Should companies like Walmart which indirectly benefit heavily from welfare programs be forced to pay their employees...

Should companies like Walmart which indirectly benefit heavily from welfare programs be forced to pay their employees better or pay more into social programs/systems? Much of the time their employees don't make enough to live without the aid of social or welfare programs, and yet they don't directly pay for this and the cost is socialized to all taxpayers. This also of course applies to other companies.

too large
-3

Why not just eliminate the welfare programs?

>should companies
>...
>forced to pay their employees better or pay more into social programs/systems?

no, it's unironically a slippery slope. the poor always want more but expect others to provide it to them, it's the main reason they remain poor. give them an inch and they'll want a mile. this has been proven historically time and time again.

Well it would be one way of doing the same thing, it's just that seems politically unfeasible. The thing is these companies couldn't do that if there weren't those programs in the first place, they'd be forced to actually pay livable wages.
It's the companies' fault in this scenario though, they're blatantly abusing the current social welfare model to force others to pay for them and make more money. They should at least be forced to pay independently livable wages to their employees, it's ridiculous that they abuse the system to the level that they know that they can pay employees minimally because other sources will pick up the slack, and that they aren't even paying for those sources.

we need a star trek society where money is not relevant. visionaries like elon musk can lead the way.

No. Get skills and find a better job if you don't like it. No one is forcing them to be there. Even a dimwit can get into construction, roofing, trade and make bank. But here's the catch; you actually have to work hard. People would rather not work hard and beg the government to force their employer to pay them more. Fucking faggots.

>indirectly benefit heavily from welfare programs

WAL-MART sells goods and services.

Niggers buy those goods and services, regardless of where they get their money.

I was referring mostly to how they pay their employees less than livable wages or less than they would otherwise have to because social welfare programs cover the extra necessary living expenses of many of them. Walmart and similar companies greatly benefit from this because they can spend much less money on wages and the taxpayer will pick up the cost of payment.

I have her nudes, she is on cam4

Tell those retards to get some skills then. Jesus Christ.

then post them you faggot

Just post them then you drunk fuck.

no they can't afford to

But that's money the Waltons earned, not Walmart corporate profits

b-but muh retail job stacking shelves and communicating with people is hard work ;__;

sounds like you're implying the welfare system is broken
I wholeheartedly agree, it should be eliminated permanently.

This may surprise you but public companies do care about their employees when it suits them to. What is happening here is the welfare system is, as you've said, caring for their employees for them. A lot of people at the top of any corporation are moralfags, eliminate welfare and the company leadership will feel bad about what they're doing and voluntarily improve the living standards of their workers, right now they can justify their actions by saying "well the government is helping my workers, why do I need to?". Socialists don't understand this but executives don't worship ancient evils and bathe in virgin blood every evening, they are people with feelings too.
No, government interference is never the way forwards.

...

Douche alert. You can't post that without posting a pic of those tig ole bitties

What's to stop the guy on the right from going and making his own company? Interest rates are close to zero, if he comes up with a good business plan getting capital to run it is not that hard these days.

Even as someone who generally sympathizes with workers the worker took no risk with his capital of establishing the company.

The billionaires thank u for shilling for them

neither did Sam Walton's children

Okay well that's not what was in the comic you pushed. Besides, inheritance is important because it implies that people still own their private property, a 100% inheritance tax is literally the government stating that rich people have no private property, and inheritance also gives people an incentive to produce to give their kids something.

and they should be punished for who their parents were? every single argument for redistribution of wealth ultimately comes down to jealousy

You're not countering what I am saying.
If the guy on the right wants to make a better business, he can. With all the complaints about Wall Street, access to capital is higher than ever.
If making a business is so easy why doesn't he do it?

I'm not talking about a 100% inheritance tax. I'm mocking the right wing billionaire corporatist shills who think that Walmart can't pay their workers a decent wage and still make a massive profit. They make $13 billion in profit per year. The Waltons didn't build the business, they literally inherited the wealth.

I'll never understand why right wingers are such cucks.

Walmart paying their workers a decent wage is punishment?

Do the billionaires pay u or do u shill for them for free?

You think someone can start a company to compete with Walmart today? You're legit mentally retarded.

They didn't make make the business. They inherited it.

Why do u shill for billionaires?

What do u have against hard working Americans earning a decent wage?

