Yes, why don't we nationalize walmart and save all those poor employees from their voluntary contractual arrangements. You know better than they do what is in their best interest.

But hey, when a major corporation games the system, following the law, that's fine.

If a disability or welfare claimant games the system, following the law, it's lumped in as fraud. If they are not even gaming the system, but the system itself is not recording the claims properly, that is lumped in as fraud. If someone has a moral objection tobhow they live, legally and within the rules, that's lumped in as fraud.

Both systems could do with changing, to move "what's legal" nearer to "what's right". And in both cases, we would want to protect the honest and genuine claimants / responsible employers and retailers.

'Voluntary'. Sure it is. But look at how high unemployment is, if you want a job, you may not get a perfect choice. And we also wonder why people may choose to avoid work - would it be rational to work if the jobs available don't pay enough to lift you ourlt of benefits?

The employer has a lot more power in the relationship, especially in jurisdictions where employment rights are dirty words.

Who mentioned 'nationalisation', by the way? Reforming employment law and retail regulation does not mean the same thing.

RJ, you are a moderate, right? That almost sounded like me saying that.

social (very) liberal, economic conservative.

I think it's crazy to protest Walmart's low wages. The reality is that the people who work there do not have better options. If we make Walmart suitable to Danivon and Ricky's sense of fairness, there will be much higher unemployment.

Wisdom from RJ

Coincidentally, I saw this quote today from the WSJ:

Penney's first experience as a retailer came as a one-third owner of a small store in a little town in Wyoming. Yet his ideas on retailing changed the whole industry. By 1920, there were 300 J. C. Penney stores -- prospering, growing and taking business away from Sears and Montgomery Ward, both of which began losing millions of dollars. Only then did Sears begin to listen to the executive who had been fired from Montgomery Ward and start opening its own stores, saving the company from the brink of bankruptcy.

Montgomery Ward then belatedly followed suit. The rich men who ran these two giant mail-order houses realized that they would not be rich much longer if they kept losing millions of dollars a year.

In the years after the Second World War, as the country grew more prosperous and people began moving to the suburbs, some Montgomery Ward executives suggested to the head man that they should start building stores in suburban shopping malls. They were fired for their trouble.

The net result was that Sears hit the shopping malls first and Montgomery Ward never caught up. Meanwhile, a young clerk in a J.C. Penney store -- a man named Sam Walton -- began learning retailing from the ground up. Later, he put his knowledge and insights to work in his own stores, which would eventually become the Wal-Mart chain, with sales larger than those of Sears and J.C. Penney combined.

ray

The reality is that the people who work there do not have better options. If we make Walmart suitable to Danivon and Ricky's sense of fairness, there will be much higher unemployment.

That's quite a claim. Other than retailers making that claim, do you have anything that substantiates the claim... Every study on minimum wage has shown that increasing the Minimum wage has had no effect on unemployment.,...
The fact that Wal-Mart exploits its employees who have few opportunities is one thing,..... But to understand that the welfare systems in place are abused because a retailer won't pay a living wage and that it doesn't bother people who've been complaining about "disability fraud" is astounding.
Bbauska aren't there laws that are so patently unfair, or so poorly constructed that they cry out for change in order to create a more just society? Would you defend slave owners because "They were doing nothing illegal at the time?"
If you question the morality of people defrauding disability how can you not question the morality of companies that compete on the backs of tax payers who support their exploited workforce?

Retail is an essential branch of every nation’s economy and affects warehouse, transportation and manufacturing patterns locally and globally. Improving work in retail not only helps those directly affected, but also their families, communities, local manufacturers and our country. The prosperity of a nation is inextricably linked to the quality of life of its people., including the millions of low-wage service workers in sectors like retail.

There are innovative strategies being used and promoted to make retail jobs into good jobs, which warrant serious consideration and discussion. At the first unionized H&M store in Canada at Mississauga’s Square One, workers negotiated a guaranteed annual pay increase and paid statutory holidays for both full and part-time workers.

In New York, retail workers are calling for living wages as well as sustainable scheduling practices, so people can plan their lives more than a day or two in advance. In Sweden, because of sectoral collective agreements, strong public policy and a culture of social solidarity, retail workers make fair wages, enjoy five weeks of paid vacation and earn overtime for evening and weekend work. And Swedish retailers are booming. Everyone benefits when workers are happy, healthy and well-paid.

Oh for Pete's sakes, RickyP. Yes I would not defend slavery owners, but neither would I try to convict them for something legal.

Are you trying to convict them for legal activities? When you say that laws should be changed, then rally support for change.

When it comes questioning morality, I do not inflict my morality on others. I would respectfully ask you to do the same. That is why I use the law as a judge.

RJ I know economic orthodoxy nowadays says that increased wages leads to higher unemployment, but where is the evidence?

Bbauska - if people are claiming disability according to the rules, that is fine by you, even if the rules are lenient enough to allow tyem to gane the system?

If they are truly disabled, I will not press for charges of fraud. If they are NOT truly disabled, then I would press charges.

If the system needs changing, then change the system, but you cannot hold the claimants liable. As for being fine by me, sounds like a moral judgement to me.

Ricky and Danivon (and all the other people who don't approve of Walmart), if you don't like how Walmart does things, why don't you start a retail company and follow practices with which you are comfortable?

Globalization and free markets are great for those with very marketable skills and/or capital; however, that can't be said for the majority of the population. In a democracy why should the majority continue to support an economic system that decides that the vast majority of resources go to the few? And instead of worrying about that fact we are worrying about poor bastards who are trying to survive on 15K a year...If you're wondering why there is this is focus on disability claims it is because it is simply a distraction from the reality that large corporations are doing great, the top 5% is doing great, but the average person is struggling. And no amount of application of free market principles is going to change that fact.

I'm sure we have covered Wal-mart ad nauseum before and I think it is a bad corporation and RJ thinks it is a great example of capitalism. I typed out a response and decided why bother...

So what are you (as in you conservative not referring to a specific person) going to do with those who get kicked out of disability? No response of course. Just.. go out and get some job...somewhere. Of course, there are plenty of jobs... (isn't it a little bit contradictory to criticize Obama for how he has done with regard to jobs in one discussion then to say in another there are plenty of jobs)

Here is some information that is not political and can at least inform the debate. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... 3924,d.cGE

Ray Jay wrote:Ricky and Danivon (and all the other people who don't approve of Walmart), if you don't like how Walmart does things, why don't you start a retail company and follow practices with which you are comfortable?

Seriously, are you becoming a parody now?