COVID Economy

[warriorchick]

Wisconsin reinstating the requirement that one has to actively look for work while collecting unemployment:

https://www.fox6now.com/news/republicans-want-work-search-requirement-reinstated-in-wisconsin

[Dr. Blackheart]

More robots

[MU82]

The NYT asked a bunch of experts about the effect of UE benefits on jobs going unfilled ...

+++

In the past few weeks, 22 states have announced they would end federal pandemic unemployment benefits, which pay recipients $300 on top of state benefits and are scheduled to extend into September. (New Hampshire is the latest.)

Many of the states’ governors, all Republicans, made statements similar to that of Gov. Henry McMaster of South Carolina, who said the expanded benefits are “incentivizing and paying workers to stay at home rather than encouraging them to return to the workplace.” The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said the same.

Businesses of all types report that they are having trouble hiring despite high unemployment. But are expanded unemployment benefits really to blame?

We asked experts in economics, recruiting and other fields what’s making it hard for many U.S. businesses to hire right now — and what they can do to fix it.

Aaron Sojourner: ‘The labor market remains sick with the virus’
Mr. Sojourner is a labor economist and an associate professor at the Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota.

Are expanded unemployment payments to blame for apparent labor shortages?

The labor market remains sick with the virus, affecting both supply and demand. The virus reduces the value of jobs to workers — by making many jobs riskier for workers and their loved ones and less pleasant if policing customers — and reduces the value of jobs to many employers because they haven’t been able to serve as many customers per worker. Further, the value of being home increased both because of increased child, elder and sick care responsibilities and additional unemployment insurance benefits. What’s being called a labor shortage is still a health shortage, a wage shortage and a care shortage.

Sensible theories tell us that unemployment insurance levels could reduce workers’ job search intensity, but well-done studies found that wasn’t really the case in 2020. Demand may be rising faster than supply but things are changing fast, systematic data is slow, and so anyone who tells you they know exactly what’s happening in America broadly now is wrong.

What else is going on here?

Assuming employed, essential workers were more likely to get vaccinated earlier, the non-vaccinated rate is substantially higher for working-age Americans who are not working. My analysis of census data shows that, in January through March, for every 10 percent of working-age people vaccinated, about 1 percent more became employed. Our working-age employment rate remains about three percentage points down from February 2020. If this relationship continued to hold as we vaccinate the next 30 percent of working-age Americans, the remaining employment gap could close. It’s not that simple, but I do think that it suggests that public health remains the first-order issue.

For employers with some flexibility in setting wages, they may not raise wage offers to new hires because internal equity then pressures for raises to incumbents and that reduces their profit. These employers will feel like they want to hire, but not so much that they will raise wage offers enough to attract candidates. They will cry about labor shortages but not compete hard.

What can companies do to attract workers?

First, make the job better. Improve wages, benefits, training, safety and respect. Ensure every supervisor treats employees with respect. Are any consistently experiencing higher turnover in their unit?

Second, promote public health by taking coronavirus precautions. This will help everyone and reassure workers who’ve stayed out of the labor market due to health concerns.

Third, be more transparent about what the job offers. Many managers post vague job openings in order to preserve their bargaining flexibility, so they can make a tailored offer after learning about a specific candidate’s circumstances. However, vague vacancy descriptions can lead to two kinds of expensive errors. First, some people who would be a good fit don’t apply because they can’t recognize that the job would be a good fit. Second, people who would not be a good fit apply because the ad is not clear and then the manager has to waste time interfacing with them.

Tsedal Neeley: ‘People are not merely financial engines’
Ms. Neeley is a professor at Harvard Business School and the author of “Remote Work Revolution: Succeeding From Anywhere.”

Are expanded unemployment payments to blame for apparent labor shortages?

Context matters. People are not merely financial engines. We are still in the middle of a pandemic even though we are seeing significant improvements. Nearly every facet of people’s work and nonwork lives has been upended. For many people, support systems that were in place for child and elder care have disappeared.

