Walmart employees to get raises

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

No.

Oh, Cabo. My mistake.

And walking around the fountain square for your overnight layover in Tokyo doesn't really count for your "Asian countries."

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

PRB, One sentence in particular demonstrates the difference between countries like the US and a lot of other countries.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

SO, can you can answer me?

I'll give one of many examples. My wife is walking down the street in metro Manila. "Jaywalking," just like everyone else. Cop comes up and asks her what she is doing. She gets indignant and says in a very loud voice, "What do you want?!!" Money?!! You think you can shake me down because I'm married to an American?!" Cop sort of shrivels up and slithers off. Didn't get his little payoff--bribe--whatever.

Try standing up for yourself like that with a cop in this country and see how far you get. The difference is that Americans are afraid of the government. The Filipino government, on the other hand, is afraid of the people. History and other factors in such countries make it so. It's true of many Latin American, Asian, and African countries.

 

[PRB]

I'll give one of many examples. My wife is walking down the street in metro Manila. "Jaywalking," just like everyone else. Cop comes up and asks her what she is doing. She gets indignant and says in a very loud voice, "What do you want?!!" Money?!! You think you can shake me down because I'm married to an American?!" Cop sort of shrivels up and slithers off. Didn't get his little payoff--bribe--whatever.

Try standing up for yourself like that with a cop in this country and see how far you get. The difference is that Americans are afraid of the government. The Filipino government, on the other hand, is afraid of the people. History and other factors in such countries make it so. It's true of many Latin American, Asian, and African countries.

Ok, thanks, that's a good answer. See? If you gave me an answer, whether good or bad, we can actually have a discussion.

I've been to Philippines too, just not Manila. I agree, in this country most people fear the government and police, but there's plenty of liberty people who've posted videos of themselves standing up to stop and frisk or DUI checkpoints, and left the spot unharassed.

Taking the example you gave, do you believe US vs Philippines, overall, which has better quality of life and less government interference? If you say Philipinnes wins on both, what's stopping you from moving there? There must be something good keeping you here now.

I am willing to entertain that many countries have some aspects of greater freedom or less government in isolated cases or some issues, but overall, US still is the best country to live. I am open to being wrong, last and least, anybody can "prefer" to live wherever he wants, even if it's not the freest country or wealtheist.

 

[oyarde]

Where do you find a better country? Do tell.

Once I take over the Southern Half of The Land of Indians and expel all commies , socialists , state & Fed govt.'s, free markets will prevail and it will be as before all those undesirables came across.LOL

 

[Slutter McGee]

I'm seeing a lot of people thinking this will raise prices or is going to cost Walmart a lot.

It might not. Of course I don't have Walmart's numbers on me but their is going to be a definite decrease in the marginal expense of hiring workers as the result of attrition, and a likely increase in marginal productivity. I have no idea if that will offset the cost of paying more but it is certainly going to cut into it.

And increased good publicity may drive up revenues. I seriously don't think Walmart would be doing this if it was't good for their bottom line, and raising prices certainly isn't.

Slutter McGee

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

If you gave me an answer, whether good or bad, we can actually have a discussion.


***

I've been to Philippines too, just not Manila.

If you're trying to convince me that your experience is beyond American beaches and tourist spots, then you're not doing a very good job. Manila is not really a vacation destination.

We already had this discussion anyway. Even at that--why would I discuss such things with you? Most of your "questions" on this forum are just trying to play your pretend libertarian gothcha games.

 

[PRB]

If you're trying to convince me that your experience is beyond American beaches and tourist spots, then you're not doing a very good job. Manila is not really a vacation destination.

I've been to tourist spots, I've lived in other countries too.

We already had this discussion anyway. Even at that--why would I discuss such things with you? Most of your "questions" on this forum are just trying to play your pretend libertarian gothcha games.

I sincerely don't remember having this discussion, but I won't completely deny the way I deny your claims that you've presented evidence of my lying. Yes, my questions for you are meant for gotcha, the fact you refuse to play tells me you have something to hide or don't know what you're talking about.