She's kinda NYC famous

>that Walmart can't pay their workers a decent wage and still make a massive profit.

because it won't solve the "probem" you statist manchild. if they raise wages due to pressure from the left in 5 years they will want higher wages still, because the poor are greedy and don't understand conservation of wealth. i've said already the solution is to abolish the welfare system, that is what will make your horrible vile billionaires start to think about their workers, because the government won't be there to do that for them.

People don't make enough money is the claim, exploited. $9/hour is average at Wal-mart, even though above minimum wage is still a difficult lifestyle, $18,000/year. Thought experiment: tip jar, voluntary welfare payment. Condescending, but maybe the worker would appreciate it. As a result of this program, workers are earning, let's say, $12/hour, by generosity of shoppers. Job gentrification. The people who would have taken $9/hour are no longer competitive for those jobs. Or it might lower the wage at Wal-mart so that the total goes back to $9/hour. If there became social pressure to leave money in the tip jar, many people might shop elsewhere.

why should workers be punished for businesses abusing the system?

Seattle fag here. This is a complete lie. Our economy is beyond fucked and our streets are awash in homeless heroin addicts.

Why not allow Walmart to pay less than minimum wage? Working at Walmart would become "jobs Americans won't do". You'd continue to have Walmart, welfare, and poor people but with the added benefit of more illegal immigrants.

Yes someone can make a business that can compete with Walmart.
What is Costco?
What is Amazon?
James Sinegal, the founder of Costco literally worked as a grocery store bagger before putting his money where his mouth is and creating Costco. He wasn't a billionaire, he was working class and created a competitor to Walmart. Or does this violate your narrative

J U G G S

Shelf stacking for an hour is more work than Donald Trump does in a week.

>stand around be orange and yell a lot
>write name on piece of paper other people wrote for you
>go to maralago

>You think someone can start a company to compete with Walmart today?

You name companies that were founded decades ago.

Look we're on 2 different sides. We're not going to agree. You're a shill and a cuck for the billionaire globalist elites. You want them to pay hard working people as little as possible so that the wealthy elites you worship, serve and obey can hoard as much wealth as possible. That's your right to hold that position. But at least be honest about it.

...

Yes. If you burn the coal you must pay the toll. If your company burdens our social welfare system you must pay.

The trouble is you cant have a new company for every person who wants to, it just doesn't work like that.

>this is what leftists actually believe

i'll tell you right now kid if you were put in his shoes tomorrow morning you'd be a pile of mush by 10am

So what changed? Why was someone able to make a competitor to Walmart before and not now? James Sinegal made Costco after your drawing was put to paper

>it's their fault i'm poor

that attitude is why you will always be poor

Trump becomes a pile of mush every morning in the first place I've read the tweets he writes at 6 am.

for every person who is willing to get off their arse and go to the effort of putting together a sensible business model and actually starting a new company? considering that's a miniscule fraction of the population, sure you can have a new company for every person who wants to. just not every person who "wants" to.

Amazon took off as a competitor after Walmart was already entrenched. So again, you're talking out of your ass

>doesn't even deny being a billionaire globalist shill

gee i wonder why

Why can't Walmart pay their workers a livable wage? They make $13B in profits per year.

yes, you have read them. and you thought about them. so, you are thinking about him.

sounds like you're doing exactly what he wants you to be doing. haha yeah what an idiot amirite???

I'm richer than u. I'm just not a cuck for the billionaire globalist elites.

have you ever watched the news you jack wagon? it's kind of hard to avoid the retardation that spews forth from his social media.

Hmmm...I wonder why? Really makes the neurons fire...

How many brick and mortar stores does Amazon have? You absolute fucking retard.

>You think someone can start a company to compete with Walmart today?

>today

Just stop.

Look we're on 2 different sides. We're not going to agree. You're a shill and a cuck for the billionaire globalist elites. You want them to pay hard working people as little as possible so that the wealthy elites you worship, serve and obey can hoard as much wealth as possible. That's your right to hold that position. But at least be honest about it.

>obamaleaf
saged for absolute faggotry

Wait.
Where in the rulebook did it say that a competitor to Walmart had to have brick and mortar stores?
The whole point of why Amazon is taking off as a competitor is that it doesn't have brick and mortar stores, so it is cheaper than Walmart.
You're just moving the goalposts constantly

You can, if they are willing to put the work into it.

I'm not moving any goalposts. You're the one dodging the fucking question that OP asked and that I asked you.

Why can't Walmart pay their workers a livable wage? They make $13B in profits per year. Btw I fucking love that u don't even try to dent that you're a billionaire globalist shill. I mean how could u deny it, it's so fucking obvious.

