Wal-Mart's low wages have led to full-time employees seeking public assistance. These are not the 47 percent, lazy, unmotivated bums. Rather, these are people working physical, often difficult jobs. They receive $2.66 billion in government help each year (including $1 billion in healthcare assistance). That works out to about $5,815 per worker. And about $420,000 per store. But the federal and state aid varies widely; in Wisconsin, a study found that it was at least $904,542 a year per store. (See the accompanying chart.)
Why, I keep asking myself, do we effectively want to subsidize a private company’s employees? Wouldn’t it make much more sense to raise the minimum wage to a level that a full-time worker could support the average American family of four? Just $11.33 puts a 40-hour employee over the poverty line. The costs of this increase would be borne by the company and its consumers -- not the taxpayer.
You do know that everything is relative. You raise the wages, the prices are raised. It is all related. The thing is, if there are lots of jobs and WMT can't find people to work, they will raise the wages to attract people. Like in Williston, ND, the average starting salary is $18 at WMT. Supply and demand is the law of the economy.
I agree we need to stop supporting all the free loaders, farmers, global warming, arts, large co's, energy, M brotherhood, swimming pool in Vegas, Bridge to nowhere, congress-senate-president-MICHELLE vacations out of the country that may have cost as much as 100 million to China. There is enough waste to pay most of the budget if our elected officials would do their job.
I for one am sick of the tax dollars I pay going to make the Walton children even wealthier because I'm paying for the cost of WMT employees. What makes things even worse is the Walton children never accomplished anything in their lives. They need to try working for a month or would that be too strenuous on them to have to put in a few days work in their lifetime.