Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
We can do that. At that opportunity we could ask them if they earn enough money so that they could afford to buy in a more expensive supermarket instead of a discounter.
There is a reason why cheap discounters are booming.  At the same time these discounters can only be cheaper, because they offer less service and pay their employees worse. Which leaves you with employed but exploited consumers having less money - and thus many cannot afford to buy in more expensive supermarkets - where the workers get payed fairer wages.
|
Fair enough, Sky. I think people who earn enough money to buy clothes at Macy's and tools at Sears already make the decision where to spend their money. We could ask middle-income people to avoid Wal-mart, but the choice is still theirs and a lot of them prefer to stretch their dollar at WM. Besides, if more people avoided WM, that would not induce the company to pay their employees more, I don't think.
However, there are many other reasons discounters like WM can offer lower prices. You know they put a lot of thought and effort into making their supply chain very efficient. They have some really outstanding management practices, that save them costs. Wal-Mart is a very smart company.
Quote:
The minimum criterion for a fair wage is that if somebody works fulltime a week in a given job, he needs to be able to make a living by his income that funds his family, pays for raising and educating his children, and secure his life's evening when he has become old and does not work anymore. Else there would be no point in working fulltime.
|
I respectfully disagree, and I am not trying to change your opinion. The minimum criterion for a fair wage is what people will accept. I cannot buy into socially engineered pay structures. You mandate a "fair" pay that covers all those areas, there is less incentive for people to strive. I do not think that will work over the long run. Ask GM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tater
....you cannot have regulation/socialization without the threat of force, period.
|
Wow, that is so true.