Penn and Teller on Walmart

[ianlippert]

can you provide us with an example where walmart used physical violence against its employees?

[ QUOTE ]
A free market only exists in theory.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only because people like you believe that violence is the best way to solve your problems.

[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]
The whole point of organization would be to prevent these acts, and fight for better working conditions.



[/ QUOTE ]

If you really wanted to increase the wages of walmart workers you would fight against the actual causes of low wages. Walmart is the effect not the cause. Taxation and regulation reduces the demand for labour which then allows walmart to hire people for minimum wage. Any sort of solution that is directed at walmart will only further reduce the demand for labour. Violently attacking walmart only encourages them to close stores, which further reduces the demand for labour.

It would be nice if we lived in a world where we could enact violence on people and they stuck around to do business with us. Unfortunately most businesses arent going to stay in an unprofitable realtionship with their workers. It therefore seems unreasonable to rely on violence to increase the wages of walmart workers.

[pvn]

[ 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?

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no idea. I don't really care what they think.

Why should I care about your opinion?

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's so abusive that they keep working there.

[ QUOTE ]
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 ]

Basically. Actions > words.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ 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 ]

What if he's playing video poker professionally, so that he can avoid working at WalMart?

[ QUOTE ]
[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where did you get this idea that he's doing it for leisure?

[ QUOTE ]
You can't quit your job unless you have another one lined up already.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure you can. People do it all the time. The fact that you squandered your money and have no savings isn't your employer's fault.

[Borodog]

[ 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 <font color="red">at WalMart</font> 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 ]

Here's the implied fallacy.

[pvn]

[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't? I quit my job a few months ago. Now, granted, I wasn't working at WalMart, but the job police didn't come by and try to stop me from quitting.

You're conflating coercion initiated by other people and economic and biological realities. WalMart doesn't cause your hunger, then use that to extort you into working for them.

[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what?

WalMart needs its customers a hell of a lot more than than the customers need WalMart. Is it unjust for customers to use this leverage to get WalMart to offer lower prices?

[ QUOTE ]
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).

[/ QUOTE ]

Gosh, that sounds scary. Reassigned to the Lawn and Garden siberia!

[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

What difference does this make? College educated white collar professionals don't need to eat? They don't have families?

[neverforgetlol]

[ QUOTE ]
can you provide us with an example where walmart used physical violence against its employees?

[/ QUOTE ]

Walmart has repeatedly locked in employees over night.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4146540/

[ QUOTE ]


Only because people like you believe that violence is the best way to solve your problems.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually it's because it's never existed in history, what the hell kind of response is this?

[neverforgetlol]

[ QUOTE ]


If you really wanted to increase the wages of walmart workers you would fight against the actual causes of low wages. Walmart is the effect not the cause. Taxation and regulation reduces the demand for labour which then allows walmart to hire people for minimum wage. Any sort of solution that is directed at walmart will only further reduce the demand for labour. Violently attacking walmart only encourages them to close stores, which further reduces the demand for labour.

It would be nice if we lived in a world where we could enact violence on people and they stuck around to do business with us. Unfortunately most businesses arent going to stay in an unprofitable realtionship with their workers. It therefore seems unreasonable to rely on violence to increase the wages of walmart workers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most regulations are fought for by corporations to levy power against other corporations. Walmart also takes in billions in government subsidies each year. Where's the attacks against Walmart for doing that?

[neverforgetlol]

[ QUOTE ]


I have no idea. I don't really care what they think.

Why should I care about your opinion?

[/ QUOTE ]

Then why were they brought up? You don't have to care about what I say (you clearly don't), but I am at least aware of the horrid labor relations walmart has had, which P/T apparently are not.


[ QUOTE ]
Basically. Actions &gt; words.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why I'm not a libertarian. Just because someone isn't putting a gun to your head doesn't mean it's not coercive. The employer has a large amount of power over his/her employees, and there are plenty of people with the ability to do these kind of jobs. Do you think the boss needs worker X as much as worker X needs their boss? Please.

Just to clarify, an example: A boss tells a female employee: "You must have sex with me or you're fired."

Is that coercive?

[neverforgetlol]

[ QUOTE ]

What if he's playing video poker professionally, so that he can avoid working at WalMart?

[/ QUOTE ]

Please tell me you are joking.

[ QUOTE ]


Where did you get this idea that he's doing it for leisure?

[/ QUOTE ]

What else would you call playing video games in your spare time? I assume he doesn't play video games for a living, that's pretty rare.

[ QUOTE ]

Sure you can. People do it all the time. The fact that you squandered your money and have no savings isn't your employer's fault.

[/ QUOTE ]

And here we go again. What people? People that have skills that are in high demand by other employers, sure. People that have little to no education and not any specialized skills are not exactly being wooed by other employers.

You seem to think the employee-boss relationship is a completely equal economic transaction. They have a job, you need a job, either of you can opt out at any time. Well it's not that easy.

[ QUOTE ]


Here's the implied fallacy.

[/ QUOTE ]

This thread is about walmart and people working there.