Walmart's army of bakery decorators take the cake when it comes to hourly store pay
NEW YORK (AP) — Inside a Walmart store in New Jersey, a worker puts the finishing touches on a cake with an edible ink Sponge Bob on top. A colleague creates a buttercream rosette border for a different cake, while another co-worker frosts a tier of what will be a triple-deck dessert.
It's graduation season, the busiest time of year for the 6,200 employees the nation's largest retailer trained to hand-decorate cakes per customers' orders. The cakes themselves come, pre-made, frozen and in a variety of shapes and sizes, from suppliers, not Walmart's in-store bakeries.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Toronto Star
3 hours ago
- Toronto Star
Trump says Elon Musk could face ‘serious consequences' if he backs Democratic candidates
BRIDGEWATER, N.J. (AP) — President Donald Trump is not backing off his battle with Elon Musk, saying Saturday that he has no desire to repair their relationship and warning that his former ally and campaign benefactor could face 'serious consequences' if he tries to help Democrats in upcoming elections. Trump told NBC's Kristen Welker in a phone interview that he has no plans to make up with Musk. Asked specifically if he thought his relationship with the mega-billionaire CEO of Tesla and SpaceX is over, Trump responded, 'I would assume so, yeah.'
Winnipeg Free Press
4 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Hamlin undeterred by ruling siding with NASCAR in lawsuit filed by Jordan-owned 23XI and Front Row
BROOKLYN, Mich. (AP) — Denny Hamlin is unfazed that a three-judge federal appellate panel vacated an injunction that required NASCAR to recognize 23XI, which he owns with Michael Jordan, and Front Row as chartered teams as part of an antitrust lawsuit. 'That's just such a small part of the entire litigation,' Hamlin said Saturday, a day ahead of the FireKeepers Casino 400. 'I'm not deterred at all. We're in good shape.' Hamlin said Jordan feels the same way. 'He just remains very confident, just like I do,' Hamiln said. NASCAR has not commented on the latest ruling. 23XI and Front Row sued NASCAR late last year after refusing to sign new agreements on charter renewals. They asked for a temporary injunction that would recognize them as chartered teams for this season, but the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, on Thursday ruled in NASCAR's favor. 'We're looking at all options right now,' Hamlin said. The teams, each winless this year, said they needed the injunction because the current charter agreement prohibits them from suing NASCAR. 23XI also argued it would be harmed because Tyler Reddick's contract would have made him a free agent if the team could not guarantee him a charter-protected car. Hamlin insisted he's not worried about losing drivers because of the uncertainty. 'I'm not focused on that particularly right this second,' he said. Reddick, who was last year's regular-season champion and competed for the Cup title in November, enters the race Sunday at Michigan ranked sixth in the Cup Series standings. The charter system is similar to franchises in other sports, but the charters are revocable by NASCAR and have expiration dates. The six teams may have to compete as 'open' cars and would have to qualify on speed each week to make the race and would receive a fraction of the money. Without a charter, Hamlin said it would cost the teams 'tens of millions,' to run three cars. 'We're committed to run this season open if we have to,' he said. 'We're going to race and fulfill all of our commitments no matter what. We're here to race. Our team is going to be here for the long haul and we're confident of that.' Thursdays Keep up to date on sports with Mike McIntyre's weekly newsletter. The antitrust case isn't scheduled to be heard until December. NASCAR has not said what it would do with the six charters held by the two organizations if they are returned to the sanctioning body. There are 36 chartered cars for a 40-car field. 'We feel like facts were on our side,' Hamlin said. 'I think if you listen to the judges, even they mentioned that we might be in pretty good shape.' ___ AP auto racing:
Winnipeg Free Press
8 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Trump's tariffs could pay for his tax cuts — but it likely wouldn't be much of a bargain