What else is going on here?

Caretaking responsibilities are coupled with the fear and anxiety wrought by the contagious virus. Even those who are currently employed are hesitant to return to their workplaces immediately. It takes time to secure workplaces and give people confidence that they will be safe.

What can companies do to attract workers?

Companies can leverage flex time, the greatest gift that remote work offers. To be able to say in job searches that “mode of work is flexible” will help attract and retain workers.

A hallmark of virtual work — autonomy — allows for a degree of control over one’s working conditions and processes. Pragmatically, this means offering candidates the opportunity to segment their day as they wish, provided they are available for synchronous and asynchronous collaborative efforts.

Autonomy does not mean giving employees free rein to do whatever they want. Even if they are out of sight, remote workers are still accountable to their teammates, project goals and productivity agreements. Nor is autonomy equivalent to isolation. Employees still need leadership, guidance, feedback and connection.

Steven Rattner: ‘Government transfers only tell part of the story’
Mr. Rattner, a contributing opinion writer for The Times, led the auto industry task force during the Obama administration.

Are expanded unemployment payments to blame for apparent labor shortages?

While a variety of factors are at work, expanded unemployment benefits and stimulus payments have doubtless played a role. Though jobless benefits vary from state to state, in most parts of the country, unemployment insurance can result in higher earnings for some members of the work force than taking a job. In Pennsylvania, for example, the extra $300 per week from the federal government on top of the state benefit raises a minimum wage earner’s weekly pay by more than 50 percent. Pennsylvania residents who make close to the median hourly wage will find themselves with as much pretax income as they had when they were working. In addition, some of these earnings, as was the case for this past year, may go untaxed. All of that has led some Americans to choose to sit back and wait.

What else is going on here?

Government transfers only tell part of the story. While the economy has shed more than eight million jobs since February 2020, the overall labor force is also 3.5 million people smaller. Workers who have exited the labor force are by definition not receiving unemployment benefits (though they likely received stimulus payments), which suggests that other factors are also at play.

Many have chosen to retire somewhat earlier than expected. But others, especially mothers, have had to exit the labor force to take care of their children as schools remain closed for in-person learning. As with the expiration of expanded unemployment insurance, it will be interesting to see the extent to which the labor force grows once children are back in school and parents are no longer required at home. Ditto for those who chose not to work because of the public health crisis, as that concern recedes.

What can companies do to attract workers?

One way is the way they always have: with increased pay and incentives. In many ways, enhanced unemployment benefits are a backdoor to higher wages for those closer to the bottom. We saw an analogous situation before Covid-19, when unemployment was as low as 3.5 percent. Companies were forced to raise pay, and wage earners in the bottom quartile saw the fastest growth in pay. That trend may now be accelerating. For example, big retailers like Costco have been raising wages for entry-level applicants. That’s encouraging.


What the research says
Since the first pandemic relief bill — the CARES Act, which was passed in March 2020 — economists have studied how workers’ behavior has changed along with the value of extra federal unemployment benefits. Most researchers found that the payments didn’t have a big effect:

“We find no evidence that more generous benefits disincentivized work either at the onset of the expansion or as firms looked to return to business over time.” — Researchers at Yale used data from a company that provides scheduling software to small businesses to examine whether the $600 weekly supplement early in the pandemic led to increased layoffs or discouraged workers from returning to their jobs.

“Simple job search models predict a sharp decline in search in the wake of a substantial benefit expansion, followed by a sustained rebound when benefits expire. We instead find that the job-finding rate is quite stable.” — Researchers at the University of Chicago and JPMorgan Chase analyzed anonymized bank account data to assess the effects of the $600 supplement.

“I find little impact of job gains from the benefit reduction.” — Arindrajit Dube, an economist at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, used data from the weekly Census Household Pulse Survey to show how the end of the $600 supplement affected hiring trends.

