7 ms·
> many of which would otherwise be on welfare I get what you're saying, but Walmart employment is (alas) very compatible with being a welfare recipient, and ra
by rjbond3rd 13y ago
> many of which would otherwise be on welfare
I get what you're saying, but Walmart employment is (alas) very compatible with being a welfare recipient, and rather than preventing welfare, Walmart is actually subsidized by it (at least according to a recently popular theory).
- protomyth 13y agoThe local Walmart pays better than the local grocery store or any of the small businesses on main street. There is a reason that so many apply.
- rsl7 13y agobetter.. if they let you work full time.
- protomyth 13y agoGiven the new healthcare law, no main street business is going to have full-time workers other than relatives. 29 is going to be it.
- code_duck 13y agoSure, now that Walmart has crushed those businesses, it can afford to pay a little more than they can.
- protomyth 13y agoThose businesses are still around, it is pretty easy given what Walmart actually sells. Amazon is more a pain for a lot of those businesses.
- code_duck 13y agoThe ones that are still around, are still around. There's been plenty of documentation of walmart's negative effect on small cities' retail, manufacturing and tax bases.
- protomyth 13y agoAnd that documentation would be (the manufacturing and tax base info would be interesting)? I see it quoted a lot, but I don't see much in the way of independent studies (and I am disinclined to believe union studies as much as I won't believe Walmart internal reports).
- code_duck 13y agoWalmart's practice of locating stores just outside of municipalities to avoid local sales tax affects sales tax revenues.
- jamesbritt 13y agoAnother view on "subsidizing Walmart": http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/06/10/if-the-welfare-system-subsidises-walmart-then-should-we-ban-welfare-to-stop-subsidising-walmart/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/06/10/if-the-we...