3 ms·

Difference is, I imagine your uncle didn't have millions of shareholders who would lobby to fire him if he didn't lay someone off. What he did was noble, surel

Difference is, I imagine your uncle didn't have millions of shareholders who would lobby to fire him if he didn't lay someone off. What he did was noble, surely. But at the same time, it sounds like it was his business. If Mike Duke (Wal-Mart's CEO) were to say, hey, we're going to cut our profit in half, but pay our employees double, he'd be shown the door. The question is tough. I don't know you, but for a second let's imagine you're an average American. A percentage of your 401k is likely depending on Wal-Mart's stock rising. And your wife/husband's. And your parents' retirement accounts (whether it's 401k, pension fund, whatever). How much are you & your friends & family willing to give up? If you want Wal-Mart wages to go up, invest in them. And convince all your friends, family, coworkers, etc to do the same. And your 401k holders (or union representatives or whoever manages your retirement funds). Eventually, you'll have a voice big enough to bring up the issue in stockholder meetings & have it be heard. As it stands now, the board has a duty to their shareholders to maximize holdings, not to be nice. That can change though.

Amadou 13y ago
the board has a duty to their shareholders to maximize holdings, not to be nice. I think that is a fundamentally biased description of the situation. It isn't necessarily about "nice" vs "profits" - its about corporate responsibility to the community that supports it. Or to over-simplify: short-term profits vs long-term profits. A store in a ghost-town doesn't do walmart any good in the long run.
crisnoble 13y ago
>If you want Wal-Mart wages to go up, invest in them. So your saying that if we buy their stock, driving the price up that Walmart would take this a signal to invest in employee pay and benefit increases, and not a validation that their current minimum wage, weekly hour cap, and lack of benefit model is working? I have heard of people who believe that voting with your wallet / investments is a way to apply pressure to change a companies practices (somehow dolphins and tuna usually gets brought up). But I have never heard of a theory in which investing in a business you think has bad practices will encourage them to get better.
pbhjpbhj 13y ago
>hey, we're going to cut our profit in half, but pay our employees double, he'd be shown the door // Doesn't that just show how the current system of shareholder control of companies is broken.

Amadou 13y ago

the board has a duty to their shareholders to maximize holdings, not to be nice. I think that is a fundamentally biased description of the situation. It isn't necessarily about "nice" vs "profits" - its about corporate responsibility to the community that supports it. Or to over-simplify: short-term profits vs long-term profits. A store in a ghost-town doesn't do walmart any good in the long run.

crisnoble 13y ago

>If you want Wal-Mart wages to go up, invest in them. So your saying that if we buy their stock, driving the price up that Walmart would take this a signal to invest in employee pay and benefit increases, and not a validation that their current minimum wage, weekly hour cap, and lack of benefit model is working? I have heard of people who believe that voting with your wallet / investments is a way to apply pressure to change a companies practices (somehow dolphins and tuna usually gets brought up). But I have never heard of a theory in which investing in a business you think has bad practices will encourage them to get better.

pbhjpbhj 13y ago

>hey, we're going to cut our profit in half, but pay our employees double, he'd be shown the door // Doesn't that just show how the current system of shareholder control of companies is broken.