How about costco charge a membership. That alone is like what $50 to $80 a year from each member? Small shops and Wal- mart don't charge a membership.

Small shops can't buy their products in bulk from suppliers to get a bulk discount while Costco can. Have you ever shop at Costco? All the stuff they sell is in bulk while Small business isn't. That's the main difference.

Not all at once - the increase is to be phased in over three-four years for companies with 500 or more employees nationally, seven years for smaller businesses... and of course, will ONLY apply within Seattle city limits. Since it just took effect this summer, it's a little soon to be using it as a "proof of concept".

And again we see the flaw in this whole "living wage" concept: if you can't afford to live in your current lifestyle, then maybe you should adjust your lifestyle, rather than insist that the government force your employer to pay you more than you're worth. That could mean moving from your Yaletown condo to a New West rental... might mean taking the bus or a bike instead of driving your Prius (with payments and insurance) the 15 blocks to your job at McDonalds. Maybe it means surviving with your iPhone 4 a couple more years instead of upgrading to the latest model the minute it comes out. Or maybe it means actually getting some skills and finding a job where you can EARN your worth. There are plenty of ways to live on less, it all comes down to personal choices and personal accountability.

Costco is like my second home. Go there all the time. Costco memberships costs nothing because we get 2% back until we reach $500 every year. Also not everything is in bulk at Costco. Walmart in the states competes directly with Costco with Sams club stores.

^^ Not every gets the 2% back like you. Also this is not the states is Vancouver.

Everyone can get 2% back just have to upgrade there membership.

Arkansas minimum wage $6.25 B.C. minimum wage 10.25. Walmart makes a profit in both places.

$110 for Executive vs. $55. You have to spend $2750 to make back that $55. Not really worth it for a lot of people.

DO let us know when you factor in all the other operating costs besides wages... :concentrate:

if you don’t earn enough of a rebate to cover the cost of the upgrade Costco will refund you the difference.

Of course I've shopped at Costco, I have a membership. I still don't understand how Costco selling their products in bulk, and charging a small membership fee makes them such a different company profitability-wise from an example like Walmart. You are also not taking into account the price control measures a company the size of Walmart is able to enforce on their providers, that Costco simply does not have the size to do.

Do you really think these two businesses are so different? Do you really think if Walmart was forced to increase the bare minimum wage for their employees that their profitability would completely tank?

I highly doubt it. I'm still not seeing a core argument here. Walmart could easily pay their employees more, but they don't, plain and simple. I don't want this thread to turn into a blame Walmart-fest, as it shouldn't be, Walmart is simply conducting their business the way the market is allowing them to do so. There are times when government intervention is required to push the common good, as the market will not.

Like I said minimum wage of course does not fix the issue, but if you're against it, what are some other options to fix the problem, and please not the typical "Get an education, and get a better job", because for many, that simply isn't an option.

They've never refunded the difference for me.. they just send the costco cash card in the mail at the time of renewal but if its only $30 you still pay the remaining balance to renew, did I miss something all these years??:heckno:

Costco gets their profitability from their bulk purchasing power. They also try not to carry multiple brands or varieties where the item is basically the same, except, of course, their Kirkand brand. With this strategy, Costco is also able to enforce pricing with their suppliers, like that time where they canned Coca Cola over pricing. It took less than a month for Coke to come crawling back.

They ARE different. Different business models, different target demographics. Different staffing requirements.

As Presto points out, Costco don't carry anywhere near the variety of different products Walmart does. They don't carry a shit-ton of lowest-common-denominator crap. The store IS the warehouse for a lot of product, so they don't need to keep it all somewhere else and continuously truck merchandise to the retail end.

Costco don't put all their stores on prime real estate - how much do you figure Walmart pays in rent to anchor all the malls they're in? Their buildings are much plainer, with less money spent on making the stores themselves "pretty". The wide-open spaces and lack of drop ceilings means broader, more efficient lighting can be used... minimizes the need to pipe HVAC everywhere... etc. etc., all things that reduce construction and operating costs.

Walmart also employ people who probably wouldn't make the cut at Costco, or most other retailers. Face it, the limited abilities of many Walmart employees is the butt of many jokes, but at least Walmart is providing them paying jobs, probably taking a hit to the bottom line in the process. So you want to force them to pay these people more, "just because"? Props to them for being good community members in that way, but yes, it's something else that means Walmart probably has higher operating costs.

So other than being big sprawling buildings selling stuff to consumers... no, there really isn't a direct comparison between the two.

pretty sure you have to go in and talk to them to get the refund, its not automatic

good to know! thanks

Here's my view. The places with lower minimum wages/none has always ended up with the greatest wealth inequality. While I don't think people earning minimum wages deserve more, it's one way of forcing increased sharing of wealth that would otherwise go to the wealthy.

For the business owners who say they will cut employees, I'm gonna call their bluff. You cut productivity, you cut income. If you can afford to cut staff and still run fine, then you never needed them to begin with.

If you're the owner of a small business, more likely you just pick up the slack yourself, to stay afloat.

RAISE MINIMUM WAGE TO 100 BUCKS AN HOUR!!!

that way all the hard working people will leave, and then vancouver will suck, and then all the immigrant buyers will leave and panic sell their properties, and then you guys can all afford a place to stay!!!

what a great idea.

Why isn't the real estate thread up when this thread is up? hahaha....

i agree that no one should settle for minimum wage for a living/career
what about the immigrants that do not have their skills/credentials from back home recognized by Canadian employers/governing bodies? That's one group that I always feel bad for just slaving away at a min wage.

Well if you are immigrating to a different country wouldn't you want to know if the skills/credentials you got back at your home country can be applied or be recognize in the country you are moving to? After all moving to another country is a big life event especially when you have a family.

Which means they never needed them to begin with, thus proving my point. They just didn't think their time was worth the pennies they paid the employees.

anyone else think seattle is more expensive than vancouver?? maybe the downtown areas? lol

exactly!
that will force more corporates to move their plants / factory to Asia countries like Vietnam & India, which makes the situation even worse.

the rest of you keep yammering on about this and that but LP700's post pretty much sums the entire topic. its stupid.

didnt go to school? too bad for you. start at the bottom somewhere and work your way up. work 2 jobs to get by.. do what you fucking have too. theres no excuse to be broke or poor in the americas unless you've got physical or mental illnesses preventing you from working.

No, it means they sacrifice time with their families to go back to working 14-16 hours a day instead of only 8-10 hours a day.

Lots of companies out there hire entry level positions and hire , say, 4-5 unskilled workers to do the work of 3-4. If those workers are going to cost the company more, the company is going to scale back the work force to 3-4 quality workers and work them harder. So now 1-2 positions will be eliminated. Scale that up to every company and what will that due to unemployment rates?

And to answer your earlier post, trimming employees doesn't reduce productivity, in a good company it INCREASES productivity. You force the whole company to pick up the slack for the smaller work force, everyone works harder, and the boss makes more money.

Maybe.. BUT customer service deteriorates, the job I'm at currently has terrible service because we're understaffed and the owner won't hire someone else on when really it's just losing him money in the long run. We're losing A LOT of good customers daily. I get atleast 20 complaints a week about how poor our customer service is for example people leave voicemails, emails, etc without getting a response and it's not because people are lazy or don't want to help them. It's strictly because they're so swamped dealing with everything else that they can't possibly multitask anymore than they already are and the whole thing can be avoided by just hiring a few more people on.