WaPo Buries: Minimum Wage Increase Cost Inner-City DC Two Walmart Stores
The Washington Post headline screams, “District leaders furious Walmart breaking promise to build stores in poor neighborhoods.” So you would think that the primary reason behind the so-called broken promise would be near the top of the story, correct? Well, not if you’re reading the Washington Post when the reason for the broken promise is inconvenient to one of the Left’s favorite narratives — the minimum wage.
On top of three current D.C. Walmart stores already doing worse than expected, Walmart is backing out of the other two because the cost of doing business in DC is just too high. The DC minimum wage is already an inflated $11.50 an hour, and that could jump to $15 in November. Naturally the left-wing Washington Post buries that inconvenient news under more than a dozen paragraphs:
Evans said that, behind closed doors, Walmart officials were more frank about the reasons the company was downsizing. He said the company cited the District’s rising minimum wage, now at $11.50 an hour and possibly going to $15 an hour if a proposed ballot measure is successful in November. He also said a proposal for legislation requiring D.C. employers to pay into a fund for family and medical leave for employees, and another effort to require a minimum amount of hours for hourly workers were compounding costs and concerns for the retailer.
“They were saying, ‘How are we going to run the three stores we have, let alone build two more?’?” Evans said.
Thanks to the Left’s stupid economic policies, hundreds of jobs that would have paid $7.25 an hour and up, are now gone. Hundreds of people in DC’s inner-cities that would have had work will now make nothing. More.
Reality check: File under: The early stages of the post-employment society. Demands for a minimum wage are an easy banner to rally a crowd under. Few will stop to consider that the situation is fundamentally different today from what it was a century ago.
A century ago, a higher minimum wage gave more buying power to lower income people, resulting in a broader distribution of (once deemed) luxury goods. Today, it merely hastens the pace of automation.
WalMart might act upset, but probably isn’t really. WalMart Canada, for example, is moving fast toward “order online and enjoy home delivery.” The clerk who might have had a high minimum wage—if she still had a job—is not the company’s responsibility but the taxpayers’.
It’s the same principle as with the US Chamber of Commerce encouraging amnesty. New immigrants will keep costs down by accepting low wage jobs. Once those jobs are automated, the former workers will not be the companies’ expense but the taxpayers.
Aren’t companies taxpayers? Yes, but if they are big enough they can manipulate, scheme, and deal on a much more equal basis with government. Their execs probably hold their assets safely offshore.
I doubt that much can be done about the trend as such. My concerns are
1. A growth in pointless public disorder. People who, decades ago, would have worked and acquired status and property that they didn’t want to lose will have little to do but develop and vent grievances.
2. Concurrently, we will see a reduction in civil liberties, as opposed to freedom to act out. The bong pipe everywhere, but only small, tightly monitored “free speech” zones.
Both trends are now well established at universities, which train our future leaders.
My guess is that intellectual freedom—which was won by people who did not depend on government to fed, clothe, house, and vet them—will not survive the post-employment society. My concern is not to “stop” all this (probably no one can) but to help those who do not want to be a part of it find a civilized way of life in its midst.
See also: Will robots take all jobs? No. But a great many.
But who actually needs Millennials? Except for votes?
Will the junior jackboots of Asshat U finally get “justice”? (Yes, but read on … )