If Wal-Mart was unionized...

[danwxman]

would prices really go up? Wouldn't they keep prices low to compete with other stores?

[phk]

No they'd just hire illegal immigrants.

[dazzleman]

It depends on how unionization affects their labor costs.

Assuming that they are at least attempting to treat their workers decently in order to avoid them being attracted to a union, unionization may not have a large impact on labor costs in the short run, at least.

But companies like WalMart run on thin margins and depend on large volume in order to make money.  They could therefore be forced to increase prices.  If their competitors have lower labor costs than they do, it could put them out of business.  That has happened to a number of companies.

[WalterMitty]

if wal mart was unionized, i would not continue to shop there.  i dont support criminal enterprises.

[PBrunsel]

if wal mart was unionized, i would not continue to shop there.  i dont support criminal enterprises.

But don't you like the state that hosts the Kennedy Crime Family?

[Richard]

would prices really go up? Wouldn't they keep prices low to compete with other stores?

They can't keep prices low and pay $25 an hour wages + benefits + time off + encourage people to be lazy.

[senatortombstone]

I've worked for outfits like Target and other major grocery chains.  The average employee working for such a place cannot maintain a decent standard of living even at full time hours.  When I worked for Target, which is not union, they did offer health benefits, but when I was only making $7.50 an hour and they weren't absorbing much of the premiums, it was a bad deal.  But then again I worked at Target as a second-job, not my main one.

When I worked for major grocery store chains I was forced into unions and I got nothing out of my weekly dues, nothing. I was given no health benefits and my wages were terrible.  For such small-time jobs like the ones most people have at Target, Wal-Mart and other grocery stores, it isn't worth it.

[opebo]

I've always advocated a $15/hour minimum wage for places like Walmart - though a $25-35/hour wage would be necesary to for example rear a family.  I think of Walmart were forced to pay $15/hour and provide decent treatment and benefits for its workers, the increase in prices would be very minor.  In fairness I think a legally mandated minumum wage that would cover all employers is somewhat more competitively 'fair' than if for example Walmart were  unionized and say KMart were not.

[John Dibble]

I've always advocated a $15/hour minimum wage for places like Walmart - though a $25-35/hour wage would be necesary to for example rear a family.  I think of Walmart were forced to pay $15/hour and provide decent treatment and benefits for its workers, the increase in prices would be very minor.  In fairness I think a legally mandated minumum wage that would cover all employers is somewhat more competitively 'fair' than if for example Walmart were  unionized and say KMart were not.

You really want to collapse our economy, don't you?

[opebo]

I've always advocated a $15/hour minimum wage for places like Walmart - though a $25-35/hour wage would be necesary to for example rear a family.  I think of Walmart were forced to pay $15/hour and provide decent treatment and benefits for its workers, the increase in prices would be very minor.  In fairness I think a legally mandated minumum wage that would cover all employers is somewhat more competitively 'fair' than if for example Walmart were  unionized and say KMart were not.

You really want to collapse our economy, don't you?

Explain why it would 'collapse', won't you?

[John Dibble]

I've always advocated a $15/hour minimum wage for places like Walmart - though a $25-35/hour wage would be necesary to for example rear a family.  I think of Walmart were forced to pay $15/hour and provide decent treatment and benefits for its workers, the increase in prices would be very minor.  In fairness I think a legally mandated minumum wage that would cover all employers is somewhat more competitively 'fair' than if for example Walmart were  unionized and say KMart were not.

You really want to collapse our economy, don't you?

Explain why it would 'collapse', won't you?

I've explained it a million times. You never understand. Tell you what - go start a small business, something like a retail store or a fast food joint, and pay your workers $15/hr, then tell me it's a good idea.

[opebo]

I've always advocated a $15/hour minimum wage for places like Walmart - though a $25-35/hour wage would be necesary to for example rear a family.  I think of Walmart were forced to pay $15/hour and provide decent treatment and benefits for its workers, the increase in prices would be very minor.  In fairness I think a legally mandated minumum wage that would cover all employers is somewhat more competitively 'fair' than if for example Walmart were  unionized and say KMart were not.

You really want to collapse our economy, don't you?

Explain why it would 'collapse', won't you?

I've explained it a million times. You never understand. Tell you what - go start a small business, something like a retail store or a fast food joint, and pay your workers $15/hr, then tell me it's a good idea.

Well obviously as an employer, I would prefer they work for as little as possible - in fact free would be best of all.  By the same token even though it would be in my interest I cannot imagine how they could survive on less than $15/hour, and I would anticipate the miseries of that kind of life would drive them to sabotage their employer by damaging products or spitting in the food. 

