One of the few major corporations doing well during the recession is Wal-Mart. But most Chicago aldermen--49 of the 50 are Democrats--led by anti-Wal-Mart zealot Joe Moore, oppose opening more Wal-Marts in the city, unless the retail-giant pays its workers what unions, including SEIU, deem a "living wage."But Democrats love to punish success, while they see no problem with coddling failures, such as the automobile industry. Crain's Chicago Business has more:
Proponents who want to see more Wal-Marts in Chicago point to a report that says the chain’s first, and so far only, city store has generated $10.3 million in sales tax revenue in its first two years.
The report card, released Wednesday, showed that $5.3 million came in the second year, and half of that amount benefited the city, Regional Transportation Authority and Cook County.
"Wal-Mart has proven to be an incredible economic engine for the West Side of Chicago," Alderman Emma Mitts (37th) said about the store, which opened in her ward in the Austin neighborhood in 2006. Her office compiled the report.
The report revives an ongoing battle over whether the Bentonville, Ark.-based retail giant should be allowed to open more stores in the city. So far, that idea has been met with much resistance from unions and some aldermen. The retailer has faced a parade of setbacks since City Council allies in 2006 narrowly defeated a proposed measure, known as the "big-box" minimum wage law, that would have required Wal-Mart and other retailers to pay employees more than smaller shops.
Since I regularly write about Wal-Mart, I feel it is important that I comment on the tragic incident at the Long Island Wal-Mart in which a temporary employee was trampled to death at a "Black Friday" sale. I'd like to declare that I hate these limited-quantity panic sales. I hope Wal-Mart ends the practice, and the same goes for Best Buy and all the others.
Technorati tags:
Joe Moore 
politics 
Chicago 
illinois 
Wal-Mart 
Business 
SEIU 
unions 
labor
3 comments:
It is absurd to single out Wal-Mart for paying wages determined by the marketplace. Small retailers and large (and all businesses) across the city can and do pay employees based on the cost of attracting and keeping a staff while also running a profitable business. What is the imaginary difference that makes Wal-Mart an exception?
The cost of these government pay-setting schemes isn't just lost tax revenue. The cost comes in more expensive goods for consumers and in lost jobs for the people who need jobs the most--those on the lower rungs of the economic ladder.
This is true.
Merry Christmas.
Post a Comment