5 ms·

“If Walmart paid their staff ... little reason for them to exist” I would believe that if the Waltons weren’t one of (the?) richest families in the world. The

“If Walmart paid their staff ... little reason for them to exist” I would believe that if the Waltons weren’t one of (the?) richest families in the world. They can afford to pay more but don’t as the US taxpayer is making up the difference in welfare. Privatize the profit, socialize the cost.

kortilla 5y ago
“There exists people who got rich” does not make a model suddenly sustainable. Estimated Walton family wealth is $250 bill. Walmart employs 2.2 million people. Pay them all $10k more per year and the Walton wealth would be gone after a decade (ignoring the fact that losing money for years in a row would eliminate the Walton wealth much faster due to stock declines). Walmart’s model is just not sustainable at Costco level pay. > They can afford to pay more but don’t as the US taxpayer is making up the difference in welfare. If you don’t like that people can get welfare on minimum wage, either eliminate welfare at that wage level or raise the minimum wage until people who make minimum wage don’t qualify. > Privatize the profit, socialize the cost. It is the government who decides to pay welfare at these levels. If you want to ban people from making money at those hourly rates, go ahead. But this is not a case of “socialize the cost” because being a Walmart employee making $25k + welfare is still better than being unemployed and just getting welfare.