That wage is part of the reason why there are 30 check out lines at a target and 1 cashier.
Confirmation bias is a harsh mistress.
Why is it people speak of harsh mistresses as if they’re a bad thing?
Can you find any other Confirmation bias in this thread?..it is funny you waited to post 21 to identify it.
Your claim is that a dollar an hour is the difference between running 30 checkout lanes and one?
If they ran all 30, it would cost them $30 an hour more. That is not a significant figure. If that causes one person to go somewhere else due to long lines, they have lost money. (And that is to open all 30)
The reason that they only have one checkout lane is because for the particular time of day, they only need one. If they need more, but don’t have them open, that is because they cannot attract enough employees at that wage.
The reason that they have 30 lanes, is because sometimes, like around christmas or other holidays, they actually need all of them open. For that, they schedule more people,. pay overtime, even hire seasonal employees.
Do you really expect them to have all 30 lanes open 24/7? And do you really think that the only reason they aren’t running them all is because of the employees wages?
Quite probably. Why do you ask? And kindly explain the funny?
So this is trickle down?
Why do I ask? The answer affects my view of the comment, nothing more than that.
The funny is a compilation of many thoughts that went through my mind when I read your comment. Interesting, weird, I wonder, hmmm…
I was attempting to read between the lines, which is more challenging when it is just one line.
My Targets have plenty of cashiers, thanks. So does my CostCo.
I only go to Wally’s World if I absolutely have to, but the last time I went there seemed quite a shortage of cashiers. But I go only every couple of years.
I’m in Silicon Valley, and it wouldn’t surprise me if Target paid more than $11 to get people.
Wrong. The self check out lines are full with a long line and there are 8 self check out registers. There is one sometimes 2 cashiers in the other 30 lines. Why? Self-check out is free. Practically.
And no, I don’t expect 30 staffed lines with 5 customers. But if you think that less cashiers and more self check out has nothing to do with the cost of labor I don’t know what to say.
I do think it’s funny that every time minimum wage is discussed many people on this board and in other left wing dominated areas think supply and demand has nothing to do with it. Yet when the cost of labor, somehow magically, surpasses minimum wage for the majority of workers they are confounded as to why or they mumble something about tight labor market. Which is supply and demand.
Sure they have to do with the cost of labor. If the cost of labor is significantly above zero, they will make sense. Cut the MW by $1, and you think they will disappear?
In my grocery anyhow they can put 4 self checkouts in the space where one regular checkout can go - so that is another advantage.
Kimberly-Clark, in a moment of honesty, says it will use its tax cut savings to pay for layoffs.
Yes, which is why Democrats are so frantic to deny that it is happening.
Unfortunately, to some degree they are putting themselves into the same bind as they did back when Reagan was President.
[ul][li]You didn’t get a bonus last year.[/li][li]The tax bill passed.[/li][li]You did get a bonus this year.[/li][li]The company said it was because of the tax bill.[/ul]Democrats simply deny all of this. “None of this happened, and it doesn’t count if it did, and even if it did, it didn’t. Who are you going to believe - me, or your own lying eyes?” [/li]
The Democrat spin is that Republican policies have only bad effects. If anything good happens as a result, it didn’t happen and it wasn’t a result. Followed by a cite from some left-wing fruitcake who repeats the Democrat spin.
Early days yet, but it is looking more and more like Trump will be re-elected rather than impeached.
Regards,
Shodan
“Trickle down economics” is, too, faith-based spin. There is little empirical evidence it works, and the theoretical math of the Laffer curve works best in highly-progressive tax environments with multiple tax brackets.
Since we do not have that, it’s a bunch of bullshit.
Do you mean the restructuring plan that has been in the works since before the tax cut was passed? The one that is due to lower sales of diapers and such because of declining birth rates?
Since this thread is confusing annual and Christmas bonuses with bonuses from unrealized tax cuts, yes. 
But, seriously, here is the CFO herself:
““We also anticipate ongoing annual cash-flow benefits from tax reform,” Kimberly-Clark Chief Financial Officer Maria Henry said on the call. “That provides us flexibility to continue to allocate significant capital to shareholders, while we also fund increased capital spending and our restructuring program over the next few years.””
Not seeing a lot of “hiring”, “bonuses”, or “raises” in that statement. Seeing “restructuring” and “shareholders”, to be honest.
Trickle down is what happens when you get pissed upon.
Ah, those pesky shareholders. If the shareholders receive a payout, they’re going to be paying taxes on dividends and/or capital gains, returning money to the federal government. And then, since they’re investors, they are likely to either invest elsewhere, or spend, the rest. They are not likely stick the money under the mattress.
Self check out is there because many customers want it. I prefer it over check out lanes. It may be marginally cheaper, but you still have at least one, and usually two people who are overseeing 6-8 self check out. If they were all staffed with employees, then that adds less than $100 an hour to the labor cost.
If they were paying say, $5 an hour, and staffing 8 checkout lanes, they would be paying $40 an hour. At $11 an hour, they are paying $88 an hour. Is it your contention that the increase of labor of $48 an hour (at a ridiculous extreme, going from far below MW, while maintaining full staffing) is the reason that they have self checkout?
It is only funny to you because you do not actually understand what is being said. You laugh at things going over your head. Supply and demand has everything to do with it. You even admit that the reason for it is a tightening labor market. It is not mumbled, there is no confusion. It is not magic, it is the consequence of a growing and expanding economy that has been growing and expanding since 2009, when we started pulling out of the recession.
If target is having staffing problems, it is not because they are not willing to fill the positions that need filling, it is because they cannot attract enough employees at the offered wage, which is why they have to offer higher wages. It is not that because wages are “magically” so high that they refuse to hire enough employees to staff their stores.
The taxes that they pay are generally going to be a lower percentage than an employee of the company, so if the money went to workers instead, they are going to pay taxes on it, and probably more, especially once you have figured in payroll taxes, and even more so, once you figure in sales taxes on the other side.
As far as investing, really? What investments? There are not enough places to invest your money. That’s why banks are sitting on trillions of dollars they are begging people to borrow. Try buying a CD, the very best ones are paying almost a half percent these days, most are paying like .15% or so. That’s why the stock market’s price is getting so overly inflated these days. It is not because the companies are worth more, it is because people don’t have anywhere else to put their money.
Your argument works when we are in a supply shortage. When there is not enough being produced to keep up with demand. When there isn’t enough investment monies to fund the expansion of capital to increase production to meet increased demand. There are times when top-down works.
This is not one of them. All indications show that money in the hands of those who will spend it in the economy will do more to improve the economy than putting it in the hands of those who will use it to further inflate the stock market bubble.
Complaints from the opposition about bonuses and pay raises being too little to matter are reminiscent of the classic restaurant gripe - i.e. that the food stinks, and even worse, the portions are too small.
Better to emphasize the barf-fest that will occur some years down the road, after the special interest-stuffing proves indigestible.