WAL-MART: The High Cost of Low Price
- Thread starter garnet13aj
- Start date
kmc
Member
There is one good thing about Wal-Mart, at least the 24 hour one that is about 20 miles from our Deer Camp. During Deer Season when it is cold outside and you need some place warm to sit on a real toilet. You can be comfortable knowing that even if you have not showered in 4 days you can go in there and still look better than the majority of the folks shopping there.
agent707
Member
Originally Posted by watson3
Quote one thing I have posted wrong..Housing Allowance(BAQ) as you call it and BAS are only given to members with dependants..These also do not count against you in your base pay..This is why I somewhat agree..This $14 and hour you come up with shows that you may have had a nice 0900-1700 job..That is well and good, but a typical military workweek is not just 40 hours..
As with all "salary" jobs, how many hours you work have no bearing on your pay. The $14.40 was just figurative to go along with what we're talking about. Sometimes you work more, sometimes you work less.
I quoted the "dependants" figures because you said military "families" in the previous post.
That was the only reason.
Yea, I know BAQ and BAS are not "base pay", but what I meant was, all these together is the "basic" pay a G.I. get's with a family (or has dependants). Further more, BAQ and BAS are none-taxable... thus increasing the yearly net amount.
All-in-all, G.I.'s are not paid unfairly. They get a lot of benifits (30 days vacation a year??? In their first year even!). Given the fact that you don't have to know ANYTHING to enlist... they train you and pay you pretty good... given your skill set and hours worked (In my 10 years in the AF, I certainly averaged less than 40 hours per week).
Now when it comes to WAR time... I'm not so sure the pay is "worth it", but that's why it's called "serving" our country.
The whole point of my response to begin with is simply comparing the Military to Wal-Mart is like comparing apples to watermellons. Doesn't make any sense in this dicussion.
[hr]
Anyway, about Wal-Mart. What people "say" and what really "is"? I don't really care. There are already enough people that do care... so I'll leave it to them to sort it all out.
Cheers!
Quote one thing I have posted wrong..Housing Allowance(BAQ) as you call it and BAS are only given to members with dependants..These also do not count against you in your base pay..This is why I somewhat agree..This $14 and hour you come up with shows that you may have had a nice 0900-1700 job..That is well and good, but a typical military workweek is not just 40 hours..
As with all "salary" jobs, how many hours you work have no bearing on your pay. The $14.40 was just figurative to go along with what we're talking about. Sometimes you work more, sometimes you work less.
I quoted the "dependants" figures because you said military "families" in the previous post.
Yea, I know BAQ and BAS are not "base pay", but what I meant was, all these together is the "basic" pay a G.I. get's with a family (or has dependants). Further more, BAQ and BAS are none-taxable... thus increasing the yearly net amount.
All-in-all, G.I.'s are not paid unfairly. They get a lot of benifits (30 days vacation a year??? In their first year even!). Given the fact that you don't have to know ANYTHING to enlist... they train you and pay you pretty good... given your skill set and hours worked (In my 10 years in the AF, I certainly averaged less than 40 hours per week).
Now when it comes to WAR time... I'm not so sure the pay is "worth it", but that's why it's called "serving" our country.
The whole point of my response to begin with is simply comparing the Military to Wal-Mart is like comparing apples to watermellons. Doesn't make any sense in this dicussion.
[hr]
Anyway, about Wal-Mart. What people "say" and what really "is"? I don't really care. There are already enough people that do care... so I'll leave it to them to sort it all out.
Cheers!
bang guy
Moderator
Originally Posted by garnet13aj
Basically, Walmart is dumping the responsibility to care for its workers on us. Above are quotes if you don't want to read the article, but it's pretty short, if you do a search there are a lot more articles about the issue.
So, what about the K-Mart, pet stores, grocery stores, call centers, fast food places, etc. Are you saying they're not dumping the responsibility even though they pay even less than walmart? Why single out Walmart?
Basically, Walmart is dumping the responsibility to care for its workers on us. Above are quotes if you don't want to read the article, but it's pretty short, if you do a search there are a lot more articles about the issue.
So, what about the K-Mart, pet stores, grocery stores, call centers, fast food places, etc. Are you saying they're not dumping the responsibility even though they pay even less than walmart? Why single out Walmart?
garnet13aj
Active Member
Did you see the numbers? If they have 10,000 working there on welfare and the next company only has 700 in one state then they are obviously adding a lot more to the load than other companies. They wouldn't refer to it as the "walmart bill" in passing if it wasn't ultimately targetted at them.
watson3
Active Member
Originally Posted by garnet13aj
Did you see the numbers? If they have 10,000 working there on welfare and the next company only has 700 in one state then they are obviously adding a lot more to the load than other companies. They wouldn't refer to it as the "walmart bill" in passing if it wasn't ultimately targetted at them.
