Monday, August 07, 2006
Edwards Derogates Wal*Mart
In a truly remarkable statement, the Senator said that “taxpayers should not be subsidizing (Wal-Mart) employees’ health care.” The unstated argument apparently being that Wal-Mart should provide the same Cadillac package of plans that have bankrupted other companies.
Let’s dissect the Edwards statement. First of all, how do we know that employees’ health care is being subsidized? Undoubtedly, some of the employees-- many of whom get company paid benefits-- are second income earners in families where the primary breadwinner has benefits. Then too, many employees are retired from other careers and already receiving Medicare benefits.
But most importantly, for those employees who rely most heavily or completely on their Wal-Mart paycheck, the Wal-Mart job is probably their best employment option; otherwise they would be doing something else for a living. And in all likelihood earning less and receiving fewer benefits than they get from Wal-Mart.
Thus, it is preposterous for the Senator to claim that taxpayers are subsidizing Wal-Mart employee health benefits. If they were out of work, they would be getting unemployment—a major governmentally forced subsidy—and Medicaid and or/ welfare both of which are substantial taxpayer subsidies. If they were earning less money at another employer, they would be worse off and might place more demands on government programs. So by providing them better paying jobs, Wal-Mart is helping reduce the burden on taxpayers.
Of course the seeker of the Presidency will never look at the positives of the situation as long as he can make political hay out of pandering to those who want to believe the worst about the private sector. No wonder the nation is in such a mess. Maybe the Senator could tell us how he is fighting to stop the flood of illegal aliens who are driving down wages for entry level and many skill level jobs in this country. Now there is a real issue.