Teens at Work - Walmart

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

The wrong being done is the benefits Wal-Mart is receiving without cost.

Why is recieving benefits that at the same time benefits others wrong?

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

These teens are not working for free.

 

[Rufus_1611]

These teens are not working for free.

Oh? How much are they making?

 

[Hope of Glory]

The UN has determined that it's illegal for 14 YO kids to work?

It's a good thing we don't listen to the UN!

BTW, I've never been in a Wal-Mart that hires baggers. Is that common? (I don't like Wal-Mart, but can't avoid the place when I'm in Anchorage.)

So, basically, either these kids work for tips, or they don't work.

Sounds as if Wal-Mart is doing the right thing. For once.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Nope. They're working for free because they like it.

I wasn't aware they were working for free. The OP emphasized, "THE GRATUITY THAT YOU GIVE THEM." So was the article wrong, or are you wrong? Please clarify for us.

It's teaching kids that corporations should be able to profit off of their labor and they should long for the scraps from the consumers that voluntarily give them tips.

How is the corporation profiting from this? All consumers spend their money voluntarily (except in taxes). No one has to shop at Walmart.

Excellent point. I believe Walmart has established what they believe these people are worth.

Perhaps. But so?

Mexico is a socialist state and the UN is their socialist papa.

Funny how you cite the UN in some places while complaining about it other places.

Personally, I think we should let the market work. If Walmart starts paying these people, it drives prices up and then shopping at Walmart becomes more expensive, and few people can afford to buy what they need. And then you will complain about rising prices.

Sounds like things should be left alone.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

Oh? How much are they making?

I do not know how much you are making am I to assume you are working for free?

 

[Rufus_1611]

I wasn't aware they were working for free. The OP emphasized, "THE GRATUITY THAT YOU GIVE THEM." So was the article wrong, or are you wrong? Please clarify for us.

They are not getting paid by the corporation they're working for. However, they have achieved a step above panhandler whenever they receive a gratuity.

How is the corporation profiting from this?

They sell a product and they deliver a product without payment for the delivery of that product. Rather than the money going to the laborer, Wal-Mart retains it and this helps them pocket $280 million a quarter. Yeah "capitalism".

All consumers spend their money voluntarily (except in taxes). No one has to shop at Walmart.

Who said they did?

Perhaps. But so?

Wow. :tear:

Funny how you cite the UN in some places while complaining about it other places.

I complain about it everywhere, what makes you think I was being pro-UN in this case?

Personally, I think we should let the market work. If Walmart starts paying these people, it drives prices up and then shopping at Walmart becomes more expensive, and few people can afford to buy what they need. And then you will complain about rising prices.

Orrr, they could pay their employees and maybe rather than making $280 million a quarter they could make $279.5 million a quarter?

Sounds like things should be left alone.

 

[Rufus_1611]

I do not know how much you are making am I to assume you are working for free?

No. My employer still pays me. I expect though when they get in a position where they've corrupted this gov't enough, they'll ask me to volunteer and have my clients pay me a gratuity.

 

[Pastor Larry]

They are not getting paid by the corporation they're working for.

That's not what you said. Thanks for changing your story. There are many people who don't get paid unless they produce. What's wrong with that?

However, they have achieved a step above panhandler whenever they receive a gratuity.

And what's wrong with people getting paid for doing something? I must really be missing something here.

They sell a product and they deliver a product without payment for the delivery of that product.

Lot's of companies do that. I just ordered something the other day from a company who refused to pay for the delivery of it. I had to pay for it.

Rather than the money going to the laborer, Wal-Mart retains it and this helps them pocket $280 million a quarter.

So? What's wrong with a profit? Does Walmart owe these people something? If Walmart didn't let them work for tips and sent them home, would they be doing something wrong?

Wow.

Wow what? Do you have an actual argument to make for your case? Are you amazed that your position can be debunked so easily and with so little effort?

Orrr, they could pay their employees and maybe rather than making $280 million a quarter they could make $279.5 million a quarter?

They do pay their employees through the money they get from the customers. In thise case, they are simply cutting out the middle man and giving some teens the opportunity to do some work they would not otherwise have.

So far, you have made absolutely zero legitimate arguments against this.

I am curious as to what is wrong with giving teens an opportunity to work, to find out what it is like to have a job and make money by providing a service that a customer needs?

 

[Analgesic]

Why is recieving benefits that at the same time benefits others wrong?

The benefits are not fairly distributed.

 

[Pastor Larry]

The benefits are not fairly distributed.

Why should they be?

 

[carpro]

These teens are not working for free.

Of course not.

They're working for themselves.

If they don't get paid what they want, they have to work harder or longer or both. Of couse, the third option is to quit.

Either way, why should Wal-Mart care? They don't need them. There are no baggers at all at the Wal-Marts I have been to.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

The benefits are not fairly distributed.

Are you assuming there is some moral mandate for such?

 

[carpro]

When you were humpin papers around town did you volunteer in the hopes that someone would tip you or did the newspaper companies pay you for your services?

I can't speak for Curtis, but I ran a paper route from the age of 12 to 17. The newspaper never paid me a dime.

Instead, I paid them... for the papers I took out of the office and sold them. I kept everything over what I paid for the papers.

That's called working for yourself.

These Mexican kids have it good. They don't have to pay Wal-Mart a cent. Just show up and work. Unlike a paperboy in America, they can't lose.

 

[Rufus_1611]

I can't speak for Curtis, but I ran a paper route from the age of 12 to 17. The newspaper never paid me a dime.

Instead, I paid them... for the papers I took out of the office and sold them. I kept everything over what I paid for the papers.

That's called working for yourself.

These Mexican kids have it good. They don't have to pay Wal-Mart a cent. Just show up and work. Unlike a paperboy in America, they can't lose.

Good example and good argument. I'll hold though to the premise that it is unethical to profit to the tune of $800 million a year off of a country where it's citizens are making $4 a day and then work it out where you don't even have to give 'em the $4. Also, I don't get the impression that these kids are volunteering so that they can go spend it on comic books or trading cards. Maybe, I'm wrong though and they are wealthy and well-nourished and they have no cause to desire to jump our borders because of their current economic conditions.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I can't speak for Curtis, but I ran a paper route from the age of 12 to 17. The newspaper never paid me a dime.

Instead, I paid them... for the papers I took out of the office and sold them. I kept everything over what I paid for the papers.

That's called working for yourself.

These Mexican kids have it good. They don't have to pay Wal-Mart a cent. Just show up and work. Unlike a paperboy in America, they can't lose.

I would make 2-5 cents a paper, a day, I think. The rest was tips. This was long ago. But I didn't have to put any money up.

 

[just-want-peace]

Boy!! I knew there were some socialistic leanings on this board, but until this thread i never realized just how much!!!!

Sounds like several posters would be far happier for the government to take over so all us peons could be paid the same.

"A prophet is not without honor, save in his own country."

The above quote seems to fit Ayn Rand in ATLAS SHRUGGED. These leftist leaners are aiming for her "prediction" if their desires get implemented.

 

[carpro]

Good example and good argument. I'll hold though to the premise that it is unethical to profit to the tune of $800 million a year off of a country where it's citizens are making $4 a day and then work it out where you don't even have to give 'em the $4. Also, I don't get the impression that these kids are volunteering so that they can go spend it on comic books or trading cards. Maybe, I'm wrong though and they are wealthy and well-nourished and they have no cause to desire to jump our borders because of their current economic conditions.

That's not Wal-Mart's problem. They don't need the kids.

I suspect the kids would rather have this opportunity than be shut out entirely. I know I would. Especially if I was hungry and my family needed the help.

Wal-Mart should be commended for providing an opportunity they don't provide here in the states. The kids should be commended for accepting the opportunity.

There is no villian in this story.

 

[Hope of Glory]

I work two jobs, in addition to my preaching responsibilities.

One of them, I work for a company driving a bus. It's part time, but they pay me a certain amount per hour (and actually, the time is figured by the minute), as long as I'm on the road. If I don't perform to their expectations, they fire me. I also get paid very, very well for doing extracurricular work, such as driving firemen for the forest fires and driving charters. (It's great to live in a place with a shortage of people who can pass a DOT drug test!)

My other job is making stained glass windows and shipping them nationally. I can work at whatever pace I choose. If I don't produce, I make nothing. If I work long hours, I make a lot. Recently, I was in a situation in which I had to work 40 hours consecutively because of circumstances, and it meant a lot of money. No guarantees.

These kids would not have a job at all, if not for being permitted to work for tips. I've never seen a Wal-Mart with baggers, so I suspect that if they had to be paid, they would not be there at all.

However, we just got finished eating Chinese for lunch with one of my son's friends, and he just made $7,000 in one month fishing.

Guess what? He gets paid a percentage. Some years, he makes double that. One year, he made less than $1000 for a month of working 80+ hours per week.

There are many jobs that depend upon your industriousness and taking the chance that you won't get paid. (Well, every person who is self-employed in any capacity falls into this category.)

If you want job security, go to work for someone who guarantees it. But, don't knock someone else who doesn't.

 

[Hope of Glory]

BTW, on the occasions that I hire someone to work for me, I pay them by the job, not by the hour. (I only hire for the tedious work, and only when I don't have time; not for the assembly, design, etc., which I do it all personally.) I determine how long it would take me, at 25%, convert that to $10 per hour, and say, "I'll pay you $x.00 to do that". If they don't like it, then I get someone else.

I used to hire my son, be he refuses to work by the job. His choice. But, when he took 2.5 hours to do something that I did in 45 minutes, I'm not paying him by the hour.