ADVERTISEMENT

Walmart raising mimimum wage and giving bonuses thanks to Tax Reform

Paw Pad said:
This a typical statement from someone who has never put HIS OWN MONEY into a business. Why don't you and E warren and Barry start your own company; with your attitude you would see very quickly how EVIL ALL COMPANIES ARE. The govt. doesn't make
money, they just take money. It astounds me how many people think like you do, It's always someone else that is screwing the whole world. This why minimum wage increases won't work. If they went to $15.00/hr, then you would say $20.00 is needed.
This is just a revolving door issue that would never get solved.
Be happy for the people that have a job and for the bonuses that they do get. It takes BALLS to start a business and MEGA BALLS
to grow the business.
Click to expand...

Typical response from an internet tough guy. To enlighten your ignorant ass, I actually 1) work in corporate America and easily in the top 10% and 2) own two businesses on the side that employs people (and about to add a third on my way to real independence). So please don’t give me your Fox News, think you are actually part of the true elite, response that’s so typical. One thing to realize; if normal everyday folks can’t afford your product, you go out of business.
 
MBTiger23 said:
You are referencing Wal-Mart like you are there. Do you work there or just on TI while shopping?
Click to expand...

Don’t work there and try like hell to not shop there. Not a secret that most people working at Walmart are, through scheduling, effectively part time associates.
 
scotchtiger said:
Plenty of opportunity for a 2nd job then.
Click to expand...
With all due respect, do you really think the only reason we have poor and needy people is because they are all lazy? Do you think everyone has the same health, same intelligence, same talent, same family life, same opportunity, same life experiences, same luck as you? As someone who grew up poor, I can assure you that is not the case. I'm doing better now than most, but I also recognize that everyone else is not just like me. I am a blessed individual. I know that.

You need to get out and spend some real time with the people you are stereotyping. There are absolutely people who take advantage of the system. People who take advantage of others hard work. Those people are the scurge of the earth. But they are not representative of the majority.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kudzuking, clemsonpaw00, emajor2 and 1 other person
1Clemzunfan said:
With all due respect, do you really think the only reason we have poor and needy people is because they are all lazy? Do you think everyone has the same health, same intelligence, same talent, same family life, same opportunity, same life experiences, same luck as you? As someone who grew up poor, I can assure you that is not the case. I'm doing better now than most, but I also recognize that everyone else is not just like me. I am a blessed individual. I know that.

You need to get out and spend some real time with the people you are stereotyping. There are absolutely people who take advantage of the system. People who take advantage of others hard work. Those people are the scurge of the earth. But they are not representative of the majority.
Click to expand...

right. and it's telling that he focuses on poor people who take advantage of the system rather than the rich individuals and corporations who do the same, to a much more harmful degree, through tax loopholes, overshore accounts, shady business practices etc.

really makes one wonder.
 
  • Like
Reactions: emajor2
scotchtiger said:
Exactly why we need to revamp welfare. Now the absolute poorest person at Walmart will make over $22K per year assuming full time employment. That's also assuming no overtime and no 2nd job. Want more? Ask for overtime or get a 2nd job. Taxpayers shouldn't have to supplement your income at that level. We're already signing off on that person not contributing to the tax base.
Click to expand...
lol assuming full time employment. Dude they won't let them work but 29 hours a week.
 
scotchtiger said:
Like I said above- plenty of time for a 2nd job.
Click to expand...

you are so out-of-touch with the challenges of middle to lower class americans that it's kind of staggering. we get it, scotch, you're wealthy and don't want to pay more in taxes. but quit blaming the ills of society on poor people.
 
1Clemzunfan said:
With all due respect, do you really think the only reason we have poor and needy people is because they are all lazy? Do you think everyone has the same health, same intelligence, same talent, same family life, same opportunity, same life experiences, same luck as you? As someone who grew up poor, I can assure you that is not the case. I'm doing better now than most, but I also recognize that everyone else is not just like me. I am a blessed individual. I know that.