[John Dibble]

I've always advocated a $15/hour minimum wage for places like Walmart - though a $25-35/hour wage would be necesary to for example rear a family.  I think of Walmart were forced to pay $15/hour and provide decent treatment and benefits for its workers, the increase in prices would be very minor.  In fairness I think a legally mandated minumum wage that would cover all employers is somewhat more competitively 'fair' than if for example Walmart were  unionized and say KMart were not.

You really want to collapse our economy, don't you?

Explain why it would 'collapse', won't you?

I've explained it a million times. You never understand. Tell you what - go start a small business, something like a retail store or a fast food joint, and pay your workers $15/hr, then tell me it's a good idea.

Well obviously as an employer, I would prefer they work for as little as possible - in fact free would be best of all.  By the same token even though it would be in my interest I cannot imagine how they could survive on less than $15/hour, and I would anticipate the miseries of that kind of life would drive them to sabotage their employer by damaging products or spitting in the food. 

The point is to actually see if you could successfully keep a small retail/food business running with that kind of wage.

[opebo]

I've always advocated a $15/hour minimum wage for places like Walmart - though a $25-35/hour wage would be necesary to for example rear a family.  I think of Walmart were forced to pay $15/hour and provide decent treatment and benefits for its workers, the increase in prices would be very minor.  In fairness I think a legally mandated minumum wage that would cover all employers is somewhat more competitively 'fair' than if for example Walmart were  unionized and say KMart were not.

You really want to collapse our economy, don't you?

Explain why it would 'collapse', won't you?

I've explained it a million times. You never understand. Tell you what - go start a small business, something like a retail store or a fast food joint, and pay your workers $15/hr, then tell me it's a good idea.

Well obviously as an employer, I would prefer they work for as little as possible - in fact free would be best of all.  By the same token even though it would be in my interest I cannot imagine how they could survive on less than $15/hour, and I would anticipate the miseries of that kind of life would drive them to sabotage their employer by damaging products or spitting in the food. 

The point is to actually see if you could successfully keep a small retail/food business running with that kind of wage.

Obviously I could if it were the legal minimum, as all my competitors woudl be paying the same wage.

[John Dibble]

I've always advocated a $15/hour minimum wage for places like Walmart - though a $25-35/hour wage would be necesary to for example rear a family.  I think of Walmart were forced to pay $15/hour and provide decent treatment and benefits for its workers, the increase in prices would be very minor.  In fairness I think a legally mandated minumum wage that would cover all employers is somewhat more competitively 'fair' than if for example Walmart were  unionized and say KMart were not.

You really want to collapse our economy, don't you?

Explain why it would 'collapse', won't you?

I've explained it a million times. You never understand. Tell you what - go start a small business, something like a retail store or a fast food joint, and pay your workers $15/hr, then tell me it's a good idea.

Well obviously as an employer, I would prefer they work for as little as possible - in fact free would be best of all.  By the same token even though it would be in my interest I cannot imagine how they could survive on less than $15/hour, and I would anticipate the miseries of that kind of life would drive them to sabotage their employer by damaging products or spitting in the food. 

The point is to actually see if you could successfully keep a small retail/food business running with that kind of wage.

Obviously I could if it were the legal minimum, as all my competitors woudl be paying the same wage.

Obviously you still don't understand how such a minimum would affect the economy.

[opebo]

I've always advocated a $15/hour minimum wage for places like Walmart - though a $25-35/hour wage would be necesary to for example rear a family.  I think of Walmart were forced to pay $15/hour and provide decent treatment and benefits for its workers, the increase in prices would be very minor.  In fairness I think a legally mandated minumum wage that would cover all employers is somewhat more competitively 'fair' than if for example Walmart were  unionized and say KMart were not.

You really want to collapse our economy, don't you?

Explain why it would 'collapse', won't you?

I've explained it a million times. You never understand. Tell you what - go start a small business, something like a retail store or a fast food joint, and pay your workers $15/hr, then tell me it's a good idea.

Well obviously as an employer, I would prefer they work for as little as possible - in fact free would be best of all.  By the same token even though it would be in my interest I cannot imagine how they could survive on less than $15/hour, and I would anticipate the miseries of that kind of life would drive them to sabotage their employer by damaging products or spitting in the food. 

The point is to actually see if you could successfully keep a small retail/food business running with that kind of wage.

Obviously I could if it were the legal minimum, as all my competitors woudl be paying the same wage.

