Walmart Enjoying 6.2 billion in subsidies

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,303
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net
For comparison, let's start with Costco, a unionized company:

http://www.businessinsider.com/costco-ceo-supports-minimum-wage-hike-2013-3

Yeah, Costco's employees are paid by Member dues as 70% of the company's operating income comes from them.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/markets/2013/12/02/why-costco-is-beating-wal-mart/3691555/

Unlike Wal-Mart, Costco uses a paid-membership business model. Customers need to become Costco members in order to purchase merchandise at discounted price, paying at least $55 per year for the membership. This allows Costco to collect most of its profits 12 months in advance. Roughly 70% of the company's operating income is generated in this way.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,669
8
0
Wrong.

http://livingwage.mit.edu/counties/51600

Your silly example of the middle of nowhere where cost of living is unusually low does not apply globally. Also, average is not a synonym for minimum. Many employees are paid less than the average. Apparently 1% are even paid minimum wage.

Pretty sure Minneapolis is not the middle of no where. And last time I looked it up actually had a higher than median cost of living.
 

Chiropteran

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2003
9,811
110
106
If Walmart pays their workers, which there are no shortage of right now

Why isn't there a shortage of workers?

Do you have any idea?

I'll give you a hint: it's because Walmart workers can survive thanks to government handouts.

If working at Walmart made you ineligible to receive assistance, the workers wouldn't do it.

Remove the government hands outs, and Walmart workers wouldn't be able to make it. Walmart would actually have to pay a reasonable wage.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
This just in. Working a cash register will not give you enough money to support a family of 4 without Government help.

This! Since when does the most unskilled of unskilled labor provide wages that are high?

Also, Walmart isn't a charity. They exist to make profits. That it is. If Walmart pays their workers, which there are no shortage of right now, more, they either raise prices or take a profit it. Guess which one is more likely? And, then people will cry about the prices and Walmart leading the march against the middle class!

They taught you that all through school. They even try to incorporate some vocational schooling in there as well to keep you from having to resort to that kind of work. Woodshop, metal shop, small engine repair. LOL, we even had cosmetology in our shit hole school. I guess it's just easier to ignore all the advice you given since you were a child and just blame it on the corporations. I guess it would be the equivalent of smoking your whole life and then blaming your lung cancer on global warming.
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,569
7,013
136
Here was the chart comparing Walmart and Costco which clearly explains why Costco can pay higher wages:

1353972586639.cached.png

Thanks for providing the chart. It was a good read.

However, the bottom line that I get from the chart and the article I linked to is that Costco is willing to derive a much lower profit margin than Walmart to pay their employees a much better wage, which speaks volumes about where Walmart's priorities lie.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
You should also assign some of this public assistance to the cost of implementing ACA or Obama Care. A lot of people working at part time jobs had their jobs cut to 15-20 hours a week due to the regulations in Obama Care. The ACA is increasing poverty.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,243
48,431
136
You should also assign some of this public assistance to the cost of implementing ACA or Obama Care. A lot of people working at part time jobs had their jobs cut to 15-20 hours a week due to the regulations in Obama Care. The ACA is increasing poverty.

So businesses have shortened people to part time to comply with a regulation that's never been implemented? Fascinating. Tell me more!
 

Chiropteran

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2003
9,811
110
106
Pretty sure Minneapolis is not the middle of no where. And last time I looked it up actually had a higher than median cost of living.

It absolutely is. Minnesota is pretty much nowhere. Does anyone go there? No.

It also doesn't even support your argument. While the living wage for a single adult is just barely less than the *average* walmart pay, it's almost certainly above the actual pay for a very large portion of employees who make below the average, and it's absolutely much higher for anyone with any dependents.
 

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,303
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net
Remove the government hands outs, and Walmart workers wouldn't be able to make it. Walmart would actually have to pay a reasonable wage.

No, they would just find people who can make it on the wages that are paid as they are single and/or their spouse works another job. It isn't Walmarts fault that people make bad life decisions and have children they can't afford.
 

blake0812

Senior member
Feb 6, 2014
788
4
81
No, they would just find people who can make it on the wages that are paid as they are single and/or their spouse works another job. It isn't Walmarts fault that people make bad life decisions and have children they can't afford.

That makes sense, I worked at Walmart for a couple of months, my wage was 9.80 per hour and I don't have kids or a spouse. Many people I worked with were married, or had kids to support, though.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,243
48,431
136
Thanks for providing the chart. It was a good read.

However, the bottom line that I get from the chart and the article I linked to is that Costco is willing to derive a much lower profit margin than Walmart to pay their employees a much better wage, which speaks volumes about where Walmart's priorities lie.