WASHINGTON (AP) — The tax cuts in President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act would likely gouge a hole in the federal budget. The president has a patch handy, though: his sweeping import taxes — tariffs. The Congressional Budget Office, the government's nonpartisan arbiter of tax and spending matters, says the One Big Beautiful Bill, passed by the House last month and now under consideration in the Senate, would increase federal budget deficits by $2.4 trillion over the next decade. That is because its tax cuts would drain the government's coffers faster than its spending cuts would save money. By bringing in revenue for the Treasury, on the other hand, the tariffs that Trump announced through May 13 — including his so-called reciprocal levies of up to 50% on countries with which the United States has a trade deficit — would offset the budget impact of the tax-cut bill and reduce deficits over the next decade by $2.5 trillion. So it's basically a wash. That's the budget math anyway. The real answer is more complicated. Actually using tariffs to finance a big chunk of the federal government would be a painful and perilous undertaking, budget wonks say. 'It's a very dangerous way to try to raise revenue,' said Kent Smetters of the University of Pennsylvania's Penn Wharton Budget Model, who served in President George W. Bush's Treasury Department. Trump has long advocated tariffs as an economic elixir. He says they can protect American industries, bring factories back to the United States, give him leverage to win concessions over foreign governments — and raise a lot of money. He's even suggested that they could replace the federal income tax, which now brings in about half of federal revenue. 'It's possible we'll do a complete tax cut,'' he told reporters in April. 'I think the tariffs will be enough to cut all of the income tax.'' Economists and budget analysts do not share the president's enthusiasm for using tariffs to finance the government or to replace other taxes. 'It's a really bad trade,'' said Erica York, the Tax Foundation's vice president of federal tax policy. 'It's perhaps the dumbest tax reform you could design.'' For one thing, Trump's tariffs are an unstable source of revenue. He bypassed Congress and imposed his biggest import tax hikes through executive orders. That means a future president could simply reverse them. 'Or political whims in Congress could change, and they could decide, 'Hey, we're going revoke this authority because we don't think it's a good thing that the president can just unilaterally impose a $2 trillion tax hike,' '' York said. Or the courts could kill his tariffs before Congress or future presidents do. A federal court in New York has already struck down the centerpiece of his tariff program — the reciprocal and other levies he announced on what he called 'Liberation Day'' April 2 — saying he'd overstepped his authority. An appeals court has allowed the government to keep collecting the levies while the legal challenge winds its way through the court system. Economists also say that tariffs damage the economy. They are a tax on foreign products, paid by importers in the United States and usually passed along to their customers via higher prices. They raise costs for U.S. manufacturers that rely on imported raw materials, components and equipment, making them less competitive than foreign rivals that don't have to pay Trump's tariffs. Tariffs also invite retaliatory taxes on U.S. exports by foreign countries. Indeed, the European Union this week threatened 'countermeasures'' against Trump's unexpected move to raise his tariff on foreign steel and aluminum to 50%. 'You're not just getting the effect of a tax on the U.S. economy,' York said. 'You're also getting the effect of foreign taxes on U.S. exports.'' She said the tariffs will basically wipe out all economic benefits from the One Big Beautiful Bill's tax cuts. Smetters at the Penn Wharton Budget Model said that tariffs also isolate the United States and discourage foreigners from investing in its economy. Foreigners see U.S. Treasurys as a super-safe investment and now own about 30% of the federal government's debt. If they cut back, the federal government would have to pay higher interest rates on Treasury debt to attract a smaller number of potential investors domestically. Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. Higher borrowing costs and reduced investment would wallop the economy, making tariffs the most economically destructive tax available, Smetters said — more than twice as costly in reduced economic growth and wages as what he sees as the next-most damaging: the tax on corporate earnings. Tariffs also hit the poor hardest. They end up being a tax on consumers, and the poor spend more of their income than wealthier people do. Even without the tariffs, the One Big Beautiful Bill slams the poorest because it makes deep cuts to federal food programs and to Medicaid, which provides health care to low-income Americans. After the bill's tax and spending cuts, an analysis by the Penn Wharton Budget Model found, the poorest fifth of American households earning less than $17,000 a year would see their incomes drop by $820 next year. The richest 0.1% earning more than $4.3 million a year would come out ahead by $390,070 in 2026. 'If you layer a regressive tax increase like tariffs on top of that, you make a lot of low- and middle-income households substantially worse off,'' said the Tax Foundation's York. Overall, she said, tariffs are 'a very unreliable source of revenue for the legal reasons, the political reasons as well as the economic reasons. They're a very, very inefficient way to raise revenue. If you raise a dollar of a revenue with tariffs, that's going to cause a lot more economic harm than raising revenue any other way.''