“Over all, our evidence suggests that employers did not experience greater difficulty finding applicants for their vacancies after the CARES Act, despite the large increase in unemployment benefits.” — Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania, the New York Fed and Glassdoor analyzed job applications and vacancy listings data from December 2019 to June 2020.

But research that examined what happened in 2020 may not tell the full story of what is going on now, said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum. Research “unambiguously” finds that more generous unemployment insurance is linked with longer spells of unemployment, he said.

“We are increasingly, every day, coming closer to a more normal situation in the labor market, not driven by health concerns in the coronavirus,” he said. “And I’d want to look at evidence about behavior in those circumstances.”

+++

end article

[jesmu84]

https://www.kmaland.com/news/corporations-expanded-ceo-worker-pay-gap-during-pandemic/article_2c63ba88-b99f-11eb-a6f6-5bbf8f44184c.html

Ya. We should definitely force poor people back into underpaid jobs.

What happened to the idea of "at-will" employment? Why is the government stepping in to force people to work?

[JWags85]

https://www.kmaland.com/news/corporations-expanded-ceo-worker-pay-gap-during-pandemic/article_2c63ba88-b99f-11eb-a6f6-5bbf8f44184c.html

Ya. We should definitely force poor people back into underpaid jobs.

What happened to the idea of "at-will" employment? Why is the government stepping in to force people to work?

Are they forcing people to work or just enforcing UE benefits not being indefinite/unending?  You can argue that the lower paying jobs, that people are avoiding in favor of sticking with enhanced UE benefits, are underpaid and/or undesirable, but that’s a separate argument.  UE isn’t supposed to be a conduit to waiting for better or ideal jobs.

Among those still on enhanced UE, I’d be interested to see what percentage of people lost “good” jobs and don’t want to return to the workforce in a lower paying/undesirable job versus those who were in that sort of realm pre-pandemic and don’t want to return to it, especially when they can make similar through UE.

[jesmu84]

Are they forcing people to work or just enforcing UE benefits not being indefinite/unending?  You can argue that the lower paying jobs, that people are avoiding in favor of sticking with enhanced UE benefits, are underpaid and/or undesirable, but that’s a separate argument.  UE isn’t supposed to be a conduit to waiting for better or ideal jobs.

Among those still on enhanced UE, I’d be interested to see what percentage of people lost “good” jobs and don’t want to return to the workforce in a lower paying/undesirable job versus those who were in that sort of realm pre-pandemic and don’t want to return to it, especially when they can make similar through UE.

Enhanced benefits always had an end date.

[JWags85]

Enhanced benefits always had an end date.

Right.  So then I’m not sure how the government is “forcing” people to work.

[jesmu84]

Right.  So then I’m not sure how the government is “forcing” people to work.

The states ending the benefits early. Or the states cutting off benefits to someone who doesn't accept a job.

[rocky_warrior]

Or the states cutting off benefits to someone who doesn't accept a job.

That's the way unemployment has always been (to my knowledge).   1) you have to prove you're looking for work (exemptions were allowed due to pandemic). 2) Once you can get work, UE no longer pays.

I'm generally in favor of UE, and was in favor of the covid fed extensions.  But it can be true (and it is) that UE is necessary, and fed UE extensions are causing worker shortages. 

This seems like a decent compromise unless you want socialism, and then people are actually forced to work.

[jesmu84]

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/vQJ1wSQAHSI" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/vQJ1wSQAHSI</a>

[ZiggysFryBoy]

That's the way unemployment has always been (to my knowledge).   1) you have to prove you're looking for work (exemptions were allowed due to pandemic). 2) Once you can get work, UE no longer pays.

I'm generally in favor of UE, and was in favor of the covid fed extensions.  But it can be true (and it is) that UE is necessary, and fed UE extensions are causing worker shortages. 

This seems like a decent compromise unless you want socialism, and then people are actually forced to work.

Pretty sure jesmu does want socialism.

[jesmu84]

Pretty sure jesmu does want socialism.

