Widgets Magazine
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 67

Thread: Sam's Club

  1. #26

    Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by BBatesokc View Post
    Their only responsibility is to their shareholders.
    And as a shareholder the past five years it has been very rewarding. This is not a charity, it is a business.

  2. #27

    Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    I wonder how much more money the Walton family would have if it weren't for the wealth redistribution policies foisted on us by the liberals. It has to be tough for the aspiring billionaire these days.
    Don't blame me. I voted for Kanye!

  3. Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by onthestrip View Post
    Not when min wage hasnt kept up with inflation. Not when min wage was more valuable in 1960 than today, based on inflation. Not when worker productivity is much higher than it was in 1960. Not when education levels of min wage earners is much higher than it was 50 years ago. Not when corporate profits are at all time highs. And not when many min wage workers are adults with families and taxpayers end up subsidizing their income anyways in the form of public assistance.
    Walmart has absolutely *nothing* to do with those assertions. Nothing. And if you don't like the public assistance, you should be chief on the bandwagon to have it cut back, not enhanced. Your own argument makes a great case to suggest that if sub subsidies were eliminated, wages would go up because the company is factoring in that element in their market computation of wage value.

    Classic wealth redistribution is doing nothing about wages and allowing the top to collect more for themselves. Im not calling for $15/hr but the current min wage is simply out of whack with history and current living costs right now.
    Wealth redistribution is wealth redistribution; coloring it under a varying degrees of severity is merely a clever way to disguise means testing. Ultimately, it always boils down to "I think that guy has too much money, therefore he must evil. Confiscate his money over some magical threshhold and give it to someone under the magic threshhold."

    Employer X, in response to shareholder equity, pays Employee Y what the market for widgets says Employee Y is worth. Period. Not about the relative "value" of min wage because the relative "value" of minimum wage is not the employer's responsibility. Not about "relative worker productivity" if the worker at Employer X hasn't really increased. Not about "employee education levels" if the education possessed is of no value to the employer. It is up to the employee to do what he can to gain the maximum salary and compensation possible and increase his value to the workforce, not vice-versa.

  4. Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by rezman View Post
    Why not just a flat tax proportionate to what everyone earns? Say 20% ... If you only earn $2000 a year, you pay $400 in taxes. If you earn $2M a year, you pay $400,000. I guess that's just too simple.

    As far as the baseball goes, it should only get it's taxable value from the money he gets if he sells it, not what someone thinks it's worth.
    Define 'income'?

    If I have 1,000 shares of CompanyX stock and it goes up in value from $10 a share to $1,000 a share should I get a tax bill for the 'windfall profit' even if I haven't sold any shares? You would probably say no. What if I take out a $10,000,000 loan against the now $1,000,000 worth of shares (that I originally paid $10,000 for) and used the money to buy more stock, and then I used the dividends from the $10 million worth of stock to repay my loan and provide a means of living. Would you count any of that money as income?

    Now let's say all this falls apart on me and my $1,000 stock goes back to $10 and the people loaning me the $10,000,000 want their money now. Should Congress bail me out?

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,690

    Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Tax them too much and they will become tax exiles like many other countries have done to their 1%.

  6. #31

    Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by Garin View Post
    I strive to be part of the 1% as should everyone that has a work ethic.
    I agree with you.

  7. Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by Mel View Post
    Tax them too much and they will become tax exiles like many other countries have done to their 1%.
    This is the problem we have. If the Walton family went to Bermuda and took their fortune with them it would be like losing the economic power of half the country. Maybe for national security reasons we shouldn't allow them to have such a large percentage of the nation's wealth. Seriously, they could collapse the country all by themselves.

  8. Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    This is why we need to eliminate the income tax and just go with a wealth tax. Every person and company completes an annual 'net worth' statement and then pay taxes on that amount. If you live solely on cash flow and rent a place to live your taxes would be very low. If you live because your money makes you money you would pay a much higher amount.

