4 ms·

This right here. We should demand not to subsidize the richest companies in the world. The Walmart family can afford to pay their employees a living wage. Inste

This right here. We should demand not to subsidize the richest companies in the world. The Walmart family can afford to pay their employees a living wage. Instead you and I pay for that in taxes, while they extract billions in profit and value from their business. If anything we should be subsidizing small businesses to give a more level playing field against companies with global economies of scale.

WarOnPrivacy 1y ago
> We should demand not to subsidize the richest companies in the world. Not without overturning Dodge Bros vs Ford, I believe. The ruling created shareholder primacy, the privilege of shareholders to have maximum bites of the corporate apple. It rigidly protects shareholder (and by ext, executive) interests. The never-ending wealth that flows from that - first buys politicians, then officials, judges and (eventually) every part of regulation & corporate oversight. ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
burgerguyg 1y ago
Have you actually looked at what Walmart pays? Even in areas where the minimum wage is still $7.25, they're paying nearly double as a starting wage. They raised their starting wage over $10 in 2017 and have consistently raised it even where they're not legally obligated. Meanwhile, all raising wages in the current market does is implement a wealth transfer from businesses to landlords with minimum wage workers as the mules transporting the money. If you let the housing supply remain this tight and just increase wages, you just bid up rents and make the most economically vulnerable fight over the insufficient supply of affordable units.