I want something a hell of a lot better than what we have now - a mix of corporate welfare, oligarchy, trickle down policy, etc

[MU82]

That's the way unemployment has always been (to my knowledge).   1) you have to prove you're looking for work (exemptions were allowed due to pandemic). 2) Once you can get work, UE no longer pays.

I'm generally in favor of UE, and was in favor of the covid fed extensions.  But it can be true (and it is) that UE is necessary, and fed UE extensions are causing worker shortages. 

This seems like a decent compromise unless you want socialism, and then people are actually forced to work.

FWIW, we are in agreement.

[pbiflyer]

Strange, no mention of unemployment benefits causing lazy people.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/27/economy/retail-workers-child-care-best-buy/index.html
Best Buy CEO: These 4 challenges are why it's hard to hire workers right now

Excerpt:

"Even as sales are ramping up, Best Buy is seeing a dip in job applications —although it does still receivemore applications than it has open positions, Barry said.

There are four major reasons for this, she added.

The first is the ongoing struggle of parents dealing with children at home. "There is a real lack of childcare that still exists," Barry said.While the economy is in the process of fully reopening, some schools and day care centers don't yetoperate as they did pre-pandemic — so someworking parents are still being forced to balance their child care responsibilities with their jobs. That's even trickier for those who have to leave their homes to work.

Secondly, "there are still health concerns," Barry said. "And people who maybe don't want a career in retail due to health concerns."

Third, retail is among the jobs that have changed most heavily over the last year. At many companies staff members were turned into essential front-line workers overnight, as unlike those in other industries they couldn't work from home.

Finally, companies like Best Buy are facing more competition for staff. Major companies including Under Armour (UA), Amazon (AMZN) and Walmart (WMT), have raised their minimum wage to attract workers.And picking a job during these times is no longer just about money.

Now, said Barry, "it's about a wholesome set of benefits that we can put in place, and flexibility that we can put in place, so that we're able to retain a diverse workforce."

[JWags85]

Strange, no mention of unemployment benefits causing lazy people.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/27/economy/retail-workers-child-care-best-buy/index.html
Best Buy CEO: These 4 challenges are why it's hard to hire workers right now

Excerpt:

"Even as sales are ramping up, Best Buy is seeing a dip in job applications —although it does still receivemore applications than it has open positions, Barry said.

There are four major reasons for this, she added.

The first is the ongoing struggle of parents dealing with children at home. "There is a real lack of childcare that still exists," Barry said.While the economy is in the process of fully reopening, some schools and day care centers don't yetoperate as they did pre-pandemic — so someworking parents are still being forced to balance their child care responsibilities with their jobs. That's even trickier for those who have to leave their homes to work.

Secondly, "there are still health concerns," Barry said. "And people who maybe don't want a career in retail due to health concerns."

Third, retail is among the jobs that have changed most heavily over the last year. At many companies staff members were turned into essential front-line workers overnight, as unlike those in other industries they couldn't work from home.

Finally, companies like Best Buy are facing more competition for staff. Major companies including Under Armour (UA), Amazon (AMZN) and Walmart (WMT), have raised their minimum wage to attract workers.And picking a job during these times is no longer just about money.

Now, said Barry, "it's about a wholesome set of benefits that we can put in place, and flexibility that we can put in place, so that we're able to retain a diverse workforce."

Despite your snark, read between the lines.  There are many people who worked in those sort of roles, who now don’t want to work in them for a variety of reasons. Health concerns, thinking they want/need more flexibility, etc...

As was stated earlier in the thread, enhanced UE benefits make it far easier or less painful to wait it out or keep looking.  There was very little, if any, talk here at all about “lazy” being the reason people were choosing not to fill open jobs.  But if you can get not-unsubstantial sums due to UE, why go back or take a job you hate or feel you’re better than?

[jesmu84]

Despite your snark, read between the lines.  There are many people who worked in those sort of roles, who now don’t want to work in them for a variety of reasons. Health concerns, thinking they want/need more flexibility, etc...

