Yes. Don't you wish you had thought of the concept?
2007-04-16 12:32:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by BigRichGuy 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Sure, it keeps costs low for us, and it determines what gets produced and how much. Don't mess with economics baby. If there slave wage laborers did not find the wage enough, they would seek a job somewhere else. Both sides of the equation are receiving an equitable trade off, wal mart receives good profits and the laborers receive a job and a income that otherwise would not be there. some money is better than no money.
2007-04-16 19:32:16
·
answer #2
·
answered by trigunmarksman 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
How is Wal-Mart exploiting their workers? They actually called for the minimum wage increase to raise the costs of their competitors because they already pay more than minimum wage.
Wal-Mart is benefiting the poor by raising their standard of living. Were it not for Wal-Mart, many of these people couldn't afford TVs, Radios, and the rest of the stuff the rest of us take for granted. Corporations like Wal-Mart help the poor, while the government hurt them by locking them into the Welfare Trap and preventing them from moving upward. Instead of collecting welfare, they could be working at McDonald's, which is always hiring and at least offers them a chance to improve their economic status.
If Wal-Mart's workers were unsatisfied with their job, they'd go somewhere else. There are so many employers under Capitalism that it is actually a workers' market.
There's a good reason why Capitalist countries like America are wealthier than Communist countries such as Cuba or Vietnam. Capitalism actually is better for almost all of the people than the other systems (even though businessmen earn alot under Capitalism). Under the leader in non-Capitalist countries has a high a standard of living as somebody on the poverty line in a Capitalist country.
2007-04-16 19:44:55
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
slave wage workers? huh?
that's pure bullshit put out by the unions. Let me give you a dose of reality. I raised 4 daughters, and they were younger, they worked at a chain of store based out of Michigan called Meijer's. Walmart stole their "supercenter" concept from them. They have had the "super" stores since the early 1980's grocery on one side of a huge store, department store on the other...they invented the idea. Union shop. Two of my girls worked there as cashiers right about the time they got out of highschool and before they got married. They were making crap, and on top of making crap, the union was taking dues out of their checks. One of them quit, the other went to walmart for MORE money.
The Unions put out this crap because they want more dues. The union that represents grocery store workers has gone to hell in a hand basket anyway. NO ONE working in a grocery store is going to make any real money, those days are gone. consomers don't care. If a box of raisin bran costs $2 at walmart and $4 at kroger, guess where they are going to shop?
As to they deserve their profits, yes they do. they earned them. They owe it to their investors to turn a profit. who are their investors? well of course you got the Walton family, but you also have countless other shareholders, grandmothers with IRA accounts, workers with 401k accounts that all benefit when companies like Walmart are successful.
2007-04-16 19:44:40
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Ask a Wal-Mart employee. You can't pay people slave wages in this country and the minimum wage doesn't even affect WalMart.
2007-04-16 19:33:16
·
answer #5
·
answered by R. Lee 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
According to Fortune Magazine's listing, in 2006 Wal-Mart had sales of $351.1 billion and profits of $11.3 billion.
A quick calculation shows their profit at a respectable 3.2%
Compare this with Exxon Mobil (the #2 in total profit dollars for the year), who showed an 11.4% profit on receipts. Wal-Mart is making the receipts on large numbers of sales at cut-rate prices.
In 2006, Wal-Mart spent $4.7 billion on employee benefits. 75% of its employees are full-time. According to the Boston Herald, only 10% of Wal-Mart employees lack health coverage. According to USA Today, the average wage of a full-time employee is $10.11/hr, or $20,200 / year. This is already well above minimum wage, and shows that Wal-Mart i competing for workers. Perhaps you'd like to make a case that $20,000 a year is slave wages? You'd be damning large sectors of the government as well as private corporations in that case, because that is as good or better than the salaries of many low-level positions for people with college diplomas offered by government agencies.
2007-04-16 20:02:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by Tomteboda 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
yes, the slave wage laborers can always work at Mc Donald's.
2007-04-16 19:34:25
·
answer #7
·
answered by King Midas 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
NO. we should take their profits away and give them to poor people. this way there will be no motivation for anyone to invent things, sell them, be innovative, work hard. We can look just like the old USSR>
2007-04-16 20:08:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'd like to know how they made 350 billion in profits, when they only generated 312 billion in revenue.That's a pretty good trick. . ( finanial statement 2006)
Please tell me where., in their financial statement does it show the amt on income tax they paid,,,since you're such a financial whiz!.
2007-04-16 19:41:55
·
answer #9
·
answered by TedEx 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Sure. You sound jealous. I have stock in Wal Mart, this profit makes the value of my stock better.
2007-04-16 19:32:04
·
answer #10
·
answered by libsaremollys 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
No wonder Walmart sponsors Al Sharpton radio show. Did anyone know that?
2007-04-16 19:34:53
·
answer #11
·
answered by furrryyy 5
·
0⤊
1⤋