He was also wrong for the most recent year.

http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com...374-160495&type=sect&dcn=0001445305-13-002422

I'm pretty sure he's trying to compare after tax profits to membership fees, which is a clear no-no.
 

AViking

Platinum Member
Sep 12, 2013
2,264
1
0
This just in. Working a cash register will not give you enough money to support a family of 4 without Government help.

As of 2008 there were 3,362,000 in the USA. That's about 2.8% of the workforce.

Food for thought.
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,297
352
126
For comparison, let's start with Costco, a unionized company:

http://www.businessinsider.com/costco-ceo-supports-minimum-wage-hike-2013-3

Costco employs less people per dollar of revenue they earn than walmart, and they employ less people per sqft of stores.

So do you want walmart to lay off approximately half their retail work force so that the half that remains can get paid better? Because that's what a union would do.

But now what to do with the extra 1m employees out of work. Maybe they can join an unemployed union and collectively bargain with the government for better pay.....
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
Pretty sure he is looking at after tax profits. The SEC filings are extremely clear. He's wrong.

You will have to explain this liberal math to me. A company that only made $1.7 Billion in profit can have $2 Billion less in revenue and still make a profit?
 

Zaap

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2008
7,162
424
126
Wow. Someone is ringing all the left's Pavlovian bells today!
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Why isn't there a shortage of workers?

Do you have any idea?

I'll give you a hint: it's because Walmart workers can survive thanks to government handouts.

If working at Walmart made you ineligible to receive assistance, the workers wouldn't do it.

Remove the government hands outs, and Walmart workers wouldn't be able to make it. Walmart would actually have to pay a reasonable wage.

So you're against gov't handouts?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,243
48,431
136
You will have to explain this liberal math to me. A company that only made $1.7 Billion in profit can have $2 Billion less in revenue and still make a profit?

Well, "liberal math" looks at profit before income taxes when trying to see if Costco would have still made money without membership fees because income taxes are based on... get this... your income. If Costco made $2 billion less in income due to a lack of membership fees, they would have paid a lot less in income taxes.

All of this information is located in the SEC filings I linked to. Sounds like you could use some liberal math, huh?
 

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,024
79
86
You will have to explain this liberal math to me. A company that only made $1.7 Billion in profit can have $2 Billion less in revenue and still make a profit?

I would say yes, but not nearly as much. Making $2 billion less in total revenue will equate to them paying less in taxes, thus it is possible they would still make a profit. However, it would be considerably lower.
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,297
352
126
Thanks for providing the chart. It was a good read.

However, the bottom line that I get from the chart and the article I linked to is that Costco is willing to derive a much lower profit margin than Walmart to pay their employees a much better wage, which speaks volumes about where Walmart's priorities lie.

If you apply Costco's profit margin to Walmart, and give 100% of that to employees. Which would be $8b given to 2.1m you get something like $3,840 per employee, which is like $1.50 an hour.

Is $1.50 an hour in employee compensation, not take-home pay really the only difference between Walmart and Costco? No.

Walmart employs A LOT more people than they probably have to, because they cater to minimum wage workers that don't want to work as hard or be as productive as the costco employees, or even sam's club for that matter.

So if you want to get even remotely close to the same level of pay, you have to get rid of employees, make the remaining work harder, and then you can pay them more.

So Wal-Mart should lay off half its workforce and be nice and lean like Costco right?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,243
48,431
136
I would say yes, but not nearly as much. Making $2 billion less in total revenue will equate to them paying less in taxes, thus it is possible they would still make a profit. However, it would be considerably lower.

You can look at their SEC filings and pretty much estimate exactly what they would have made. They made about $2.7 billion in profits with about $2 billion in membership fees. They also paid a corporate income tax rate of about 35%.

Minus the membership fees they would have paid about $245 million in income taxes and made about $500 million in profit. Unless you're paying more than 100% in income taxes, it's not possible for income taxes to take you from a profit to a loss.
 

Chiropteran

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2003
9,811
110
106
No, they would just find people who can make it on the wages that are paid as they are single and/or their spouse works another job.

Well now you are just making stuff up. Where are those people now, why aren't they already working at Walmart? My theory: they aren't interested in working at all, at least not for the current wages offered by Walmart.

It isn't Walmarts fault that people make bad life decisions and have children they can't afford.

You are correct. It also isn't Walmart's fault if it rains. It's not Walmart's fault when an online video game lags. And it isn't Walmart's fault when you lose a call due to poor cellular service. But I must ask: why do you even bother mentioning such an irrelevant fact?


So you're against gov't handouts?

I'm against government handouts for a corporation that is making plenty of profit. That doesn't mean that there shouldn't ever be some sort of government assistance for some people in some situations.