Wait, I was just asking YOUR opinion, you can't even answer that? What are you afraid of when you've already made up your mind I'm a pretender?

Oh, why would you have discussions with me or answer my questions? So you can shame and embarass me, impress and educate other readers, but I suppose you'd rather accuse me of lying and then go neg rep happy, that's easier, right?

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Yes, my questions for you are meant for gotcha,

Your questions for everyone here are gotchya.

So you can shame and embarass me,

You're the one who said you're on this forum to try to belittle people. You're crying when somebody points it out?

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

...I've lived in other countries too.

Where?

 

[PRB]

Your questions for everyone here are gotchya.





You're the one who said you're on this forum to try to belittle people. You're crying when somebody points it out?

No, I am not crying when you point out something I said, I admit I said I am here to belittle people.

 

[PRB]

Where?

Taiwan, China and Hong Kong before it was returned.

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Wrong. We want a higher standard of living. We want an hour of pay to buy more stuff. The best way to get that is thru capitalism (freedom).

Nicely put

How much did the people at the stores Walmart customers used to shop at lose? And the stores those people shopped at? But well paying jobs don't matter. (It is a trade-off- we don't get both. Cheap prices and fewer, low paying jobs or higher prices and more higher paying jobs).

You seem to repeatedly keep forgetting some obvious, perceptible economic facts. That lower prices increase demand & consumption, which holds true for both products as well as labor, so people buy more stuff as well as more people are hired when prices/wages are lower; conversely, higher prices discourage consumption, again, that holds true for both products as well as labor, so less products are bought & less people are hired. Considering this, those that want more jobs & higher living-standards should be happier with lower prices/wages.

The thing is that people get muddled in nomimal-prices/wages while ignoring real-prices/wages, which is what causes the suggested disparity in their view (that is, their desire for lower prices & higher wages); instead, as madison320 has mentioned, an hour's worth of pay over the years, is a better way (although not perfect because the demand for different types of work can fluctuate) way of judging the relative increase/decrease in people's living standards over the years & decades.

This sort of a thing becomes very obvious when one looks back on historical periods in various countries where real-wages & living-standards of people rose very quickly, under deflationary metallic monetary standards, despite the fact that nominal-prices/wages of products/labor fell as economies grew over time.

Exactly, it amazes me how few people understand how labor supply/demand affects wages.

I was arguing with a liberal one day who pulled out graphs that showed mostly flat wages going back to the 1970's. Of course since that time period, we have seen a sharp rise in not only immigrant workers, but of course also female workers entering the job force. IIRC the population is also outpacing number of jobs too. That is in no way conducive to rising wages (though of course more speicalized and in-demand fields have most definitely seen higher wages, but on a macro level, these factors contribute to driving them down).

That is not to blame employers, immigrants or women of course, but to realize that more competition for less available jobs means that you will get great applicants without having to pay more for them, and businesses must to do so to mitigate risk and survive.

Your inherent assumption being that the workers, in the past, were able to get significantly more work done compared to present workers & therefore, present workers are being continuously (since the time that such a downward shift in workers' productivity occurred) & significantly overpaid, for whatever reason. I strongly doubt that this has been the case because markets are very efficient (isn't that why we prefer freer markets!), often even despite government controls (repeated failure of government price controls & wage controls can be seen throughout history) so why would markets start & continue to overpay workers? I strongly believe, it hasn't. So the assumption that an increase in the number of workers has caused a fall in living-standards is unsatisfactory because of course, an increase in the number of workers can affect real-wages as well as nominal-wages but it's impact on real-wages (which is what we should concern ourselves with) is TEMPORARY & is offset by the subsequent increased production.

"If we let.....?" Of course they aren't making more money. We have a glut of workers. Rising wages isn't a function of profit. It is a function of labor demand. Every time we get to peak employment, the immigrants flood in and drive wages back down.

And you can't really compare wages without also comparing prices. Back then it would take a month's salary (or more) to buy a color TV. Today you can literally pick a working set up off the curb for free.

