is a highly trained software developer and he was out of work for almost a year because of it.

Thank God for what there was of the economic support network because I don't know what we would have done without it. With it, we were able to hang onto our home and take care of our children. I don't even like to think how we would have been able to hold without it, till he finally found work again.

Having been there, I have nothing but sympathy for the poor and disenfranchised.

[Blahblahvampemer]

As a former WM worker, yeah for them! I was paid a fair wage, and I had the opprtunity to get hc that virtually no one else in the retail world could get at any price. I should add that I have two family members working for them right now, and what Terrier said isn't remotely what they're experiencing.

[betteb]

On 3/3/2015 SoftRaindrops said: Amazing! Another Walmart thread denigrating the poor in this country. Read ""Nickled and Dimed"" and find out why some try to work but don't have many choices and not because they are lazy. SMH.

SMH with you

[Blahblahvampemer]

On 3/3/2015 SoftRaindrops said:

On 3/3/2015 mominohio said:

On 3/3/2015 terrier3 said:

On 3/3/2015 mominohio said:

As to the picture in the OP, the billions received in government assistance isn't because of Walmart's low wages, it is because a large portion of those receiving those benefits are too lazy to do better, don't want to do better, and purposefully set themselves up in a job with hours and wages that fall just within the guidelines to keep getting that federal assistance.

I Walmart paid double, those people would still be on the dole, as they would be sure to only work half the amount of hours, in order to continue their eligibility for the programs.

As the mom of a former Walmart worker, you couldn't be more wrong.

Many, if not most, Walmart workers are just people trying to make a living and this was the best job they could find. Most Walmart workers are p/t - the company does this on purpose to limit benefits. They cut medical benefits in 2015 - prior to that you could get a VERY rudimentary health insurance policy if you had worked for them either f/t or for 2 years p/t. This year they changed the long term p/t requirements to 30 -39 hours a week p/t only. They didn't notify their employees in advance - they just said that if you averaged less than 30 hours/wk. in 2014 you were ineligible for HI in 2015. Since many p/t Walmart employees work 3 days a week (24 hours), they were shut out of HI this year. They were directed to apply for Medicaid on the ACA exchange.

They also are notorious for changing shifts every week. It's tough to plan a college schedule (or a second job!) if you don't know from week to week when you will be scheduled. If you "block out" time due to another job/school or any other reason, your hours are greatly reduced. They basically give the most hours to people who are available 24/7 - but even then they don't get f/t!

The main problem at Walmart isn't workers cutting shifts to get benefits. Even working FULL TIME there at $8 an hour, an employee would make $16,640 a year. The income level for Medicaid is $16,100 a year for one person (138% of poverty level). If you are a single mother with one child and work there FULL TIME, you still would be eligible for Medicaid, food stamps and other assistance. Even when they raise pay to $9, a single mom would still be eligible for assistance.

So claiming the moochers who work there would just ask to have their hours cut is patently false...even working there full time (and very few workers at a store are f/t), many workers STILL qualify for gvt. assistance.

These are entry level jobs, and not intended to support entire families. People who need and want to better themselves can and will, whether within Walmart or by finding better jobs or educational opportunities that lead to better jobs.

Sitting in a minimum wage job, or just above minimum wage, and whining about your lot in life is a full time job for some, but seems to be more a battle cry from those not even living the actual life.

The wages, hours, and scheduling aren't different from much of the other restaurant and retail work available out there, but Walmart being so large and profitable seems to be the big target, while others do the same thing without being mentioned.

My statements are not patently false about the moochers. Full time, part time, whatever, they, by the millions, know the system and the level at which they must underperform to stay on the dole. Lets put the blame where it belongs for MOST, and hold responsible those that have families when they can't or won't work and achieve at the level necessary to live a decent life, and provide for them. Let's stop blaming businesses that actually provide work, opportunity to learn, earn, advance, or move on to something better.

Tell that to a young mother whose husband just left her with two children that she is unable to feed. Tell that to a person born into poverty with an educational system that has failed because they live in a school district wrought with poverty. All of your statements about the working poor are wrong on every level and just that......assumptions and a desire to put blame on people living in poverty to help your conscience. Just another example of the blame game.

None of us start on the same playing field. Some of us have had opportunities given to us from the minute we were born. Having a little empathy and using our intellect to understand that we're all in this together hurts no one.

Both of my parents grew up in very poor households during the depression. How did they get out? Marriage before kids, educations they paid for by working awful jobs and saving for bad times. The secrets to upward mobility are actually very simple, and if you don't follow them, you do so at your peril.

[inallsincerity]

Having worked many minimum wage and low paying jobs, most of the time, two at a time, I totally agree that "the working poor" should not be used as a code word for laziness. As a matter of fact, the working poor probably includes in its ranks, the hardest workers in this country. However, many of "the working poor" are not the fodder for a "Lifetime" movie that some people seem to have in their head. My husband, a food store manager has in fact had employees request less hours so that they could still get assistance. How about the servers that I worked with that would call off sick and show up the next day with burn marks on their thumbs from smoking out of a crack pipe all night. I saw them doing it with my own eyes, so this is not conjecture or rumor or something I overheard or read someplace. Is that the norm, no, most likely not, but like everything else we discuss, all things have shades of gray. While some pretend that wealth and opportunity are waiting just around the corner for every man, woman, and child in America wishing to work for it; others, although they mean well, bemoan those same Americans as poor downtrodden souls that will just toil away for pennies while society kicks them in the teeth yet again because they just, through no fault of their own, drew an unlucky hand.