>for their effort, training, experience, etc. may not be such
>a bad idea but the real world doesn't work that way. Do you
>think there's anything particularly challenging in Britney
>Spears' work? Do you think a trained monkey would have a
>hard time playing Nelly for a day? People get paid shit at
>WalMart because WalMart can get away with paying people
>shit, plain and simple.

in america people are paid their value which is completely fair since no one forces people to work there. (unlike a socialist/communist country) if 18,000 is what walmart believes most of their employees are worth, and their employees agree to the pay then its fair and their value has been established.
>
>With the industrial base in America declining dramatically
>there are only so many jobs that someone without a college
>degree or technical accreditation can do. Correct me if I'm
>wrong, but I believe WalMart is the largest single employer
>in the US. As such, it has a moral responsibility to pay
>its employees a living wage, regardless of minimum wage
>laws. What we need is a return to the Keynesian ideals of a
>living wage and full employment in order to take full
>advantage of the human resources in this great country of
>yours.

moral responsiblity? not everyone shares the same moral preception as you and that is allowed and that is why i love living here. again, no one forces people to work at walmart. god bless capitalism.
>
>Paying people only enough to survive at the basest level is
>economically inefficient. The US rates sixteenth among
>industrialized nations on the UN's Human Poverty Index;
>given its massive natural resource advantages and lack of
>enemies it should be number one. Paying people shit at
>WalMart is a symptom of a much larger problem.

ineffeciant for whom?