As was stated earlier in the thread, enhanced UE benefits make it far easier or less painful to wait it out or keep looking.  There was very little, if any, talk here at all about “lazy” being the reason people were choosing not to fill open jobs.  But if you can get not-unsubstantial sums due to UE, why go back or take a job you hate or feel you’re better than?

Good.

Wage slavery is terrible for our country

[warriorchick]

Good.

Wage slavery is terrible for our country

So  having to work at a job one doesn't like is slavery?

[naginiF]

So  having to work at a job one doesn't like is slavery?

if the environment is such that the jobs salary is purposely kept near the poverty line and without benefits.......it may not be slavery but it is certainly purposely cruel and clearly something we should avoid.

[pbiflyer]

if the environment is such that the jobs salary is purposely kept near the poverty line and without benefits.......it may not be slavery but it is certainly purposely cruel and clearly something we should avoid.

Some people harken back to the days without labor laws, child workers, impossibly low wages, and ultra rich benefiting.
I suspect that if there is a higher being and one has to account for their beliefs at the end, saying I had more money and a better life and worked “harder” than those picking crops in the fields, it wouldn’t be the way to pass the entrance test.

[JWags85]

Some people harken back to the days without labor laws, child workers, impossibly low wages, and ultra rich benefiting.
I suspect that if there is a higher being and one has to account for their beliefs at the end, saying I had more money and a better life and worked “harder” than those picking crops in the fields, it wouldn’t be the way to pass the entrance test.

Way to add an absurd non-sequiter about child labor and “impossibly low wages” to the discussion obscure the point.

Best Buy, Target, other retailers are paying $15 an hour to start, the minimum wage level people are clamoring for, but they can’t fill jobs cause people don’t want to work retail.  It’s not child labor or working in the fields, but retail often sucks so people decide they don’t want to do it.  Which is made easier by increased UE. Asking people who often don’t have demonstrable skills or differentiation to work retail instead of remaining jobless isn’t cruel and wage slavery. Stop acting like the only options are $8 an hour part time work.  “Don’t want to” is being blended into “shouldn’t have to”.  I didn’t realize every job in democratic socialist utopias like Scandinavia were enriching and fun and super well paying. Nobody works retail there unless they truly want to, and then they receive a King’s ransom

Restaurant and tipping culture is a different argument entirely, I’m firmly in favor of moving to a no tipping/higher standard wage environment for restaurants, but that just isn’t going to happen overnight.0

[naginiF]

Way to add an absurd non-sequiter about child labor and “impossibly low wages” to the discussion obscure the point.

Best Buy, Target, other retailers are paying $15 an hour to start, the minimum wage level people are clamoring for, but they can’t fill jobs cause people don’t want to work retail.  It’s not child labor or working in the fields, but retail often sucks so people decide they don’t want to do it.  Which is made easier by increased UE. Asking people who often don’t have demonstrable skills or differentiation to work retail instead of remaining jobless isn’t cruel and wage slavery. Stop acting like the only options are $8 an hour part time work.  “Don’t want to” is being blended into “shouldn’t have to”.  I didn’t realize every job in democratic socialist utopias like Scandinavia were enriching and fun and super well paying. Nobody works retail there unless they truly want to, and then they receive a King’s ransom

Restaurant and tipping culture is a different argument entirely, I’m firmly in favor of moving to a no tipping/higher standard wage environment for restaurants, but that just isn’t going to happen overnight.0

What if Best Buy or Target decided to pay their employees $30/hr, do you think that would tip the work force into wanting those jobs? My guess is that it would. Both Best Buy and Target would still be very profitable, their stocks would still increase in value, and their officers would still get hefty bonuses. Would the profit/stock value/bonuses be as big as they were in 2020? No. But 10's of thousands of peoples lives would be improved and the economy as a whole would benefit.

Is it more important to maximize profit for the owners at any expense or are we now at a time as a society where we can temper maximizing profit for ensuring the entry level worker lives a better life?

[pacearrow02]

Way to add an absurd non-sequiter about child labor and “impossibly low wages” to the discussion obscure the point.

