Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MostHelpNeeded" data-source="post: 5624312" data-attributes="member: 66806">Since we&#039;re doing maths here, I&#039;ll throw this in.For simplicity sake, let&#039;s just say all 340,000 employees were full time340,000 employees x immediate $10/hr raise = $3,400,000/hr$3,400,000/hr X 2080 hours/year = $7,072,000,0000 Or roughly 1.1 Billion less than they spent on stock buybacks last year.In other words, the company could easily afford to give EVERYONE a $10/hr raise right off the bat, spend all the other money they do, still do 1.1 billion in buybacks, and still keep their 13 billion in profit. Not saying it&#039;s going to happen, just urging to stop looking at only profit and dividing that by employees to get feasibility of payroll. I can&#039;t say it enough, it&#039;s not about profit it&#039;s about allocation of income. We ALL deserve a bigger piece of the 100 Billion+ pie</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MostHelpNeeded, post: 5624312, member: 66806"] Since we're doing maths here, I'll throw this in. For simplicity sake, let's just say all 340,000 employees were full time 340,000 employees x immediate $10/hr raise = $3,400,000/hr $3,400,000/hr X 2080 hours/year = $7,072,000,0000 Or roughly 1.1 Billion less than they spent on stock buybacks last year. In other words, the company could easily afford to give EVERYONE a $10/hr raise right off the bat, spend all the other money they do, still do 1.1 billion in buybacks, and still keep their 13 billion in profit. Not saying it's going to happen, just urging to stop looking at only profit and dividing that by employees to get feasibility of payroll. I can't say it enough, it's not about profit it's about allocation of income. We ALL deserve a bigger piece of the 100 Billion+ pie [/QUOTE]

Verification