Obviously you still don't understand how such a minimum would affect the economy.

It would be hard to know precisely what the outcome would be in detail.  However it seems to me an obvious political imperative that we give it a try.  Or rather would be if people voted in their economic interests.

[John Dibble]

http://business.baylor.edu/Charles_North/LivingWageSlides.ppt

[opebo]

http://business.baylor.edu/Charles_North/LivingWageSlides.ppt

Why should an increase in unemployment concern us if a) we provide generous welfare to those laid off, paid for by taxing the owners, and b) the jobs lost were miserable starvation level jobs anyway?

[John Dibble]

http://business.baylor.edu/Charles_North/LivingWageSlides.ppt

Why should an increase in unemployment concern us if a) we provide generous welfare to those laid off, paid for by taxing the owners, and b) the jobs lost were miserable starvation level jobs anyway?

a. would require higher taxes, which will be of further detriment to the economy
b. you don't know squat about jobs in the U.S. - and wouldn't those 'starvation' level jobs be covered by your supposed cure all living wage? The whole point is supposed to be bringing people out of poverty, not putting them back in.

[opebo]

http://business.baylor.edu/Charles_North/LivingWageSlides.ppt

Why should an increase in unemployment concern us if a) we provide generous welfare to those laid off, paid for by taxing the owners, and b) the jobs lost were miserable starvation level jobs anyway?

a. would require higher taxes, which will be of further detriment to the economy
b. you don't know squat about jobs in the U.S. - and wouldn't those 'starvation' level jobs be covered by your supposed cure all living wage? The whole point is supposed to be bringing people out of poverty, not putting them back in.

They wouldn't be in poverty - the New Welfare would provide well above the poverty level.

[John Dibble]

http://business.baylor.edu/Charles_North/LivingWageSlides.ppt

Why should an increase in unemployment concern us if a) we provide generous welfare to those laid off, paid for by taxing the owners, and b) the jobs lost were miserable starvation level jobs anyway?

a. would require higher taxes, which will be of further detriment to the economy
b. you don't know squat about jobs in the U.S. - and wouldn't those 'starvation' level jobs be covered by your supposed cure all living wage? The whole point is supposed to be bringing people out of poverty, not putting them back in.

They wouldn't be in poverty - the New Welfare would provide well above the poverty level.

It's clear you don't value the idea of people earning their own way in life.

[12th Doctor]

I've always advocated a $15/hour minimum wage for places like Walmart - though a $25-35/hour wage would be necesary to for example rear a family.  I think of Walmart were forced to pay $15/hour and provide decent treatment and benefits for its workers, the increase in prices would be very minor.  In fairness I think a legally mandated minumum wage that would cover all employers is somewhat more competitively 'fair' than if for example Walmart were  unionized and say KMart were not.

My family survived for 3 years, albeit uneasily, on just $7 per hour.

[opebo]

http://business.baylor.edu/Charles_North/LivingWageSlides.ppt

Why should an increase in unemployment concern us if a) we provide generous welfare to those laid off, paid for by taxing the owners, and b) the jobs lost were miserable starvation level jobs anyway?

a. would require higher taxes, which will be of further detriment to the economy
b. you don't know squat about jobs in the U.S. - and wouldn't those 'starvation' level jobs be covered by your supposed cure all living wage? The whole point is supposed to be bringing people out of poverty, not putting them back in.

They wouldn't be in poverty - the New Welfare would provide well above the poverty level.

It's clear you don't value the idea of people earning their own way in life.

No.  Not at $6 an hour.

[opebo]

My family survived for 3 years, albeit uneasily, on just $7 per hour.

I would love to know more about this.  Just one wage earner?   40 hours per week?  How many in your family?  And just how did you manage this feat?  A tent? Dumpsters?  Please, I am curious.

[John Dibble]

http://business.baylor.edu/Charles_North/LivingWageSlides.ppt

Why should an increase in unemployment concern us if a) we provide generous welfare to those laid off, paid for by taxing the owners, and b) the jobs lost were miserable starvation level jobs anyway?

a. would require higher taxes, which will be of further detriment to the economy
b. you don't know squat about jobs in the U.S. - and wouldn't those 'starvation' level jobs be covered by your supposed cure all living wage? The whole point is supposed to be bringing people out of poverty, not putting them back in.

They wouldn't be in poverty - the New Welfare would provide well above the poverty level.

It's clear you don't value the idea of people earning their own way in life.

No.  Not at $6 an hour.

I believe this belongs to you.