[krickkrack]

Walmart only makes less than $7k per employee. They have 2.2million employees. Regardless of the common narrative - they simply can't afford to raise all of their employees wages by any meaningful amount with their current profits.

[albatruss]

Walmart makes over 200k in revenue per employee. Using profit to make your point is not applicable if honest. Otherwise you would advise Amazon to cease hiring altogether in all those years they were seemingly losing money per employee.

[dehrmann]

Walmart's profit margin is 2.20% (that's a very low number). That's an extra $4,400 per employ at most.

[throwawaysea]

How can we know that? The profit margin that is publicly known is after spending that might be optional. For instance, Walmart could forego some investment like building a new store, or expand more slowly, and be able to pay higher wages that go beyond the buffer of their current profit margin as a result.

[dehrmann]

> The profit margin that is publicly known is after spending that might be optional. For instance, Walmart could forego some investment like building a new store, or expand more slowly...

You can see cap ex on their cash flow statement and create all sorts of hypothetical profit margins for them. Walmart can't actually take a hit like that because their monopoly power isn't strong enough. Their game is low prices. If they grow slower, they'll start losing market share to the dollar stores, Target, etc. If they raise their prices, the same thing happens. It's different when labor is in short supply or you want more skilled labor. Starbucks pays more and hires somewhat overqualified baristas because they see value in it and offering a premium experience.

[djbebs]

Walmarts finances are public, you need only read their latest 10-K and youll have a pretty good idea of how much money they make.

[krickkrack]

Revenue is largely irrelevant in either case.

And why would anyone treat an established retailer like a high-growth company? That makes no sense.