Politics What is happening????

You don't have a choice.

Funny how that works, eh?

 

U.S. fast-food workers walk off jobs, rally for higher minimum wage - The Globe and Mail

It's interesting that this issue is getting more attention and more action.

I don't know about raising minimum wage to as high as $15 all at once, but I could see going from $7.25 to somewhere around $10, which is the low end of calculated living wages. The minimum wages in Canada range (provincially) between $10 and $11, but some argue that that's too low and should be closer to something like $14.

I would think that going in stages (e.g., $7.25 to $9 or $10 before going higher) would be better in terms of minimizing the negative economic effects.

 

I think several posts up we addressed that issue. There are negative economic effects (yes, often exaggerated) that tend to overshadow the positive effects.

 

There are also issues of employee treatment and working conditions.

Not to mention their product sourcing practices.

 

Well, to give them the benefit of the doubt...there is the fact that they are HUGE.
And they employ so many people.

However, where there is smoke...often there is fire.
People aren't stupid...and they'll put up with a lot, most of the time.
So if Wal-Mart...keeps showing up on the radar, again & again...I'd say there may be a problem.

I don't know. I've seen their stores...often they don't look so hot. (then again, neither does K-Mart, etc)
But then I look at stores like CostCo...which has the opposite rep.
Theirs looks efficient and clean...so in the end, you get what you pay for.

What would you rather have? Pissed off people and rot from the inside?
Or employees that crow your name...and give back what you give.
Your choice.

Circles and cycles can go either way.
I'd rather have the stairway to heaven.

 

As @rogue49 says it's because they are the paragons of what they do. Discount retailers? Walmart, right? (Over 60% market share.) Fast food? McDonald's, right? (20% market share—fast food is way more competitive.) Now look at what they do. Now see how huge and profitable they are.

But it's true. The problem is way more widespread than these two companies, but as with most things, focusing on the big fish will often lead to changes to the whole pond.

 

"Why are record numbers of Americans on food stamps? Because record numbers of Americans are in poverty. Why are people falling through the cracks? Because there are cracks to fall through. It is simply astonishing that in this rich nation more than 21 million Americans are still in need of full-time work, many of them running out of jobless benefits, while our financial class pockets record profits, spends lavishly on campaigns to secure a political order that serves its own interests, and demands that our political class push for further austerity. Meanwhile, roughly 46 million Americans live at or below the poverty line and, with the exception of Romania, no developed country has a higher percent of kids in poverty than we do. Yet a study by scholars at Northwestern University and Vanderbilt finds little support among the wealthiest Americans for policy reforms to reduce income inequality."​

—Bill Moyers (emphasis Wil Wheaton's), Bill Moyers: "We are this close to losing our democracy" - Salon.com​

​

 

"Affluenza" must be more difficult than, say, poverty:

Ethan Couch-Affluenza: Texas teen spared prison time in deadly drunk driving crash after offering wealth-based defense.

Affluenza: CNN's Anderson Cooper interview Dr. G. Dick Miller, defense-called psychologist in case of Ethan Couch.

 

More on minimum wages. This short article does well to outline how things aren't neatly cut and dried, or perhaps as obvious as we may think.

For example:

Minimum wages: The logical floor | The Economist

 

Finally...a shot across the bow.
I doubt this will be the final say...but at least a portion of the court is now getting involved with US citizens' decreasing right to privacy.

Now don't get me wrong, I understand the possible need to retrieve info to analyze patterns to prevent terrorist actions,
but there is too much so at the moment...with the potential of irresponsible usage of all this collected.
The brakes need to be put on to slow down...and define restrictions, retrieval, retention and disposal times.

However, I don't agree with what Snowden did, how he did it and how much he released.
He should be still prosecuted.
There was a more appropriate, less extreme & damaging way to do this.
His method would be exploding a populated skyscraper to demonstrate that building codes were not being followed.

 

This is big...another potential win for privacy.
Employers are not transparent, nor do they tell employees everything...why should employees need to let them know?

Not only can circumstances be unfair, as stated in the article.
But the reports are not accurate or kept up to date often.