You need to get out and spend some real time with the people you are stereotyping. There are absolutely people who take advantage of the system. People who take advantage of others hard work. Those people are the scurge of the earth. But they are not representative of the majority.
Click to expand...

I’m not saying that at all. For starters, I strongly believe that we should help the physically and mentally challenged/incapable. They can’t provide for themselves. Beyond that, I think we need to ensure that everyone else has access to the tools, training and life skills needed to succeed. I’m not sure why our system is set up to hand out fish instead of fishing rods, or why those that think teaching is better than giving are somehow vilified.

Furthermore, how is saying that only working 29 hours gives you plenty of time for a 2nd job calling someone lazy? My wife and I both work more than 40 hours per week. She works weekends. I travel and spend nights away from my family. Why should someone be entitled to a certain standard of living just because they are willing to show up somewhere for 29 or even 40 hours per week? I do more than that to provide the sort of life for my family that I want, so why should I pay for someone else who is unwilling to do that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mccadoyle
scotchtiger said:
I’m not saying that at all. For starters, I strongly believe that we should help the physically and mentally challenged/incapable. They can’t provide for themselves. Beyond that, I think we need to ensure that everyone else has access to the tools, training and life skills needed to succeed. I’m not sure why our system is set up to hand out fish instead of fishing rods, or why those that think teaching is better than giving are somehow vilified.

Furthermore, how is saying that only working 29 hours gives you plenty of time for a 2nd job calling someone lazy? My wife and I both work more than 40 hours per week. She works weekends. I travel and spend nights away from my family. Why should someone be entitled to a certain standard of living just because they are willing to show up somewhere for 29 or even 40 hours per week? I do more than that to provide the sort of life for my family that I want, so why should I pay for someone else who is unwilling to do that?
Click to expand...
So you support raising your property taxes to ensure the children are getting qualified educators.
 
clemsonpaw00 said:
you are so out-of-touch with the challenges of middle to lower class americans that it's kind of staggering. we get it, scotch, you're wealthy and don't want to pay more in taxes. but quit blaming the ills of society on poor people.
Click to expand...

Come on. I'm not blaming the ills of society on anyone. See my post above. Asking someone to work a little extra to earn the lifestyle they want isn't mean. I do it for my family. My wife does. And my belief that a hand up is better than a hand out is also not mean. And I don't consider myself wealthy. But I do hate taxes.
 
scotchtiger said:
I’m not saying that at all. For starters, I strongly believe that we should help the physically and mentally challenged/incapable. They can’t provide for themselves. Beyond that, I think we need to ensure that everyone else has access to the tools, training and life skills needed to succeed. I’m not sure why our system is set up to hand out fish instead of fishing rods, or why those that think teaching is better than giving are somehow vilified.

Furthermore, how is saying that only working 29 hours gives you plenty of time for a 2nd job calling someone lazy? My wife and I both work more than 40 hours per week. She works weekends. I travel and spend nights away from my family. Why should someone be entitled to a certain standard of living just because they are willing to show up somewhere for 29 or even 40 hours per week? I do more than that to provide the sort of life for my family that I want, so why should I pay for someone else who is unwilling to do that?
Click to expand...
So only physically handicapped or mentally ill people have an excuse for being poor. A single mom with 3 kids who lost their husband to any number of things and is facing more in daycare than she can make working an $8 to $10 hour job because she doesn't have a college education is just SOL. That's just one scenario. And any federal programs that allow them to have housing assistance, insurance, grants for education, or help with putting food on the table is just a handout because she is too lazy to work 80 hours a week for $8 an hour and let her kids fend for themselves at home alone. That's just one very real scenario of many. There are far more.

I guess her husband shouldn't have gotten in that car wreck, or fought for our military, or gotten cancer and left his family.