    How come if a person catches Barry Bonds homerun ball he instantly owes $200K in taxes, but if Walmart stock instantly goes up a few points the owners of Walmart stock don't get a tax bill. Weird how that works. I wonder who came up with these rules.

    TaxProf Blog: More on Tax Consequences to Fan Catching Barry Bonds' 756th Home Run
    If we post a bit more of that commentary, we find out that "not all tax experts agree with Barrie's legal assessment."

    There is considerable discussion regarding what the realities of that situation are. And one little nugget that I just loved, and think carries a ton of weight, goes like this:

    If the folks want to tax the ball on its value at the time it was caught, great. That ball, at the time it is caught, is about $15. Why? Because the fan catching the ball does so almost certainly before the runner scores (well, technically, before he crosses third base). The event that makes the ball valuable doesn't occur until after the fan takes possession of it. So he now has a perfectly legitimate claim to avoid sudden accession to wealth, and as one guy put it, "claim the $15 value on the tax return to start the statute of limitations clock running." (or words to that effect), and sell the ball with the notion of paying capital gains taxes on the subsequent home run.

    As far as the wealth tax goes, that's a non-starter, because neither countries nor municipalities can make any intelligent plans on the "predictions" of wealth, nor does wealth imply liquidity of funds to make payments. So some poor soul gets stuck with a bill for, say, $1000 on the presumed "wealth value" of a non-liquid asset? Start doing that and people won't walk, they'll run away from investing in most any to-that-point healthy economy. Sadly, however, we already do "wealth taxation," here - we just call it "property taxes."

  9. #34

    Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by SoonerDave View Post
    Walmart has absolutely *nothing* to do with those assertions. Nothing. And if you don't like the public assistance, you should be chief on the bandwagon to have it cut back, not enhanced. Your own argument makes a great case to suggest that if sub subsidies were eliminated, wages would go up because the company is factoring in that element in their market computation of wage value.



    Wealth redistribution is wealth redistribution; coloring it under a varying degrees of severity is merely a clever way to disguise means testing. Ultimately, it always boils down to "I think that guy has too much money, therefore he must evil. Confiscate his money over some magical threshhold and give it to someone under the magic threshhold."

    Employer X, in response to shareholder equity, pays Employee Y what the market for widgets says Employee Y is worth. Period. Not about the relative "value" of min wage because the relative "value" of minimum wage is not the employer's responsibility. Not about "relative worker productivity" if the worker at Employer X hasn't really increased. Not about "employee education levels" if the education possessed is of no value to the employer. It is up to the employee to do what he can to gain the maximum salary and compensation possible and increase his value to the workforce, not vice-versa.
    No, they dont. Thats why govt should require a higher min wage and tie it to inflation. Im sure we will hear this from the Pres during his state of the union address tomorrow. As for the state level, Sen. McAffrey gas proposed a bill (SB1362) to raise it to $10/hr for state workers.

  10. Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by onthestrip View Post
    No, they dont. Thats why govt should require a higher min wage and tie it to inflation. Im sure we will hear this from the Pres during his state of the union address tomorrow. As for the state level, Sen. McAffrey gas proposed a bill (SB1362) to raise it to $10/hr for state workers.
    Absolutely not. Employers set the wage, not the government. And McAffrey's bill should be crushed.

  11. #36

    Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    Define 'income'?

    If I have 1,000 shares of CompanyX stock and it goes up in value from $10 a share to $1,000 a share should I get a tax bill for the 'windfall profit' even if I haven't sold any shares? You would probably say no. What if I take out a $10,000,000 loan against the now $1,000,000 worth of shares (that I originally paid $10,000 for) and used the money to buy more stock, and then I used the dividends from the $10 million worth of stock to repay my loan and provide a means of living. Would you count any of that money as income?

    Now let's say all this falls apart on me and my $1,000 stock goes back to $10 and the people loaning me the $10,000,000 want their money now. Should Congress bail me out?
    Heh heh.. It's easy to muddy things up.

