Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Fox Hosts Aren't Sold On This 'Living Wage' Thing" video.

  1. +Cake Hebenstreit Japan also has a culture where everyone works themselves to death.
    5
  2. +Mark G Lifting boxes generates little wealth. By market standards it is not a "real job".
    2
  3. +Michael Powers You need to look at the market more. If the idea was to produce very little while making a lot of money then why does a company like Walmart continue to open stores? Or why do cell phone companies continue to produce newer cell phones?
    2
  4. +Seth Wooten Even with that, would you not allow a doctor to cure cancer if they never had cancer themselves?
    2
  5. +OkamsRazer I agree. The same goes for economics. The term "living wage" does not exist in the economic world.
    2
  6. +Bogdan Stancu In the big picture that is all you need. As long as you have food and a place to sleep then anything beyond that is a luxury.
    1
  7. +Seth Wooten I have, it is not hard work. I work harder for less as a graduate student now.
    1
  8. +Cake Hebenstreit They are paid a wage as well in the US. And have you ever heard of Karoshi?
    1
  9. Where does Kyle get his "facts" about Walmart and the economy? And Walmart actually makes little profits, so no, they can't just cut profits to raise wages. The money is not there. The point at the end is easily countered by saying that those who are working low wage jobs should be told to get better.
    1
  10. The term "living wage" subjective. What does it mean? How do you determine it? At that point it is a meaningless term which is why it is not an actual economic term. If you were to ask me if somebody were to work a full time job they should make a "living wage" I will say "what is a living wage"? We need to start there.
    1
  11. +Elven Master Race Because profit margins are thin.
    1
  12. +Elven Master Race Almost every business. Walmart's profit margins are a around 3%.
    1
  13. +waleuska A 1.6% is a lot considering how their prices are slightly lower than other retail stores such as Target or Hy Vee or Raley's and so on. They run a business model of low prices at convenient locations and times. It caters to the consumers. Even with that, if a 1.6% increase in price lead to zero loss in consumers, then why don't they do it already and make that much more in profits?
    1
  14. +Asmodeus555 That is a lot of businesses. But let us turn this around. If you as a person can't generate enough wealth to earn a higher wage then you suck as a person.
    1
  15. +theoryneutral Ok, Walmart's top 6 CEOs earn a combined $77 million a year. If you were to spread that evenly to the 525,000 workers of walmart who earn less than $25,000/yr they will earn an extra $148 a year. Not much.
    1
  16. +sausagemcbean Which is why I went to the extreme. People are complaining about how much CEOs earn and how they should earn less. Do CEOs earn a lot? Yes. But if we forced them to earn less where does the extra money go? Obviously by simple math it won't go to the workers.
    1
  17. +Asmodeus555 What am I not right about? Someone can work in improving themselves even if they are no a low wage. It requires work. Manage your money better, be more organized. If you think it doesn't require work then you are in trouble.
    1
  18. +Asmodeus555 I just showed you how mathematically it won't go to the workers. The money is not there.
    1
  19. +RG3Hunna "ou please also touch on me saying walmart purposefully not paying their employees and giving them part time so they don't legally qualify for benefits" So you are saying there is a law that if someone works a certain amount of hours a week they must get benefits? It seems that this law is preventing workers from getting more hours. This sounds similar to the min. wage law preventing people from getting jobs. This seems like the fault of a law, not the fault of Walmart.
    1
  20. +RG3Hunna In those times $2 was quite a bit. My job does give me what they want. They pay me a salary that, if you include a 40 hour work week is around $15/hr. The rate is fair to me. And trust me, few people can do what I do. During the times of low work sanitation and child labor we were a developing country. We are past those times. Children are living with parents longer and attending school more. That is the natural development of the country. "The problem with a lot of people who have your mind frame is they assume that if you remove all regulations that businesses are all of sudden going to play fair." One, what is "fair"? Next, they are now using the government to their advantage due to the government having power it can give out.
    1
  21. +RG3Hunna It is a problem though. Other min. wage companies are cutting hours as well. Businesses simply can't afford higher wages.
    1
  22. +RG3Hunna Because they are responsible for more employees and a larger business that grew. Big business is a symptom of big government. Big government is the disease.
    1
  23. +RG3Hunna Completely different businesses. McDonalds are franchised, Walmarts aren't. You can't make a comparison. Plus, where do you get your numbers? "How is big business a symptom of big government? Please explain more i'm very interested to hear your thoughts." All a business can do is offer you a job or a product. It can't force you to do anything. Government can. When government grows and the people lose control of it then big businesses will lobby to create laws in their favor. That is the symptom. The disease is big government. I agree that republicans are hypocritical at times. "The party that doesn't believe in minimum wage laws." There is not one single good reason to even have a min. wage. But on that, Walmart and Costco both lobbied to increase the min. wage knowing it will hurt their competitors. " The party that believes that banks should be allowed to offer housing loans to anyone even if they can't pay it back and end up putting us in a recession again when we have to bail out these banks." That was actually the democrats. Your mindset on republicans is rather extreme.
    1
  24. +RG3Hunna If there are 20 people fighting for one job then that means those 20 people will have to find a way to make themselves more marketable since their job options are limited. Plus if there were no min. wage the company may end up hiring 2 or 3 of them as opposed to one. Businesses already increase their wages even with a min. wage. That is why it is a pointless law. All it does is prevent those from looking or work with no marketable skills or experience from getting a job. "because we've had no minimum wage laws in the past and the wages were extremely low" Low compared to what? That was almost 100 years ago. We are more developed now. " why would a business raise wages to compete when they can just hire the employee who is willing to make 10k a year? " To attract better workers. I will never work for so little. I have a marketable skill. If a company wants to hire me for that little I will go to another one to work. Businesses will pay more to attract better workers, but there comes a point where you simply can't afford higher wages. The same falls for a lot of things. I bet you would love to have a better car or home (assuming the one you have is run of the mill). I would like to have a better apartment, but I can't afford one. Me paying for one will make my life easier, for example having an actual washer and dryer instead of using the laundry mat. But I can't afford a luxury like that, so I pay less rent. It is the same for labor. McDonalds would like to pay more and get skilled workers, but they can't afford it. A company like Google can and pays well. The factory my dad workers at pays $26/hr starting. Tesla starts their workers in a factory out at around the same wage, they hire skilled workers.
    1