Best Buy, Target, other retailers are paying $15 an hour to start, the minimum wage level people are clamoring for, but they can’t fill jobs cause people don’t want to work retail.  It’s not child labor or working in the fields, but retail often sucks so people decide they don’t want to do it.  Which is made easier by increased UE. Asking people who often don’t have demonstrable skills or differentiation to work retail instead of remaining jobless isn’t cruel and wage slavery. Stop acting like the only options are $8 an hour part time work.  “Don’t want to” is being blended into “shouldn’t have to”.  I didn’t realize every job in democratic socialist utopias like Scandinavia were enriching and fun and super well paying. Nobody works retail there unless they truly want to, and then they receive a King’s ransom

Restaurant and tipping culture is a different argument entirely, I’m firmly in favor of moving to a no tipping/higher standard wage environment for restaurants, but that just isn’t going to happen overnight.0

Why would you support moving away from tipping culture?

[JWags85]

What if Best Buy or Target decided to pay their employees $30/hr, do you think that would tip the work force into wanting those jobs? My guess is that it would. Both Best Buy and Target would still be very profitable, their stocks would still increase in value, and their officers would still get hefty bonuses. Would the profit/stock value/bonuses be as big as they were in 2020? No. But 10's of thousands of peoples lives would be improved and the economy as a whole would benefit.

Is it more important to maximize profit for the owners at any expense or are we now at a time as a society where we can temper maximizing profit for ensuring the entry level worker lives a better life?

There is just so much incorrect with this.  Pre-pandemic, Best Buy’s 2019 net income was roughly $1.5B.  They furloughed 50,000 workers when stores locked down.  So let’s use 50K workers as a number.  If Best Buy doubled their hourly salary to $30 an hour as you suggest, that adds another $1.5B in salary costs, aka erases all profit.  In reality that number is probably higher.

They wouldn’t be “very profitable”, though I’m sure if they made $200MM net income you’d claim that was more than enough. Their stock certainly wouldn’t rise.  You clearly don’t follow or understand much of stock prices and market reaction if you think addition of massive costs leads to any sort of positive stock movement. I’d love to have an example of a big company that massively increased their salary costs and it lead to sustained profitability and soaring stock prices.  Also, “owners” aka shareholders have very little appetite for altruism, that in addition would not result positively for the stock price.

Not sure what to make of that last statement other than you declaring “rich” people have enough and it should be distributed to others.

Why would you support moving away from tipping culture?

It’s just flawed. Having traveled many places without tipping, I firmly disagree that it ensures better service. I think there is significant negative racial biases, affecting both server and patron.  It’s super stressful and inconsistent for staff, which again goes against a good consistent dining service.

My biggest pet peeve is I feel that a LARGE majority of patrons don’t understand anything about the restaurant industry and are grounded in antiquated BS.  You expect servers to make the majority of their income in tips yet tons of people still think anything more than 15-18% is only for EXCEPTIONAL service.  Or think that kitchen delays or mistakes are the fault of the server and thus reduce their tip. Or ignore percentages on larger bills cause it feels like “too much” to tip $100 cause your bill was $500.

It’s so much more pleasant to tip an outstanding server 5-10 Euros in Europe and see them genuinely surprised and appreciative and stay to chat for a bit as opposed to the US where churning tables is paramount

[naginiF]

There is just so much incorrect with this.  Pre-pandemic, Best Buy’s 2019 net income was roughly $1.5B.  They furloughed 50,000 workers when stores locked down.  So let’s use 50K workers as a number.  If Best Buy doubled their hourly salary to $30 an hour as you suggest, that adds another $1.5B in salary costs, aka erases all profit.  In reality that number is probably higher.

They wouldn’t be “very profitable”, though I’m sure if they made $200MM net income you’d claim that was more than enough. Their stock certainly wouldn’t rise.  You clearly don’t follow or understand much of stock prices and market reaction if you think addition of massive costs leads to any sort of positive stock movement. I’d love to have an example of a big company that massively increased their salary costs and it lead to sustained profitability and soaring stock prices.  Also, “owners” aka shareholders have very little appetite for altruism, that in addition would not result positively for the stock price.

