NationStates Jolt Archive

Apparently it's not only "Repubs' that are the pawns of big business and opposing minimum wage increases.

http://cbs2chicago.com/homepage/local_story_254112402.html

Mayor Daley Vetoes Big-Box Ordinance
Says Ordinance Would Drive Jobs Out Of Chicago
Get breaking news alerts

(CBS) CHICAGO Mayor Richard Daley vetoed an ordinance Monday that would have required mega-retailers to pay their workers higher wages after some of the nation's largest stores warned the measure would keep them from opening their doors within the city's limits.

Supporters said the measure would guarantee employees a "living wage," but in a letter to City Council members released Monday, Daley said the ordinance would drive businesses from Chicago.

Anyone suprised by this? I'm not.

I'm more concerned at the fact that his administration has mismanaged the city's economy so badly that saving jobs at Wal-Mart is worth vetoing an increase in the minimum wage.

How is this neoconservative? :confused:

How is this neoconservative? :confused:

Standard NS mudslinging practices LG, you should know that. :)

How is this neoconservative? :confused:

Neo Con =/= Conservative.

Standard NS mudslinging practices LG, you should know that. :)

Ah. :)

How can I resist a good mudslinging? Carry on. :)

the "pawns" of big business are the people who work for them and rely on them for paychecks and health care for them and their families.

oh,yeah- and all the people that buy their products, good and services. And stocks. And watch the shows they advertise on.

its really terrible, isnt it? :rolleyes:

Anyone suprised by this? I'm not.

I'm not.....Shirley Franklin is prety much doing the same down here in Atlanta. This is why I think the Dems are a dead party. We need a real center-left party

We need a real center-left party

unfortunately, the dems are entrenched and not utterly collapsing as a party, and the republicans are essentially fascist. so trying to form a new party right now effectively splits the non-fascist vote - and then they don't even have to cheat to win. you'd be better off scrapping the whole system and starting over than playing within the system of party politics.

the "pawns" of big business are the people who work for them and rely on them for paychecks and health care for them and their families.

WalMart? Provide Health Care? BWAAAAAAH HA HA HA HAAAA!! (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/13/business/13walmart.html?ex=1158206400&en=3f9b139dfa666ba1&ei=5070)

:D

oh,yeah- and all the people that buy their products, good and services. And stocks. And watch the shows they advertise on.

its really terrible, isnt it? :rolleyes:

And of course WalMart's responsible for shutting down a lot of manufacturing plants in the continental United States and having them outsourced to China, where wages are cheaper and of course, employee rights aren't as well-defined. It's a vicious circle and someone on NSG appropriately called them "poverty bombs." The Frontline special on WalMart goes into a lot of detail about their practices. Even company vendors complain how WalMart demands that products are sold to them at an artificially low rate and how they deliberately undercut local competetion by sheer volumes.

I notice how nobody's mentioned the one alderperson who changed her vote when wallyworld promised to build a store in her district.

And of course WalMart's responsible for shutting down a lot of manufacturing plants in the continental United States and having them outsourced to China, where wages are cheaper and of course, employee rights aren't as well-defined. It's a vicious circle and someone on NSG appropriately called them "poverty bombs.".

That's competition; the reason is that most people don't want to pay the additional cost for US products, . Wal-Mart isn't to blame for the loss of US manufacturing jobs, it's the consumer who prefers to pay less for Chinese products. People don't want to pay 20-50% or more for similar US products

There's not really anything wrong with that, either; spending less by buying cheaper products from overseas mean that consumers have more to spend in other areas and they can increase their overall standard of living. If people want to keep manufacturing jobs in the US, they'll have to be willing to pay more and in some cases significantly more for those goods. That means they have less to spend in other areas.

It's unfortunate, but workers in manufacturing are going to lose their jobs to foreign competition; the goal is to enable them to make the transition from manufacturing to other fields through retraining and assistance. The benefits of trade far outweigh the losses, especially for consumers and workers in fields associated with trade.

That's competition; the reason is that most people don't want to pay the additional cost for US products, . Wal-Mart isn't to blame for the loss of US manufacturing jobs, it's the consumer who prefers to pay less for Chinese products. People don't want to pay 20-50% or more for similar US products

This is a fallacy.

There are many cases of retailers who had annual contracts to provide their wholesale goods to Walmart and Walmart asked them to contract their production to Chinese plants. Those who refused found that the following year Walmart made no orders, without warning. So these companies had run up their standard annual inventory and suddenly had no market, because Walmart found another marketer who would contract with a Chinese plant, but didn't bother to mention this to their previous years wholesaler.

Did Walmart pass these savings on to the customer? No, their priced didn't drop a penny as a result. They stayed exactly where they were. An average of 2-3 cents below the next lowest priced competitor.

unfortunately, the dems are entrenched and not utterly collapsing as a party, and the republicans are essentially fascist. so trying to form a new party right now effectively splits the non-fascist vote - and then they don't even have to cheat to win. you'd be better off scrapping the whole system and starting over than playing within the system of party politics.

Or do what the Connecticuit people are doing. Vote out incumbents that don't support liberal politics. If you've got two non-liberals, vote for the least conservative. Then next time around chose the more liberal again. Eventually the politicians will get the idea.

Conservative = death. Politically, and globally.

There are many cases of retailers who had annual contracts to provide their wholesale goods to Walmart and Walmart asked them to contract their production to Chinese plants. Those who refused found that the following year Walmart made no orders, without warning. So these companies had run up their standard annual inventory and suddenly had no market, because Walmart found another marketer who would contract with a Chinese plant, but didn't bother to mention this to their previous years wholesaler.

There's nothing wrong with that, that's just good business sense. If you're negotiating for a supplier, and you can find a supplier that is willing to abide by your terms, then you go with that supplier. Wal-Mart sets its terms, and if a company refuses to agree with them then Wal-Mart has every right to leave them without orders. It maxmizes their profit and gives them a competitive edge over other retailers.

Did Walmart pass these savings on to the customer? No, their priced didn't drop a penny as a result. They stayed exactly where they were. An average of 2-3 cents below the next lowest priced competitor.

And people are still willing to buy from them to save 2-3 cents...the only way you're going to change Wal-Mart is if you convince people that those 2-3 cents aren't worth the social costs.

It's simple: work at Wal-Mart for whatever wages they offer, or be unemployed and live life off society's money. I should think that working at Wal-Mart would be preferable to being unemployed, but apparently, liberal logic states that $0/hour > $5.15/hour.

What the fuck does big business economics have to do with neoconservatism? What's new about that?

Why post this shit?

Begoner21;11673767']It's simple: work at Wal-Mart for whatever wages they offer, or be unemployed and live life off society's money. I should think that working at Wal-Mart would be preferable to being unemployed, but apparently, liberal logic states that $0/hour > $5.15/hour.

Funny, because there's several articles on the Web that pretty state that WalMart employees still have to apply for welfare benefits even while working for $5.15 an hour- quite a generous wage if you live in Backwardistan, but a pittance in the West compared to the basic Costs of Living.

Here's one article I picked:

http://www.janabommersbach.com/phx-mag-may04.htm

Seems that Right-Wing/Libertarian Logic states that those ungrateful wretches ought to be thankful they're getting anything at all, regardless of how much basic necessities actually cost.

unfortunately, the dems are entrenched and not utterly collapsing as a party, and the republicans are essentially fascist.
What's in a name?
to be fair to the fascists, the US has a right of centre party, and a slightly less right of centre party.

unfortunately, the dems are entrenched and not utterly collapsing as a party, and the republicans are essentially fascist.
Totalitarians, maybe.