    If you invest in the market and your stocks go up, and you reinvest the gains, no I do not think the gains should be taxed. Now if you put your gains in the bank, then yes that would be taxable income.

  12. Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by rezman View Post
    Heh heh.. It's easy to muddy things up.

    If you invest in the market and your stocks go up, and you reinvest the gains, no I do not think the gains should be taxed. Now if you put your gains in the bank, then yes that would be taxable income.
    Should the purchase of stock be subject to sales tax then?

  13. #38

    Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by SoonerDave View Post
    Absolutely not. Employers set the wage, not the government. And McAffrey's bill should be crushed.
    Well, then we will continue to have very slow economic growth.

    And I'm guessing that you probably believe that there should be no min wage of any kind? If so, do you think that would improve things for the country as a whole?

  14. #39

    Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by onthestrip View Post
    Not when worker productivity is much higher than it was in 1960.
    Even been to a Wal-Mart lately?

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,690

    Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    This is the problem we have. If the Walton family went to Bermuda and took their fortune with them it would be like losing the economic power of half the country. Maybe for national security reasons we shouldn't allow them to have such a large percentage of the nation's wealth. Seriously, they could collapse the country all by themselves.
    Too rich too fail.

  16. #41

    Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    This is the problem we have. If the Walton family went to Bermuda and took their fortune with them it would be like losing the economic power of half the country. Maybe for national security reasons we shouldn't allow them to have such a large percentage of the nation's wealth. Seriously, they could collapse the country all by themselves.
    It's a free market. The Walton's are fine people and have every right to have as much money as they can make and pay their employees minimal wage.

    Don't like it, GET OVER IT.

  17. Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by zookeeper View Post
    Garin, Nice job of sidestepping the issue of hoarding BILLIONS upon BILLIONS while the taxpayer picks up the tab for many of their workers "benefits."
    Great work ethic those Walton's have!
    First, saying they make $25,000 every minute is quite an exaggeration. Lets look at real numbers. According to Yahoo finance, the largest shareholder was Jim Walton with 10,501,672 shares as of June of last year. That equates to dividend income of about $19,743,143 per year which is about $37.56 per minute. Still not bad pay but far from $25,000 per hour you claim.

    Second, Wal Mart directly employs more than 2.1 million people worldwide. That is a massive number of people. Add to that the millions upon millions who are employed in multiple other businesses supporting Wal Mart's sales and operation and you have virtually the world's most massive business.

    Now, lets look at the layoffs that have you foaming at the mouth.....about 2,800 people. All businesses lay people off while undergoing reorganizations or slowing business. I've been laid off myself and totally understand it is part of life. You seem to feel that the Walton family had something to do with this business decision. Do you understand business so little that you don't realize that NO ONE in the Walton family has anything to do with the decision to lay these people off. Wal Mart is a business run by officers and the people they laid off were let go by way of a business decision. The company will open both Sam's and Wal Mart stores this year that will employ far more than the 2,800 these layoffs will entail. The Walton family is so far removed from the layoff decision you could line 100 Superstores in between.

    Next, you seem to be under the impression that the Walton family sits in buildings virtually drowning in the hoarded piles of cash and stacks of $1000 bills, being waited on by naked servants, serenaded by musicians and being fed bon-bons and grapes like so many Jabba-the-Huts. Their wealth is in the value of the stock they own which rose to all-time highs in recent weeks.

    The company donated directly to charity more than $650 million dollars over the last 5 years.

    The company and the Walton Foundation has pledged $2 Billion just to hunger causes by 2015.

    If they didn't hoard all those billions and billions, what exactly, would you have them do? Just give shares of their stock away? Pull up in front of the local stores in pickup trucks loaded with stock certificates and just start throwing them up in the air for anyone to get? They give hundreds of millions away every year. Millions of people are invested in Wal Mart stock and expect the business to operate in the most profitable way. This is a fiduciary responsibility. If the company feels 2,800 Sam's employees are not needed, then that's part of their responsibilities of running a business.