I did.
Up here.
You keep putting into your posts that I didn't respond, and I did, 5 posts ago

I made a post mocking right wing retard billionaire globalist shills like you and u immediately fell for it

>trusting forbes

With your tip jar autism, I didn't even take that post seriously. You kept talking about a tip jar, I assumed u were deliberately acting retarded.

It's almost as if those who do have certain skills that not everyone has and those people get compensated for said skills accordingly.

>inheriting wealth is a skill

I think every human being is entitled to and in fact should own a chain of discount retailers.

i wonder how much of walmart's revenue comes from state benefits.

You keep asking for an answer to your question.
I provide one
You ignore It
You keep asking for an answer
I remind you that I provided it.
Instead of refuting what I was saying, when you acknowledge I answered your question, you just say my post is Autistic.

t. retarded walmart cuck leaf

Attacks character instead of discussing any of his counter points. Here's a thought, you think walmart has shitty wages? DON'T FUCKING WORK THERE OR BUY THEIR SHIT

$9 an hour is not even $18k at 40 hours a week. Your math is wrong.

Can your billionaire globalist overlords afford to pay more than $9/hour to the workers who enable their $13 billion in annual profits?

That's not really revenue though.
Revenue is the income that a business has from its normal business activities, usually from the sale of goods and services to customers.
The argument is not that Walmart is receiving benefits, but the employees are.

This is autism

this

i gotta go now but this guy said it best mocking u, cuck leaf

yah, and they're spending it at walmart. you think they're shopping at nordstrom or whole foods on welfare?

I do not think you are very smart my cold friend

40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year
40*52 is 2080
2080*9=18720
Can you refrain from making factually incorrect arguments please

Ignore the butthurt leaf, he's been shitting up threads all night.

But, it's infact what James Sinegal, the founder of Costco did.

Prices will go up so you will have to pay the niggers more and then inflation will set in if you keep upping it.

>Capitalism is flawed
What a surprise
Wouldn't happen under a national socialist economy :^)

>be me
>shop at a ghetto walmart regularly
>clerk is surprised when i don't pay with EBT
>most every other customer pays for their groceries with EBT, with a separate pile of liquor paid in cash

a lot.

And so because of those state benefits, Walmart is able to offer artificially lower prices.
So isn't the solution stopping Rich people from shopping at Walmart?

Why should I be punished (higher taxes) because someone else is too lazy or stupid to get a real job?

I can tell you've never worked before. You don't know what income tax deductions are. Also, 52 weeks? They don't get any vacation at all? Wow

Your billionaire globalist overlords sure grind their workers down.

Hey leaf, address this with your fail.

>not getting free shit is being punished
businesses are not abusing the system they are just paying market rates for labor

Maybe, just maybe, you fucking kike Amazon found a clever way to compete with walmart by not using brick and mortar stores and using new shit like the internet to make business. It's like they made a lot of money by creating a clever business model and compete.

Just noticed the filename
I thought it was you. How's it going Obama Leaf?

good how r u?

I'm exposing right wing retard billionaire globalist shills as always

When people are talking about salaries, they use a gross salary, not net salary.
Also, if they work 50 weeks and have 2 weeks vacation, the math becomes 50*40*9, which is 18,000.

>You think someone can start a company to compete with Walmart today? You're legit mentally retarded.


>today

Names a company founded over 2 decades ago

Do u retards actually think u can found a competitor to walmart today? You autists are mentally retarded.

Something tell me Walmart wasn't the party responsible for social programs.

Don't like them? Get rid of them.

Don't blame others.

> difficult lifestyle, $18,000/year.

You were talking about lifestyle.

It's net that counts, not gross. How much money you bring home.

You've obviously never worked before. Otherwise you would know that there are deductions.

Again, I didn't dodge your question.
How is Amazon not a competitor to Walmart? You claim that it is not a competitor because it lacks brick and mortar locations, but that isn't logically consistent.

No, they should just fire all the employees and close.
The Waltons have enough money.

>Walmart:

>funded by EBT cards
>workers paid via subsidy

Government funded Profit!!!

I'm not responsible for guns existing but if I abuse one in some way I'm rightfully punished for doing so.

how is paying market wages abuse?

You are counting income tax deductions, but you are not counting the earned income tax credit.
If you subtract income tax deductions, and add earned income tax credit, someone working 52 weeks a year 40 hours a week is making 18,***$

I'm fine
Thanks for exposing their lolbertarian autism