What state has 10000 Wal-Mart employees?
Did you see the numbers? If they have 10,000 working there on welfare and the next company only has 700 in one state then they are obviously adding a lot more to the load than other companies. They wouldn't refer to it as the "walmart bill" in passing if it wasn't ultimately targetted at them.
What state has 10000 Wal-Mart employees?
bang guy
Moderator
Originally Posted by garnet13aj
Did you see the numbers? If they have 10,000 working there on welfare and the next company only has 700 in one state then they are obviously adding a lot more to the load than other companies. They wouldn't refer to it as the "walmart bill" in passing if it wasn't ultimately targetted at them.
So, the idea is to punish a company if it employs a lot of people? Is that really a good idea?
"Wal-Mart said it provides health insurance to more than 568,000 of its employees"
How many pet store employees are provided with health insurance?
Did you see the numbers? If they have 10,000 working there on welfare and the next company only has 700 in one state then they are obviously adding a lot more to the load than other companies. They wouldn't refer to it as the "walmart bill" in passing if it wasn't ultimately targetted at them.
So, the idea is to punish a company if it employs a lot of people? Is that really a good idea?
"Wal-Mart said it provides health insurance to more than 568,000 of its employees"
How many pet store employees are provided with health insurance?
garnet13aj
Active Member
I guess the pont then is that we see it differently, I don't want to pay for their health insurance and you do. There's really no point in going back in forth if it's merely a difference in opinion based on the same facts.
garnet13aj
Active Member
I don't understand what you are saying, can you clarify?
garnet13aj
Active Member
Ok, I think we can all agree on that...
1journeyman
Active Member
Originally Posted by garnet13aj
I guess the pont then is that we see it differently, I don't want to pay for their health insurance and you do. There's really no point in going back in forth if it's merely a difference in opinion based on the same facts.
When did Health Insurance become a "right" in this country?
You pay for insurance to hedge your bet against a catastrophic loss. Punishing companies because they aren't providing health care is obscene.
If Wal Mart had to pay for insurance for all of their employees we would all fit the bill. Employees would be fired raising unemployment, and Wal Mart would raise their prices (punishing the folks that are of lower income that shop there btw)
I guess the pont then is that we see it differently, I don't want to pay for their health insurance and you do. There's really no point in going back in forth if it's merely a difference in opinion based on the same facts.
When did Health Insurance become a "right" in this country?
You pay for insurance to hedge your bet against a catastrophic loss. Punishing companies because they aren't providing health care is obscene.
If Wal Mart had to pay for insurance for all of their employees we would all fit the bill. Employees would be fired raising unemployment, and Wal Mart would raise their prices (punishing the folks that are of lower income that shop there btw)
ruaround
Active Member
Originally Posted by Bang Guy
So, what about the K-Mart, pet stores, grocery stores, call centers, fast food places, etc. Are you saying they're not dumping the responsibility even though they pay even less than walmart? Why single out Walmart?
i agree!!! if it wasnt Wal Mart it would be another super company that this documentary was made about... McDonalds was bashed not to long ago, and they still have over 10 billion served... why... the more employees there are the more disgruntled ones there are that get fired or quit... voice of the masses...
why doesnt someone make a doc. on insurance companies, title companies and
[hr]
companies... now these are total rackets!!!
So, what about the K-Mart, pet stores, grocery stores, call centers, fast food places, etc. Are you saying they're not dumping the responsibility even though they pay even less than walmart? Why single out Walmart?
i agree!!! if it wasnt Wal Mart it would be another super company that this documentary was made about... McDonalds was bashed not to long ago, and they still have over 10 billion served... why... the more employees there are the more disgruntled ones there are that get fired or quit... voice of the masses...
why doesnt someone make a doc. on insurance companies, title companies and
[hr]
companies... now these are total rackets!!!
jmick
Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
When did Health Insurance become a "right" in this country?
You pay for insurance to hedge your bet against a catastrophic loss. Punishing companies because they aren't providing health care is obscene.
If Wal Mart had to pay for insurance for all of their employees we would all fit the bill. Employees would be fired raising unemployment, and Wal Mart would raise their prices (punishing the folks that are of lower income that shop there btw)
I bet what they write off each year for theft and loss would be equal to or slightly less then what it'd cost them to insure their employees.
When did Health Insurance become a "right" in this country?
You pay for insurance to hedge your bet against a catastrophic loss. Punishing companies because they aren't providing health care is obscene.
If Wal Mart had to pay for insurance for all of their employees we would all fit the bill. Employees would be fired raising unemployment, and Wal Mart would raise their prices (punishing the folks that are of lower income that shop there btw)
I bet what they write off each year for theft and loss would be equal to or slightly less then what it'd cost them to insure their employees.