Not sure what to make of that last statement other than you declaring “rich” people have enough and it should be distributed to others.

It’s just flawed. Having traveled many places without tipping, I firmly disagree that it ensures better service. I think there is significant negative racial biases, affecting both server and patron.  It’s super stressful and inconsistent for staff, which again goes against a good consistent dining service.

My biggest pet peeve is I feel that a LARGE majority of patrons don’t understand anything about the restaurant industry and are grounded in antiquated BS.  You expect servers to make the majority of their income in tips yet tons of people still think anything more than 15-18% is only for EXCEPTIONAL service.  Or think that kitchen delays or mistakes are the fault of the server and thus reduce their tip. Or ignore percentages on larger bills cause it feels like “too much” to tip $100 cause your bill was $500.

It’s so much more pleasant to tip an outstanding server 5-10 Euros in Europe and see them genuinely surprised and appreciative and stay to chat for a bit as opposed to the US where churning tables is paramount

So BBY would keep their retail prices the same and not adjust any other expenses....."there's so much wrong with this". You're right, it's much easier to make profits from keeping labor costs at a minimum. BBY has a ton of intelligent folks in upper management, they could figure out how to be profitable with higher labor costs. Or they aren't as talented as they appear and should be replaced.

The rest of your response is somewhere between "yes, profits are more important than people", and "I'm a pretentious condescending prick who has travelled many places where the LARGE majority of patrons don't understand anything and love to see them genuinely surprised and appreciative". You should a) really reassess how important you are and b) know your audience.

[JWags85]

So BBY would keep their retail prices the same and not adjust any other expenses....."there's so much wrong with this". You're right, it's much easier to make profits from keeping labor costs at a minimum. BBY has a ton of intelligent folks in upper management, they could figure out how to be profitable with higher labor costs. Or they aren't as talented as they appear and should be replaced.

Would you be willing to pay $1499 for a TV instead of $999 for the same TV if Best Buy was paying $30 an hour for sales staff?  Retail is insanely competitive, we’ve seen many big retail chains go under, the ones we have seen have made strong moves into online sales.  Best Buy has one of the strongest price match guarantees otherwise they would be going the way of Radio Shack.  Would it be “worth it” in your opinion if Best Buy raised their wage to $30 and then closed a bunch of other stores and focused further on online?

They made that $1.5B on $15B in revenue. I don’t think you’re realizing the level of increased sales needed and costs to cut to carry another $2B in increased costs.  It’s not magic, the costs are gonna come from somewhere and it’s not magic “cut the CEO’s pay” cause those sums are as massive in totality as many think

The rest of your response is somewhere between "yes, profits are more important than people", and "I'm a pretentious condescending prick who has travelled many places where the LARGE majority of patrons don't understand anything and love to see them genuinely surprised and appreciative". You should a) really reassess how important you are and b) know your audience.

What the hell are you even talking about? Project much?  You mean my response where I was advocating on behalf of low paid restaurant workers who are often hurt by the current system?  Where studies have been done that show many servers of color get shortchanged on tips? I said nothing of having a generous nature or what I tip, just that many people take advantage of the current system by under tipping based on flawed assumptions or understandings.

And yes I have travelled, and experienced other things that allow me to think beyond “that’s just how it’s done in the US”.  It’s a very different experience when you tip beyond just when it’s expected. There is nothing pretentious about it.  F-Ing laughable that you took any of that to be self important.

As for knowing my audience, you mean cause I don’t lean as left as you and didn’t participate in a like minded circle jerk as a result?  I thought my audience was a board of people with differing views that are generally receptive and considerate and interested in varied experiences.  But apparently you know all about me since I don’t share your view on the absolute evils of American capitalism.  Got consume an edible chill out and stop acting like I’m rocket or a troll.