Consider yourself blessed, sir. It's a very different world out there for most people. Everyone that is poor isn't a free loader or lazy. There are a lot of healthy hard working Americans who just haven't been blessed to the same degree that we have that aren't just looking to free load off of you and your family.
 
1Clemzunfan said:
So only physically handicapped or mentally ill people have an excuse for being poor. A single mom with 3 kids who lost their husband to any number of things and is facing more in daycare than she can make working an $8 to $10 hour job because she doesn't have a college education is just SOL. That's just one scenario. And any federal programs that allow them to have housing assistance, insurance, grants for education, or help with putting food on the table is just a handout because she is too lazy to work 80 hours a week for $8 an hour and let her kids fend for themselves at home alone. That's just one very real scenario of many. There are far more.

I guess her husband shouldn't have gotten in that car wreck, or fought for our military, or gotten cancer and left his family.

Consider yourself blessed, sir. It's a very different world out there for most people. Everyone that is poor isn't a free loader or lazy. There are a lot of healthy hard working Americans who just haven't been blessed to the same degree that we have that aren't just looking to free load off of you and your family.
Click to expand...

Obviously there are plenty of other examples like you listed. I’m not sure how my comment that someone who only gets 29 hours at Walmart has time to work a second job has devolved into a lack of empathy for single mothers. That obviously wasn’t remotely suggested in my OP and you have taken huge leaps to twist it.
 
scotchtiger said:
Obviously there are plenty of other examples like you listed. I’m not sure how my comment that someone who only gets 29 hours at Walmart has time to work a second job has devolved into a lack of empathy for single mothers. That obviously wasn’t remotely suggested in my OP and you have taken huge leaps to twist it.
Click to expand...
Maybe because you specifically addressed the lady in my example above. Your entitlement reform comment wasn't limited to someone who was only willing to work 29 hours...

scotchtiger said:
Exactly why we need to revamp welfare. Now the absolute poorest person at Walmart will make over $22K per year assuming full time employment. That's also assuming no overtime and no 2nd job. Want more? Ask for overtime or get a 2nd job. Taxpayers shouldn't have to supplement your income at that level. We're already signing off on that person not contributing to the tax base.
Click to expand...
 
1Clemzunfan said:
Maybe because you specifically addressed the lady in my example above. Your entitlement reform comment wasn't limited to someone who was only willing to work 29 hours...
Click to expand...

Do you not think we need reform? Do you disagree that education is preferable to hand outs? We can argue the semantics of a forum post typed from my iphone, but the system needs foundational reform. Let's look at your single mother example. They probably fall into 3 categories:
  • Dad alive - Adequate income from working and alimony/child support. No help needed.
  • Dad not alive - Education opportunity for term life insurance (super cheap and affordable). This could eliminate the need for gov't financial assistance in most cases. Fathers are irresponsible if they do not have this. In your military example, the mother should have received a death benefit and a survivor pension btw.
  • Dad alive - Inadequate income from working/alimony/child support. This generally means the dad isn't pulling his weight. We shouldn't penalize the mother/child, but we need to figure out how to shift this burden to the father, not the taxpayer. If the father can't provide due to health issues, then that falls into my other category of physically/mentally capable.
I'm not trying to be mean-spirited, but there are common sense ways to approach these things other than throwing money at the problem.
 
clemsonpaw00 said:
imagine having to support trump yet again after today. seemingly everyday's another adventure with this goddamn mental midget. must be exhausting for you guys @Ron Munson @scotchtiger


View embedded media
Click to expand...

You'll never see me completely applaud or condone everything Trump does. You have to take the good with the bad. Obama said a lot of pretty words and rarely offended anyone, but his policy stunk. Trump says a bunch of dumb shit and his twitter is embarrassing, but his policy is better.