    Since you don't understand what capitalism is, what you see with the Walton family is simply called building and wildly successful family business that has helped the middle and lower income people of this country survive far better than if Wal-Mart didn't exist at all. The family simply owns stock in the company. No one puts a gun to the head of any Wal Mart employee to work there. Well over a million American's do keeping far more off of the government dole or relying on it far less than they otherwise would.

    Wal Mart is a business. It is not in business to provide welfare jobs for tens of thousands or pay more than they need to pay. If they raise wages, then they raise their prices and it will defeat the purpose of their business plan. They didn't become the worlds largest business by paying prime wages and benefits.

    If you don't understand these things, then you don't understand capitalism at all.

  18. Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by Plutonic Panda View Post
    It's a free market.
    It's not a free market - and THAT is the problem.

  19. Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    Should the purchase of stock be subject to sales tax then?
    No, because you will eventually pay taxes on the capital gains and dividends, whether in a non-retirement account or in a retirement account. If you die with it, you pass it to your children subject to estate taxes. Investing in stock is investing in a company. While some profit, just as many lose money. Would you tax someone who buys a coffee shop or a printing plant for the cost of the purchase?

  20. Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    This is the problem we have. If the Walton family went to Bermuda and took their fortune with them it would be like losing the economic power of half the country. Maybe for national security reasons we shouldn't allow them to have such a large percentage of the nation's wealth. Seriously, they could collapse the country all by themselves.
    That's what France was seeing with their wealth tax and had to pull it back. Those with wealth were simply moving it elsewhere.

  21. #46

    Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts View Post
    It's not a free market - and THAT is the problem.
    Dude, a business was created by Sam Walton and has grown beyond anyones expectations. It is extremely profitable and even though it has grown out of Sam Walton's ethics, it is still part of the free market system. I take it you don't like shareholders?

  22. Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Mugofbeer,
    First, I like your name, second, money in IRAs, 401k/403b accounts are subject to income taxes, not estate taxes (much of which is exempt for we, the great unwashed), and the heirs have to pay in the year received. I could be corrected, but that's what I had to do when my mother died, and my financial adviser has told me that my boys will have to do the same. I would love for someone knowledgable on this forum to tell me otherwise.
    C. T.
    Quote Originally Posted by mugofbeer View Post
    If you die with it, you pass it to your children subject to estate taxes.

  23. #48

    Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by Plutonic Panda View Post
    Dude, a business was created by Sam Walton and has grown beyond anyones expectations. It is extremely profitable and even though it has grown out of Sam Walton's ethics, it is still part of the free market system. I take it you don't like shareholders?
    JTF is saying (I think) that we don't actually have a FREE market, but a manipulated market where the forces aren't actually allowed to compete fairly in all cases. Perhaps along the lines of "too big to fail"? JTF, correct me if I'm off base.

  24. #49

    Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Quote Originally Posted by Hemingstein View Post
    JTF is saying (I think) that we don't actually have a FREE market, but a manipulated market where the forces aren't actually allowed to compete fairly in all cases. Perhaps along the lines of "too big to fail"? JTF, correct me if I'm off base.
    Even if that is the case, then he wants to regulate companies limiting how large they can get.

  25. #50

    Default Re: Sams club layoffs

    Panda. Ina 100% free-market capitalist system we would not have a minimum wage. Without the minimum wage requirements, Walmart would pay half their currents wages. Walmart is committed to being the lowest on everything. Whether that be prices quality wages or anything else, they are committed to having the lowest.

    That is their right but it is also my right as a shopper to not support that kind of disgusting behavior

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Club One15
    By Plutonic Panda in forum Restaurants & Bars
    Replies: 115
    Last Post: 08-09-2015, 09:22 AM
  2. Best club in the bag !!!!!
    By Roadhawg in forum Sports
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-09-2012, 02:08 PM
  3. CNN makes layoffs
    By FRISKY in forum Politics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-15-2011, 03:52 PM
  4. Help with the name of a club/bar.
    By SOONER8693 in forum Nostalgia & Memories
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-13-2011, 06:19 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO