The Rich And The Poor - Lds Statements

[Chronos]

MormonFreeThinker: If you are unwilling to have a discussion and would rather attempt to brow-beat others into agreeing with you, then the thread will be shut down.

 

~Chronos

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I"m not sure what you "doubt" about jobs disappearing.  It can certainly be argued that some industries grow their number of jobs while other industries shrink, but certainly specific industries can lose a great many jobs.  It happened with US manufacturing, and it will happen with jobs for low-skilled/ low-wage workers if they insist on forcing companies to pay them more than an economically justified wage.  It's not a matter of fairness, honesty, or kindness.  It's like gravity.  

 

Just look at the Church's early efforts to institute economic systems that tried to introduce creative interpretations of common economic principles.  Great in principle, and a disaster in practice.

 

One solution to the problem that I think could work would be for someone to create some sort of standard for a "Fair Wage", and then certify companies and give them a sticker they can put in their window (much like the LA County health department does to let consumers know how a restaurant did on their last health inspection).  Then consumers could choose whether or not they want to eat at a restaurant that pays a "Fair Wage", or one that doesn't. They could even take automation into account (and grade companies that automate lower).  That would be a great, non-government solution to the "problem" that would be far more effective than any thing else that's been suggested. 

I agree with your first part wholeheartedly. The 2nd part isn't bad at all on paper. Put that into practice and see how many people still shop and eat at the "low wage" places.

 

You cannot just arbitrarily put a number out there that would ever justify what a fair wage is out side of what an employer can afford and what the market supports, i.e., you run a comparable to see what others make in the same field.  IF you think otherwise I challenge you to do it and see how well it works, if not, then we are in agreement.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

MormonFreeThinker: If you are unwilling to have a discussion and would rather attempt to brow-beat others into agreeing with you, then the thread will be shut down.

 

~Chronos

Bummer, I cannot give you a rep point.

[thesometimesaint]

I"m not sure what you "doubt" about jobs disappearing.  It can certainly be argued that some industries grow their number of jobs while other industries shrink, but certainly specific industries can lose a great many jobs.  It happened with US manufacturing, and it will happen with jobs for low-skilled/ low-wage workers if they insist on forcing companies to pay them more than an economically justified wage.  It's not a matter of fairness, honesty, or kindness.  It's like gravity.  

 

Just look at the Church's early efforts to institute economic systems that tried to introduce creative interpretations of common economic principles.  Great in principle, and a disaster in practice.

 

One solution to the problem that I think could work would be for someone to create some sort of standard for a "Fair Wage", and then certify companies and give them a sticker they can put in their window (much like the LA County health department does to let consumers know how a restaurant did on their last health inspection).  Then consumers could choose whether or not they want to eat at a restaurant that pays a "Fair Wage", or one that doesn't. They could even take automation into account (and grade companies that automate lower).  That would be a great, non-government solution to the "problem" that would be far more effective than any thing else that's been suggested. 

 

Walmart v Wendy's v Costco

SEE http://money.cnn.com/2013/08/06/news/economy/costco-fast-food-strikes/

 

It is being done now.

SEE http://www.alternet.org/labor/burger-king-and-mcdonalds-pay-fast-food-workers-20-hour-denmark

 

You and I subsidize Walmart with our tax dollars.

SEE http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/04/15/report-walmart-workers-cost-taxpayers-6-2-billion-in-public-assistance/

[cinepro]

 

Why do you want life to be easier for the rich? and harder for the poor?

7.25 full time is not enough for the food, rent, and the bills. 

 

Do you really want single mothers to have two or three jobs just to survive? 

 

The scriptures tell us to help the poor, and the rich need to help the poor, not make their lives harder. 

 

"Honest people work hard during all the hours for which they are paid. Honest employers pay those who work for them according to what the employees deserve." 

https://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-fundamentals/chapter-26-honesty?lang=eng

 

For example, Costco is an honest employer, Walmart is not very honest. 

 

 

There is another explanation for the statement in the Gospel Principles manual.  There are employers who do not pay their employees what they are legally entitled to (or what was agreed upon hiring) when it comes to break periods, overtime and other such things.  Also, some employees work "off the clock" (whether by their own choice or their employer's insistence).  In all of these cases, their paycheck does not accurately account for their proper pay, and the employer is being "dishonest" in a very real way.

 

If an employer enters into an agreement with an employee to pay a certain amount per hour ($X), and then the employee works a number of hours (Y) and the employer pays that employee ($X * Y), then both sides have honored the agreement, and I'm not sure on what basis I would accuse the employer or the employee of being "dishonest".  Sure, you can say they were unfair and raise all sorts of nebulous issues of ethics, but when two parties reach an agreement and both sides honor that agreement, I won't accuse either of being "dishonest".

 

While I'm sympathetic to the issues raised by the interpretation that if MormonFreeThinker isn't happy with what someone is getting paid then that employer is "dishonest", I would bet that the Gospel Principles manual is referring to the more clear-cut issues of the former explanation.

Edited October 29, 2014 by cinepro

[MormonFreeThinker]

Walmart v Wendy's v Costco

SEE http://money.cnn.com/2013/08/06/news/economy/costco-fast-food-strikes/

 

I think the rich like Walmart can afford to pay it's workers more.   

 

In 2013, Walmart's total revenue was 469,162, 000, 000 dollars in the USA. 

Source: http://news.walmart.com/news-archive/investors/walmart-reports-q4-eps-of-167-full-year-eps-of-502-walmart-us-gains-market-share-adds-47-billion-in-comp-sales-for-year-company-announces-fy-14-dividend-of-188-up-18-or-1787345

 

Walmart has 1.3 million associates in the USA. 

http://news.walmart.com/walmart-facts/corporate-financial-fact-sheet

 

Walmart pays the associates that have experience 8 - 9 dollars an hour, 7.45 for the new associates.

Source: I cannot find that in Walmart's website, but I used to work at Walmart.  

 

So Walmart pays all the USA associates about 16 billion dollars a year.

 

1,300,000 associates * 8 = 10400000 an hour 

10400000 * 30 hours a week = 312,000,000

312,000,000 * 52 weeks = 16,224,000,000 dollars

 

469 billion dollars in revenue USA vs 16 billion US associates make 

 

"Some employers are not fair to their employees; they pay them less than they should. Satan says, “Take the advantage of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor” (2 Nephi 28:8 ). Taking unfair advantage is a form of dishonesty." Gospel Principles, (2011), 179–83 

 

"Being wealthy is not morally wrong. The danger, as the Book of Mormon repeatedly emphasizes, is that when people become wealthy they sometimes forget the Lord and His commandments. President Brigham Young (1801–77) said: “The worst fear that I have about [members of this Church] is that they will get rich in this country, forget God and his people, wax fat, and kick themselves out of the Church and go to hell. This people will stand mobbing, robbing, poverty, and all manner of persecution, and be true. But my greater fear for them is that they cannot stand wealth; and yet they have to be tried with riches” (quoted in Preston Nibley, Brigham Young: The Man and His Work [1936], 128)."

 

That is far less than the total revenue

 

I hope the rich 

Edited October 29, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[Calm]

Walmart v Wendy's v Costco

SEE http://money.cnn.com/2013/08/06/news/economy/costco-fast-food-strikes/

]

The article compares a young cashier at Wendy's with a forklift operator who has been there for 19 years. I don't see that as a valid comparison. Draws the credibity of the rest into doubt.

And instead of comparing Wal-Mart with Costco, why not just use Sam's Club which eliminates a lot more variables due to different requirements of two very different styles of store.

Edited October 29, 2014 by calmoriah

[MormonFreeThinker]

There is another explanation for the statement in the Gospel Principles manual.  There are employers who do not pay their employees what they are legally entitled

 

I do not think it is saying that, but please see post 56 for the Math. 

[MormonFreeThinker]

And instead of comparing Wal-Mart with Costco, why not just use Sam's Club which eliminates a lot more variables due to different requirements of two very different styles of store.

 

Sure

 

Costco's average pay, for example, is $17 an hour, 42 percent higher than its rival, Sam's Club. 

 

Please see post 52 for the Math. 

[cinepro]

I do not think it is saying that, but please see post 56 for the Math. 

 

 

I'm going to say this as kindly as possible.

 

Your ignorance on the subject is astounding.  You have obviously never been an employer and had to make a payroll in your entire life.  You have obviously never had to create a human resources budget, or manage other employees.  It's also probable you've never had to read a P&L statement.

 

The "wage" paid to the employees is only a fraction of the overall employee costs to the employer.  There are a myriad of taxes and fees that are directly assessed against payroll dollars.  There are substantial additional costs for hiring and training. 

 

But most astounding is that you are using the revenue figure for income!  That is the total number of dollars that come in to the cash registers, before all costs are accounted for!    That's before the costs of building and maintaining stores, buying the goods that they sell, and paying employees. 

 

You also compared your estimate for US employee wages with the global revenue figure. 

 

If you ever feel like people (especially business people) aren't taking you seriously when it comes to business and economic subjects, send me a PM and I can tell you why.

 

I'll also add that while I look to the Church on guidance for many things, I won't take business advice from a corporation that is transitioning more and more of its employees to volunteer (i.e. unpaid) status (on top of the many, many thousands of workers who perform work on a unpaid basis).

Edited October 30, 2014 by cinepro

[Calm]

Sure

Costco's average pay, for example, is $17 an hour, 42 percent higher than its rival, Sam's Club.

Please see post 52 for the Math.

Link please

Average pay for all employees or average pay for comparable employees at the same level?

If all employees, Costco could pay enough executives extremely high salaries to raise averages higher even if at the low end they paid less than Sam's.

Edited October 29, 2014 by calmoriah

[ksfisher]

There is another explanation for the statement in the Gospel Principles manual.  There are employers who do not pay their employees what they are legally entitled to (or what was agreed upon hiring) when it comes to break periods, overtime and other such things.  Also, some employees work "off the clock" (whether by their own choice or their employer's insistence).  In all of these cases, their paycheck does not accurately account for their proper pay, and the employer is being "dishonest" in a very real way.

 

If an employer enters into an agreement with an employee to pay a certain amount per hour ($X), and then the employee works a number of hours (Y) and the employer pays that employee ($X * Y), then both sides have honored the agreement, and I'm not sure on what basis I would accuse the employer or the employee of being "dishonest".  Sure, you can say they were unfair and raise all sorts of nebulous issues of ethics, but when two parties reach an agreement and both sides honor that agreement, I won't accuse either of being "dishonest".

 

While I'm sympathetic to the issues raised by the interpretation that if MormonFreeThinker isn't happy with what someone is getting paid then that employer is "dishonest", I would bet that the Gospel Principles manual is referring to the more clear-cut issues of the former explanation.

 

This would seem to make sense, as the title of the Gospel Principles lesson was "Honesty" and not "How does the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints define a fair wage"  or "What does the scriptures say that employers in 2014 should be paying their employees."

[MormonFreeThinker]

Your ignorance on the subject is astounding.  

 

I admit it, I am ignorant about the subject, but former stake president Mitt Romney agrees that the poor need a better pay. 

 

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865602791/Mitt-Romney-I-think-we-ought-to-raise-the-minimum-wage.html?pg=all

 

 

But most astounding is that you are using the revenue figure for income!  That is the total number of dollars that come in to the cash registers, before all costs are accounted for!    

 

Really? I though revenue was the total income after all the costs are accounted for. 

I admit it, I am ignorant about the subject. 

 

I think the rich like Walmart can afford to pay it's workers more.   

 

In 2013, Walmart's total revenue was 469,162, 000, 000 dollars in the USA. 

Source: http://news.walmart.com/news-archive/investors/walmart-reports-q4-eps-of-167-full-year-eps-of-502-walmart-us-gains-market-share-adds-47-billion-in-comp-sales-for-year-company-announces-fy-14-dividend-of-188-up-18-or-1787345

 

Walmart has 1.3 million associates in the USA. 

http://news.walmart.com/walmart-facts/corporate-financial-fact-sheet

 

Walmart pays the associates that have experience 8 - 9 dollars an hour, 7.45 for the new associates.

Source: I cannot find that in Walmart's website, but I used to work at Walmart.  

 

So Walmart pays all the USA associates about 16 billion dollars a year.

 

1,300,000 associates * 8 = 10400000 an hour 

10400000 * 30 hours a week = 312,000,000

312,000,000 * 52 weeks = 16,224,000,000 dollars

 

469 billion dollars in revenue USA vs 16 billion US associates make 

 

"Some employers are not fair to their employees; they pay them less than they should. Satan says, “Take the advantage of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor” (2 Nephi 28:8 ). Taking unfair advantage is a form of dishonesty." Gospel Principles, (2011), 179–83 

 

"Being wealthy is not morally wrong. The danger, as the Book of Mormon repeatedly emphasizes, is that when people become wealthy they sometimes forget the Lord and His commandments. President Brigham Young (1801–77) said: “The worst fear that I have about [members of this Church] is that they will get rich in this country, forget God and his people, wax fat, and kick themselves out of the Church and go to hell. This people will stand mobbing, robbing, poverty, and all manner of persecution, and be true. But my greater fear for them is that they cannot stand wealth; and yet they have to be tried with riches” (quoted in Preston Nibley, Brigham Young: The Man and His Work [1936], 128)."

 

That is far less than the total revenue

 

I hope the rich 

[cinepro]

 

Sure

 

Costco's average pay, for example, is $17 an hour, 42 percent higher than its rival, Sam's Club. 

 

Please see post 52 for the Math. 

 

 

 

One more thing that should be pointed out MFT.

 

In other threads, you sing the praises of scientists, and express frustration at people (especially LDS) who eschew scientific theories such as evolution on the basis of "faith" or belief.

 

So you should understand that businessmen are the scientists of business, and most of the people who are harping about minimum wages and how Walmart and other businesses operate are the business equivalents of creationists.  That's why they ignore you, the same way scientists ignore creationists.  Because your complaints and theories sound great, but they have no basis in reality. 

 

Just as creationists and other deniers don't actually do any experiments to prove their alternate theories, you (and everyone else who thinks businesses should pay more) don't go out and start businesses and run them, and hire people, and jump through the regulatory hoops, and get investors (or put your own money on the line), and get inventory or develop a service skill set.

[MormonFreeThinker]

So you should understand that businessmen are the scientists of business

 

Mitt Romney is a Harvard businessmen, he says, 

 

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865602791/Mitt-Romney-I-think-we-ought-to-raise-the-minimum-wage.html?pg=all

[cinepro]

Really? I though revenue was the total income after all the costs are accounted for. 

I admit it, I am ignorant about the subject.

 

"Revenue" is the money coming in (or "sales").  "Income" or "profit" is what is left after expenses. 

 

Here's how Wikipedia breaks it down (sales = revenue):

 

The various deductions (and their corresponding metrics) leading from Net sales to Net income are as follows:

Net sales = Gross sales – (Customer Discounts, Returns, Allowances)

Gross profit = Net sales – Cost of goods sold

Gross profit percentage = {(Net sales – Cost of goods sold)/Net sales} x 100

Operating Profit = Gross Profit – Total operating expenses

Net income (or Net profit) = Operating Profit – taxes – interest

Maybe here's another question we should ask in the discussion on "fairness". Walmart obviously brings in money at the cash registers. Now, at the end of the day, after all their costs and expenses are accounted for, how much do you think they should have left over as "profit"? Meaning, for each dollar, what percentage should Walmart (and businesses in general) be able to ethically make at the end of the day?

[Calm]

Profit would include any "salary" taken by owner or owners though given MFT's mindset perhaps he would deduct what he considers a decent wage to meet the needs and perhaps some luxury choices for the owners (many owners will take any money not needed to live on and put it back into the company at least in the beginning years until it is stable and productive), money invested back into the company for growth (I don't think that is covered by operating expenses), probably a few other things I can't think of right now and money given to investors as dividends (as opposed to repaying loans) and any other money laying around unclaimed.

Edited October 29, 2014 by calmoriah

[MormonFreeThinker]

. 

Edited October 29, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[MormonFreeThinker]

 

Maybe here's another question we should ask in the discussion on "fairness". Walmart obviously brings in money at the cash registers. Now, at the end of the day, after all their costs and expenses are accounted for, how much do you think they should have left over as "profit"? Meaning, for each dollar, what percentage should Walmart (and businesses in general) be able to ethically make at the end of the day?

 

I don't think CEOs should make 35 million dollars a year, but a hard working associate (with 2 other jobs) only 8.00 dollars an hour. The store manager makes about 100 thousand a year, the market manager makes more.  

 

Thank you for teaching me all of that, I am very ignorant about economics and business, but he doesn't seem to agree with you 

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865602791/Mitt-Romney-I-think-we-ought-to-raise-the-minimum-wage.html?pg=all

[sdc999]

I agree with MFT that the poor need better pay.  Now the question is:  How do they go about getting better pay?  Do they sit around at McDonalds or Walmart and 'wish' for better pay?  It seems that most do.  Why is it that an immigrant will come and pack into a house with 10 other people to get by?  They don't always get the best paying jobs either, but they seem to be willing to do what it takes to get by.  That's something Americans have lost over the years.  Did you earn it or is it an entitlement case.  "I deserve better pay."  Showing up for a job does not entitle you to better pay.  Don't like the job or the pay?  Two options:  1. Quit and have nothing.(not entirely true:  Our gov't is all too willing to help subsidize laziness)  2. Keep working until you can find a better paying job.  

I write about $350k-400k a year in payroll checks for my guys.  I do start out about $1 over min wage and cap around $10/hr for hourly guys.  I have had several come to me over the years wanting more.  I'm all for an employee bettering himself.  I give advice - 'go to the oilfields or pipeline.'  It pays double and sometimes triple what I pay.  The problem then arises that it would take them out of their comfort zone.  They would have to leave friends/family.    So What! 

 

People who say they cannot find jobs are usually not willing to sacrifice in order to better themselves.   Been laid off.  Got a little too comfortable with your lifestyle.  Get used to a new lifestyle and quit complaining. 

[MormonFreeThinker]

  I give advice - 'go to the oilfields or pipeline.'  It pays double and sometimes triple what I pay.  The problem then arises that it would take them out of their comfort zone.  They would have to leave friends/family.    So What! 

 

What would happen if all hard-working Walmart associates find a better job? What about single mothers? It is very hard to find another job, many Walmart employees have nowhere else to go. 

 

So what would happen if all hard-working associates find another job? Walmart (or any other business or factory) would only be left with teenagers and irresponsible associates (they get fired all the time), Walmart wouldn't like that. 

 

It is important to be with your family, especially the single mothers. 

 

"Honorable employment is useful. It provides goods or services which make the world a better place in which to live. Honorable employment is also remunerative. It provides enough income so that we may be self-sufficient and able to support our families, while leaving us enough time free to be good fathers and church workers."

- President Howard W Hunter 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/print/1975/10/prepare-for-honorable-employment?lang=eng

Edited October 29, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

One more thing that should be pointed out MFT.

 

In other threads, you sing the praises of scientists, and express frustration at people (especially LDS) who eschew scientific theories such as evolution on the basis of "faith" or belief.

 

So you should understand that businessmen are the scientists of business, and most of the people who are harping about minimum wages and how Walmart and other businesses operate are the business equivalents of creationists.  That's why they ignore you, the same way scientists ignore creationists.  Because your complaints and theories sound great, but they have no basis in reality. 

 

Just as creationists and other deniers don't actually do any experiments to prove their alternate theories, you (and everyone else who thinks businesses should pay more) don't go out and start businesses and run them, and hire people, and jump through the regulatory hoops, and get investors (or put your own money on the line), and get inventory or develop a service skill set.

I think you are on a roll here. I agree with this post too.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Profit would include any "salary" taken by owner or owners...

I am not sure if you are just throwing out a hypothetical or if you are asking a question or what. But a salary in any sense is never "profit". It is always an expense. And it doesn't matter whose salary it is. Salary = expense.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

The article compares a young cashier at Wendy's with a forklift operator who has been there for 19 years. I don't see that as a valid comparison. Draws the credibity of the rest into doubt.

And instead of comparing Wal-Mart with Costco, why not just use Sam's Club which eliminates a lot more variables due to different requirements of two very different styles of store.

It is as bad what the feminist use on the so called gender wage gap. They just can't be honest about they are comparing.

[The Nehor]

I agree with MFT that the poor need better pay. Now the question is: How do they go about getting better pay? Do they sit around at McDonalds or Walmart and 'wish' for better pay? It seems that most do. Why is it that an immigrant will come and pack into a house with 10 other people to get by? They don't always get the best paying jobs either, but they seem to be willing to do what it takes to get by. That's something Americans have lost over the years. Did you earn it or is it an entitlement case. "I deserve better pay." Showing up for a job does not entitle you to better pay. Don't like the job or the pay? Two options: 1. Quit and have nothing.(not entirely true: Our gov't is all too willing to help subsidize laziness) 2. Keep working until you can find a better paying job.

I write about $350k-400k a year in payroll checks for my guys. I do start out about $1 over min wage and cap around $10/hr for hourly guys. I have had several come to me over the years wanting more. I'm all for an employee bettering himself. I give advice - 'go to the oilfields or pipeline.' It pays double and sometimes triple what I pay. The problem then arises that it would take them out of their comfort zone. They would have to leave friends/family. So What!

People who say they cannot find jobs are usually not willing to sacrifice in order to better themselves. Been laid off. Got a little too comfortable with your lifestyle. Get used to a new lifestyle and quit complaining.

The problem is while that works for individuals it would not work if all the poor did it. Suppose tomorrow all minimum wage workers in the United States started going to college or trade schools to improve how much they make. In the end we will still need fast food workers and hotel maids and there would not be enough high dollar jobs to support all the newly qualified people. On an individual level I would encourage those not making much to strive for improvement but that will not eliminate poverty.

As to government subsidizing laziness most people who say that have never been in the welfare system. For most it is temporary and not lucrative. It is only permanent in most states if you are disabled enough that you cannot work (or can convince doctors you are not) and in most states it takes at least a year to start getting those benefits unless it is a clear-cut obvious case (like blindness).

I agree with an article linked above that Wal-Mart is the big welfare queen of America. They do not pay their employees enough and government programs take up the slack with food stamps, medical care, etc. Wal-Mart pays low wages but get employees that are not riddled with disease or malnourished because the taxpayers make up the difference. This is why I support minimum wage laws. You should not get most of an employee's working hours if you are not willing to pay them enough to reasonably live on.

There is no easy solution. The only solution I know of is to establish Zion but that is not easy.

Edited October 29, 2014 by The Nehor