Reality is reality. Reality is impossible for Govt to predict. Such low level micromanagement is typically doomed. As in most cases, Govt had benign intent that ends with poor real consequences. Thats how it typically works, due to the fundamental incapability of Govt to micromanage societal change. It doesnt work. If it did work, and the world could be made a better place with active social violence, I would be right there with you.

It doesnt, so I'm not.

Also, nothing hypocritical at all - thats a non sequitur on your part - at least as a general rule. Because its not necessarily the corporations pushing for Govt to subsidize low wages. If a terrorist takes a hostage and demands a ransom from you and you do not pay the ransom, so the terrorist kills the hostage - whose fault it is? Yours for not paying the ransom, or the terrorist for taking the action?

I do not ignore that situation at all, I just assign blame where blame is due - on the Govt. However, I also think that in the grand scheme of things... I would rather have employed people being partially subsidized as opposed to unemployed people being fully subsidized. Plus its not like every, or even a majority of workers are subsidized - though it is a significant number. Would be interesting to see who is getting subsidized... my hypothesis is that is is mostly people who pop out dozens of kids despite being dirt poor. The Govt has decided to subsidize that behavior, but I dont mind that so much if those people also hold jobs and pay what they can. /shrug

In this particular case I do agree that Wal Mart is very hypocritical though ,because those fucktards actually politically backed Obamacare.

For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)