Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 27 of 55 FirstFirst ... 17252627282937 ... LastLast
Results 391 to 405 of 823
  1. #391
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    40,401
    Quote Originally Posted by spliff(TONE) View Post
    Its more important that the three heirs in the Walton family increases their net worth from 154 billion (in April of 2020) to probably a 160 billion now. How are they expected to afford that next island they look to purchase otherwise?

  2. #392
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    97,710
    With allies like this, you have to wonder how Republicans haven't been able to repeal the entire minimum wage yet.

    https://twitter.com/KyleKulinski/sta...734876675?s=20
    Let's get embedded tweets working again!

    https://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sh...5#post33780085

  3. #393
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    16,721
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    With allies like this, you have to wonder how Republicans haven't been able to repeal the entire minimum wage yet.

    https://twitter.com/KyleKulinski/sta...734876675?s=20
    What do the Republicans have to do with a tweet talking about POTUS and VPOTUS?
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  4. #394
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    16,721
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    Its more important that the three heirs in the Walton family increases their net worth from 154 billion (in April of 2020) to probably a 160 billion now. How are they expected to afford that next island they look to purchase otherwise?
    Their net worth is affected by the value of WalMart stock, not wages of WalMart employees and they have nothing to do with any say in day to day operations....haven't for many years
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  5. #395
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    13,498
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Probably sooner, but I think theyíll make more money if they get $15 until they are replaced instead of $7.25 until they are replaced.

    Which do you think helps workers more? $15 an hour or $7.25?
    I think $7.25 helps more workers a little.

  6. #396
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    13,498
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    I'm guessing you never worked fast food when you were younger because that's not a particularly true statement. Those jobs minute to minute can be very demanding in terms of the number of orders and how much food/transactions need to be made. It's only gotten worse in an era of Doordash, UberEats, etc.
    When I was in my late teens, I worked in a convenient store which was similar. Itís not the same as being a cashier at Costco.

  7. #397
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    39,496
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    I think $7.25 helps more workers a little.
    Then we definitely disagree. As does basic mathematics.

  8. #398
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    56,297
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    I think $7.25 helps more workers a little.
    You should start helping yourself and send me half your income


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  9. #399
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    13,498
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Then we definitely disagree. As does basic mathematics.
    A major corporation is not going to earn less profits simply because you tell them they should.

    Most companies allocate a certain amount of cost to wages. If you double that cost per employee, they will hire less employees. Itís basic accounting.

    A corporation can hire two employees for $7.25 and hour meaning that hr of labor costs $14.50. If you stipulate an hour of labor per employee costs $15 an hr, corporations will employee one less employee and make the $15 an hr employee work twice is hard. Youíre right. Itís simple.

  10. #400
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    38,578
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    I think $7.25 helps more workers a little.
    lol, what?

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    RAIDERS, SHARKS, WARRIORS

    "i don't believe in mysteries but still i pray for my sister, when speaking to the higher power that listens, to the lifeless vision of freedom everytime we're imprisoned, to the righteous victims of people of a higher position" - planet asia, old timer thoughts

    "God is Universal he is the Ruler Universal" - gangstarr (rip guru), robbin hood theory

    "don't gain the world and lose your soul, wisdom is better than silver and gold" - bob marley, zion train

  11. #401
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    37,078
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    A major corporation is not going to earn less profits simply because you tell them they should.

    Most companies allocate a certain amount of cost to wages. If you double that cost per employee, they will hire less employees. Itís basic accounting.

    A corporation can hire two employees for $7.25 and hour meaning that hr of labor costs $14.50. If you stipulate an hour of labor per employee costs $15 an hr, corporations will employee one less employee and make the $15 an hr employee work twice is hard. Youíre right. Itís simple.
    Just FYI ... Two employees at $7.50 per hour do not cost the same as 1 employee at $15. The two at $7.50 cost more. The costs of an employee are not just their hourly wage.

  12. #402
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    13,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Just FYI ... Two employees at $7.50 per hour do not cost the same as 1 employee at $15. The two at $7.50 cost more. The costs of an employee are not just their hourly wage.
    Thatís assuming they get health insurance or other benefits.

  13. #403
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    40,401
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    Their net worth is affected by the value of WalMart stock, not wages of WalMart employees and they have nothing to do with any say in day to day operations....haven't for many years
    Increased wages would hurt said stock value because net revenues would be lower. It's all relative, unless of course they found ways to circumvent the increased wages of employees which I am sure they would.

  14. #404
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    16,721
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    Thatís assuming they get health insurance or other benefits.
    well, total taxes an employer pays would also be higher
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  15. #405
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    40,401
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyc77 View Post
    When I was in my late teens, I worked in a convenient store which was similar. Itís not the same as being a cashier at Costco.
    I worked at a Wendys when I was 15 and 16, dude. It's a lot of manual labor, being on your toes, working quickly, etc. Yes, you don't need to be a rocket scientist but its a physically demanding job.

    I worked jobs in direct support (for high functioning disabled people) when I went through college where I was making more money and doing a lot less work.
    Last edited by metswon69; 03-01-2021 at 06:15 PM.

Page 27 of 55 FirstFirst ... 17252627282937 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •