Re: Penn and Teller on Walmart
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think they should get a job at Walmart and see how it goes.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would probably suck. So what?

[/ QUOTE ]

So why should we care about the opinions of rich white men that have probably never been in a walmart voluntarily? Shouldn't we be more interested in people involved with the company? They can speak about the constant abuse that goes on within the company.

Oh right, but no one's making them working there, no one has a gun to their head, so I guess it's ok then.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I played video poker I sure got abused while waiting for the big pay days. Nobody was forcing me to do it but I stayed of my own free will because I knew I was better off playing than not playing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not analagous, you need to work to make a living (unless you are independently wealthy), playing video games on the other hand is a luxury. You can quit playing whenever you want and no harm done, but for many people you need that paycheck every week or someone doesn't eat.

Re: Penn and Teller on Walmart
 

[ QUOTE ]

Incidently, Penn & Teller's B.S. is an awesome show. I'm working my way through their DVDs and have yet to think they were wrong about anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

I saw this episode the other night and, while it was basically spot on, there was a major oversight/ ignoring of some issues.

The main thing that bothered me is that they cited the benefits and salary of full time employees. This is misleading due to the fact that Wal-mart employees very few full time employees. The company purposely hires numerous part timers in order to skirt things like benefits and the like.

Re: Penn and Teller on Walmart
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think they should get a job at Walmart and see how it goes.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would probably suck. So what?

[/ QUOTE ]

So why should we care about the opinions of rich white men that have probably never been in a walmart voluntarily? Shouldn't we be more interested in people involved with the company? They can speak about the constant abuse that goes on within the company.

Oh right, but no one's making them working there, no one has a gun to their head, so I guess it's ok then.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I played video poker I sure got abused while waiting for the big pay days. Nobody was forcing me to do it but I stayed of my own free will because I knew I was better off playing than not playing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not analagous, you need to work to make a living (unless you are independently wealthy), playing video games on the other hand is a luxury. You can quit playing whenever you want and no harm done, but for many people you need that paycheck every week or someone doesn't eat.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're making a meaningless arbitrary distinction. Walmart provides that paycheck. The employees by definition must prefer working at walmart to the alternative or they wouldn't be there! When the alternative is getting an even smaller amount of stolen money from welfare, Walmart is a great option.

Re: Penn and Teller on Walmart
 

[ QUOTE ]


You're making a meaningless arbitrary distinction.

[/ QUOTE ]

How the hell is it either of those? There's a distinction between things you have to do, even if you don't want to do them (jobs, for one) and things you do because you really want to do them out of your own volition.

[ QUOTE ]
Walmart provides that paycheck. The employees by definition must prefer working at walmart to the alternative or they wouldn't be there!

[/ QUOTE ]

Does not follow. They are there because they have to work to get money, not necessarily because they prefer being there to not working. This is why my distinction is not "arbitrary and meaningless." You play video games because you prefer doing so to not doing so, and you are free to quit at any time. You can't quit your job unless you have another one lined up already. You aren't going to go hungry or be evicted if you stop playing video games. People work, for the most part because they have to, most would prefer to not have to work at all.

[ QUOTE ]
When the alternative is getting an even smaller amount of stolen money from welfare, Walmart is a great option.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, Walmart has beaten out welfare, what an amazing corporation.

Re: Penn and Teller on Walmart
 

[ QUOTE ]
Does not follow. They are there because they have to work to get money, not necessarily because they prefer being there to not working. This is why my distinction is not "arbitrary and meaningless." You play video games because you prefer doing so to not doing so, and you are free to quit at any time. You can't quit your job unless you have another one lined up already. You aren't going to go hungry or be evicted if you stop playing video games. People work, for the most part because they have to, most would prefer to not have to work at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, boo-hoo, you have to work to get money to not die. I realize this, it is a fact of life. Your statement is arbitrary and my analogy correct because in both circumstances they have made a rational decision and prefer doing one thing to the alternative. The employees are getting EXACTLY what they signed up for, and if they don't they can sue Walmart (as has actually happened).

[ QUOTE ]
Wow, Walmart has beaten out welfare, what an amazing corporation.

[/ QUOTE ]

You act like Walmart owes them something. It owes them nothing beyond their mutually agreed upon terms. Did I miss something? Is Walmart a charity now?

Re: Penn and Teller on Walmart
 

[ QUOTE ]


Well, boo-hoo, you have to work to get money to not die. I realize this, it is a fact of life. Your statement is arbitrary and my analogy correct because in both circumstances they have made a rational decision and prefer doing one thing to the alternative.

[/ QUOTE ]

But one thing is a luxury and one is a necessity. I can't freely choose to quit my job at walmart in the same manner i freely choose to stop playing video games. In fact if I can't find other work, then I can't choose to leave at all (oh right I could choose to leave and live on the streets, guess you have a point there). "Boo-hoo?"

[ QUOTE ]
The employees are getting EXACTLY what they signed up for, and if they don't they can sue Walmart (as has actually happened).

[/ QUOTE ]

But it's not like people that work at walmart have a host of companies giving them great offers, and walmart has to give them a competitive salary and benefits. Walmart knows the people need them a hell of a lot more than walmart needs their workers. These workers have little to no market power, because there are many more people with the skills needed than supply of jobs. This tips the power scales to the employer, and this is why so much abuse and threatening behavior goes on within that company (just try even discussing unionization and you will immediately be reassigned to another part of the store).

And yes they have been sued, but what I find funny is many of these lawsuits would be objectionable to libertarians: sexual/racial/etc. discrimination, inequality in pay based on such factors, libertarians don't even object to an employer saying "have sex with me or you're fired."

[ QUOTE ]

You act like Walmart owes them something. It owes them nothing beyond their mutually agreed upon terms. Did I miss something? Is Walmart a charity now?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's disingenious to call it mutual agreement when, as I said before, Walmart has much more power than the employee in deciding the terms of employment. It's not like we're talking about white-collar, college educated professionals that get high salaries and are flown out to interviews. In most cases we are talking about lower-class people with little education who just want to put food on the table and support their family.

Re: Penn and Teller on Walmart
 

[ QUOTE ]
...These workers have little to no market power...

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh, there's really not much point arguing because I think this is the crux of the issue. You don't like that the workers don't have much power in the labor market. I say it doesn't matter and that any attempt to correct it with legislation will make matters worse overall. Without legislation, the current situation is what you're gonna get.

Walmart isn't evil, they're trying to maximize profit - this also gives the best social result [ Friedman (pdf) ].

Re: Penn and Teller on Walmart
 

I didn't necessarily propose legislation. But your statement that the difference between employment and playing video games is meaningless is incorrect, I hope I explained that well enough.

And it's not that they have little power, but substantially less than the employer, this is what makes it coercive.

Think of the extremes.. you say it doesn't matter. What if there is a monopsony on labor. That would be a pretty bad situation for workers, correct? Well as the difference between employers hiring for a specific job and people able and willing to do that job gets larger, the worse off the worker will be. You saw this especially in the industrial revolution, workers were treated practically as animals, because there were many more immigrants who could do "dirty" jobs than jobs available.

Re: Penn and Teller on Walmart
 

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't necessarily propose legislation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then whats your point? Nobody is arguing that walmart provides great jobs. Everybody wants those low wage workers to be able to live decent lives. If you arent interested in finding solutions for the poor, you are just being an indignant socialist for the sake of being an indignant socialist. Its ultimately a self serving point of view.

Re: Penn and Teller on Walmart
 

Well, I think the workers should unionize themselves, using violence if necessary. I don't mind anti-discrimination stuff that is already in place, also.

And I'm not a socialist, which shows how little you are paying attention.