I am a big fan of import taxes. If we want jobs to come back, that is what would have to happen.

I'm not sure what your exact position is. Because on one hand, you are saying that increasing immigration has suppressed wages while on the other hand, you are admitting that purchasing-power (& therefore, real-wages) have gone up. It can't be both!

While the last couple of years may have been hard for many, I doubt there's been a drop in living standards of people over several decades; I think it's just people's (mostly erroneous) perception that "good ol' days were so much better". And while things have likely not gotten worse over the decades, despite people's perceptions, may be the growth in people's living standards has been slow, eaten away by inflation, compared to the growth that may have been witnessed during the "good ol' days" when the government did practice (even though, inefficiently) a gold-standard & increasing the money-supply wasn't as easy as it has been after its complete removal.

On a different note, import taxes are simply a wealth-transfer program, primarily from those who have been & will be buying imported products to those who might be hired or receive higher pay because of such a tax, not to mention, everyone else also foots a little bit of the bill because an economy is an interconnected & interdependent web of prices, so everyone is worse off in the end.

 

[PRB]

I'm not sure what your exact position is. Because on one hand, you are saying that increasing immigration has suppressed wages while on the other hand, you are admitting that purchasing-power (& therefore, real-wages) have gone up. It can't be both!

If you leave out real wages, then yes it can be both true.

Immigrants create supply for labor, making labor cheaper. A dollar can now buy more labor for less, this is increase in purchasing power. Labor costs go down nominally, I don't know about "real" but wages go down, and wages are cheaper, and dollar is stronger.

 

[Zippyjuan]

despite the fact that nominal-prices/wages of products/labor fell as economies grew over time

Can you offer examples of times when nominal prices and wages were falling as economies grew?
Lower wages are not necessarily offset by lower prices. That is because not all productivity goes to wages. Some is retained as profits by the company. The labor share of prices has fallen quite a bit in the last 50 years or so. Wages have not kept up with productivity increases and prices have also not reflected changes in productivity. Bosses and companies have been retaining larger shares than they used to.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I am here to belittle people.

That's part of the evidence of your trolling. Evidence is not just your employer sending you money through Paypal.

I combine your belittling goal with your posts. It's clear to see that your posts are not libertarian, but you trying to mock people for their libertarianism.

 

[PRB]

That's part of the evidence of your trolling. Evidence is not just your employer sending you money through Paypal.

I combine your belittling goal with your posts. It's clear to see that your posts are not libertarian, but you trying to mock people for their libertarianism.

ok, that's better, now you actually have something. Not evidence I'm lying, not evidence I'm paid, but at least an answer that's better than "I already posted it!!!!!"

What employer sending money through PayPal to who?

When I said I belittle people, if I recall the context correctly, it's to mock people who are conspiracy theorist, hyperinflation alarmist or think life was always better in the past. None of that has to do with being libertarian, I don't mock people just for being libertarian.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

When I said I belittle people, if I recall the context correctly, it's to mock people who are conspiracy theorist, hyperinflation alarmist or think life was always better in the past. None of that has to do with being libertarian, I don't mock people just for being libertarian.

All your posts mock everybody for everything. That's your context.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

...now you actually have something. Not evidence I'm lying,

You asked for evidence and I posted it. People can view the evidence and judge for themselves if you're lying.

 

[HVACTech]

ok, that's better, now you actually have something. Not evidence I'm lying, not evidence I'm paid, but at least an answer that's better than "I already posted it!!!!!"

What employer sending money through PayPal to who?

When I said I belittle people, if I recall the context correctly, it's to mock people who are conspiracy theorist, hyperinflation alarmist or think life was always better in the past. None of that has to do with being libertarian, I don't mock people just for being libertarian.

I don't mock people just for being libertarian.

if you are here to "mock" people.
follow HB's lead.
and avoid technical subjects.
stick with monetary policy (zippyjaun) and religion (HB)
that way. nobody can clean your clock.
have a nice day!