Which do you think affects the scotchtiger household more? The economy, the market and taxes or twitter and embarrassing sound bites? I focus on what impacts my family.
 
scotchtiger said:
Do you not think we need reform? Do you disagree that education is preferable to hand outs? We can argue the semantics of a forum post typed from my iphone, but the system needs foundational reform. Let's look at your single mother example. They probably fall into 3 categories:
  • Dad alive - Adequate income from working and alimony/child support. No help needed.
  • Dad not alive - Education opportunity for term life insurance (super cheap and affordable). This could eliminate the need for gov't financial assistance in most cases. Fathers are irresponsible if they do not have this. In your military example, the mother should have received a death benefit and a survivor pension btw.
  • Dad alive - Inadequate income from working/alimony/child support. This generally means the dad isn't pulling his weight. We shouldn't penalize the mother/child, but we need to figure out how to shift this burden to the father, not the taxpayer. If the father can't provide due to health issues, then that falls into my other category of physically/mentally capable.
I'm not trying to be mean-spirited, but there are common sense ways to approach these things other than throwing money at the problem.
Click to expand...
I agree that there are opportunities for reform. I would love to see real reform that is meaningful. Unfortunately, the type of "reform" many are seeking comes from the viewpoint that "most" beneficiaries are lazy, are drug dealers, or are meth heads. Unfortunately, the type of reform that is discussed would not specifically target only the low life moochers, it would be broader reaching and hurt those who need it most because people don't want to take the time to understand who needs these programs and how important many of them are and how they really need to be reformed.

At the end of the day, there are a lot of shitty people in this world. A lot of irresponsible people. Im for cutting them out of the system. But unfortunately a lot of shitty people have innocent children and families that suffer due their shitty parents or spouses decisions. You can't take the approach of letting those people suffer for the sins of their father. Its leads to much worse problems and situations that are even more costly.

Unfortunately meaningful entitlement reform isn't a massive cost saving measure that you seem to think it is. To take a surgical approach and eliminate only the benefits going to those least deserving is a break even proposition at best. It will cost more money to do adequate screening and follow-up while adding the educational services you mention. But I absolutely agree it's needed to ensure those that need benefits (not just cash but services and support) get them and those that don't get nothing. Hopefully the fraud and waste you cut out pays for the additional cost to screen and implement the right programs, but you can't just go into entitlement reform like it's some piggy bank and with the main idea being to simply save hundreds of billions of dollars. That's not realistic.

Too many people are disconnected from the social programs they are targeting and simply look at social programs as an opportunity to save money and offset tax cuts. Any real cuts of that scale would have to be a shotgun blast that damages all of those in need while minimally impacting the worst offenders. I'm not against reform, I'm absolutely for it. But I'm against the shotgun approach that is discussed by those leading the charge and the premise behind it that we can save hundreds of billions to offset tax cuts for the wealthy.
 
scotchtiger said:
You'll never see me completely applaud or condone everything Trump does. You have to take the good with the bad. Obama said a lot of pretty words and rarely offended anyone, but his policy stunk. Trump says a bunch of dumb shit and his twitter is embarrassing, but his policy is better.

Which do you think affects the scotchtiger household more? The economy, the market and taxes or twitter and embarrassing sound bites? I focus on what impacts my family.
Click to expand...

translation: i don't care that our president is a global embarrassment, a racist, is very likely mentally ill, and threatens the very idea of what is a fact any longer so long as my family pays less in taxes.

your self-serving brand of politics is truly sad. you're basically saying that you would support an authoritarian ruler so long as it benefitted your family. do you really not see what's so dangerous about being that singularly-focused?
 
clemsonpaw00 said:
translation: i don't care that our president is a global embarrassment, a racist, is very likely mentally ill, and threatens the very idea of what is a fact any longer so long as my family pays less in taxes.

your self-serving brand of politics is truly sad. you're basically saying that you would support an authoritarian ruler so long as it benefitted your family. do you really not see what's so dangerous about being that singularly-focused?
Click to expand...

We get it. You hate Trump so thoroughly that you can't comprehend how someone would vote for him despite his flaws.

I don't think Trump is a racist nor do I think he is mentally ill. I'm not choosing those things, nor a dictatorship, so that my taxes are lower. This is such a ridiculous spin on my position.
 
scotchtiger said:
We get it. You hate Trump so thoroughly that you can't comprehend how someone would vote for him despite his flaws.

I don't think Trump is a racist nor do I think he is mentally ill. I'm not choosing those things, nor a dictatorship, so that my taxes are lower. This is such a ridiculous spin on my position.
Click to expand...

lol how does one take yesterday's quote, in conjunction with his many other bordering-on-racist or outright racists claims and positions, and conclude that he's not a racist? that is some fantasy land you live in.
 
scotchtiger said:
Just smart business to shut down underperforming locations.
Click to expand...

So limited $1000 bonuses is a huge sign that Trump is "winning", but massive layoffs at those same companies is no big deal? Didn't you argue that the tax bill would create jobs?

come on man. really? I guess i should not be surprised since you are the guy that believes that Trump directly controls the stock market.
 
nytigerfan said:
So limited $1000 bonuses is a huge sign that Trump is "winning", but massive layoffs at those same companies is no big deal? Didn't you argue that the tax bill would create jobs?

come on man. really? I guess i should not be surprised since you are the guy that believes that Trump directly controls the stock market.
Click to expand...

Link?
 
scotchtiger said:
Link?
Click to expand...

dont have the time to go back and look through old posts (and I dont know how), but I remember clearly that you posted a picture of the stock market gains with Trump posing, and you tagged me in it. In that thread you argued that Trump was responsible for the stock market gains. Later, when people provided facts and statistics about how stupid that was, you backtracked and said you were just kidding. Hard to forget that level of d-baggery.
 
nytigerfan said:
dont have the time to go back and look through old posts (and I dont know how), but I remember clearly that you posted a picture of the stock market gains with Trump posing, and you tagged me in it. In that thread you argued that Trump was responsible for the stock market gains. Later, when people provided facts and statistics about how stupid that was, you backtracked and said you were just kidding. Hard to forget that level of d-baggery.
Click to expand...

Hold on, so that is what made you say "the guy that believes that Trump directly controls the stock market?" LOL
 
scotchtiger said:
Hold on, so that is what made you say "the guy that believes that Trump directly controls the stock market?" LOL
Click to expand...

LOL??? yeah, maybe you should just refrain from running to TI and posting Trump Winning memes every time a company announces they are raising wages by $1 in order to distract everyone from the massive layoffs they are conducting. Let the adults have this discussion.
 
nytigerfan said:
LOL??? yeah, maybe you should just refrain from running to TI and posting Trump Winning memes every time a company announces they are raising wages by $1 in order to distract everyone from the massive layoffs they are conducting. Let the adults have this discussion.
Click to expand...

Okay Rustle Wilson. This adult will just sit back and enjoy some tax relief and watch my brokerage accounts climb in the Trump economy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

CUTiger1977

BREAKING: TRUMP SMASHES BIDEN'S "GLOBAL MINIMUM TAX".

Replies
0
Views
146
House Of Politics & Off-Topics
CUTiger1977
CUTiger1977
leetp

Qatar Tells Hamas to Leave, Days After Trump Wins Election

Replies
0
Views
199
House Of Politics & Off-Topics
leetp
leetp
TigerGrowls

Biden issues preemptive pardons for Milley, Fauci and Jan. 6 committee members

Replies
48
Views
1K
House Of Politics & Off-Topics
CUTiger1977
CUTiger1977
TigerGrowls

Syria

Replies
1
Views
174
House Of Politics & Off-Topics
CUTiger1977
CUTiger1977
fatpiggy

Tariffs Discussion - Economic and Political Consequences - External Revenue Service (ERS)

Replies
20
Views
776
House Of Politics & Off-Topics
TigerGrowls
TigerGrowls
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back