THE reason for the current hate for Wal-Mart.

[commonsense]

From the above post:

As a business model, I guess nationally averaged-out it makes sense, and only if you fail to look at the benefits of all these huge stores close together providing plenty of immediate employment, and the longer cyclic dynamic for providing entrepreneurial opportunity,
does it appear "ruthless" and "bad" .

I just finished writing this and something critical dawns on me---

You leftists (please read both posts) and take a look at what this dynamic represents:

In my area, where there is alot of unemployment of people who (in my estimation) are borderline employable as it is, (bit that's the leftists fault, too). They suddenly can find jobs working at a doomed redundant Lowe's which will eventually be driven out by HomeDepot, though it could take years.

For however long this might take, this provides them with on-the-job training and untold potential to move on to management or building trades from what they experience there, many "go-getters" could be picked-up by contractors, etc right-away, while they mill through deserted stores looking for stuff they need in their businesses,recognizing the potential of the good workers "stealing talent" which could lead to a previously "underpriveleged minority" one-day becoming an independent tradesman himself, an example or opportunity he would never have received in the 'hood, regardless of the state dept of labor (hah!) "work programs" in the neighborhood,while giving the rest of them (mostly females) income they were somehow surviving without prior, not to mention personal productivity and "self-esteem" and the positive model for their children of at least getting up in the morning. Low wages for these people is in no way "taking advantage" by corporations, but rather an open door to opportunity they didn't have before.

All this while a huge "ruthless" company unnecessarily doubles its overhead and its employment roles for whatever its own reasons, temporarily eating into its own "obscene" and "confiscatory" profits (how can they be accused of that while providing lower prices, but ok...)
all the while creating untold and not readily tangible positive ripple effects throughout the community they are in that will outlast their presence in the area, and "empower" "educate" and "enrich" generations of poor for all time to come in unimaginable ways....

All at the expense of those company's oft-condemned "profits",
All without costing neither the consumer nor more importantly, a single taxpayer whose own family would suffer in paying taxes to support bureaucrats who have failed to accomplish one iota of the same results sine their inception in the sixties!

Just be honest. If you can't see that the free market is the only humane system available, just admit you support "liberalism" because you work for the government.

walmart reduces incomes in communities, offers few full-time positions, mostly part-time low-level-industrial jobs with no benefits packages and high risk and employee turnover. what kind of a quality estasblishment is that? it drains entrepreneurism and employment from the community, for the purpose of enriching the Waltons and the Walmart executives.

if you want to take those facts and politicize them, then obviously democrats would hate walmart bitterly because it hurts the employment and success of most people, but republicans might support it becasuse it is a large powerful corporation and makes certain people incredibly wealthy.

[VXerick]

It's truly regrettable to a liberal that anyone gets wealthy. Better that we all share equally. Problem is, we are not equally able which would put the same amount of compensation for workers doing a fair share as those doing only half their share. But that's the socialist way and one John Kerry embraces wholeheartedly. Of course, John Kerry doesn't work and his wealth is his wives and the most recent wealthy wife isn't going to open her tax report anytime soon.

[castille]

I hate Walmart because the socialists say they're evil.

Oh wait, I've never been to Walmart before.

" It's truly regrettable to a liberal that anyone gets wealthy."
i take issue with you saying that. i take issue not with the concept of wealth, but with wealth that causes poverty. the waltons could be quite wealthy and also pay their employees adequate wage.

" Better that we all share equally. Problem is, we are not equally able which would put the same amount of compensation for workers doing a fair share as those doing only half their share."
you're squabbling about a dollar an hour raise vs owning the company. the waltons certainly have more money than they "deserve". no one can produce an amount of work equal to the wealth of a rich man.

"But that's the socialist way and one John Kerry embraces wholeheartedly. Of course, John Kerry doesn't work and his wealth is his wives and the most recent wealthy wife isn't going to open her tax report anytime soon."
thank you for the aside / political stab. it makes me feel like commenting on how poor your choice of george bush over john kerry is.

[commonsense]

Dobbs, pls read my above post. Do you work for the government?

yes, i work for george bush. i tell the truth he is not allowed to because of his public image position.

"Low wages for these people is in no way "taking advantage" by corporations, but rather an open door to opportunity they didn't have before."

replacing good jobs with bad is not my idea of improvement. the good jobs offered every positive thing you mentioned about the bad ones, plus more money and success. walmart is anti-competetive, which is bad for business. they gain local monopolies. the businesses walmart drives out offer better jobs. those jobs leave the area, or are eaten as walmart's profits.

i don't know what you call that, but i say it's wrong! degrading a community and a market is a terrible and abusive way to run a business and it harms many people.

[fpitz]

I have no idea where the person came up with the number for Wal-Mart employees that have health insurance (90%????) Wal-Marts high premiums and deductibles keep approximately 2/3 - that is 700,000 employees from participating in the company health plan.

Sean - or whoever is moderating this one - this is one of the reasons I abhor these stupid boards/posts, no body fact checks this stuff. These people just throw bs out there for the whole (idiotic) world to see. aaargh!

[commonsense]

I applaud your responding, but I still don't think you read my post, or it was unclear:
A nod to fpitz above, you're right in one sense, what I am about to say is purely anecdotal, but it is obvious that during this "megastore wars" that is going on in my area, and likely in many others, for years before it resolves itself, MANY people will be employed in largely vacant, clearly unprofitable stores.
MOST of these employees very obviously were not employed before because these companies like Lowe's and Walmart, in this area at least, are visibly "scraping the bottom of the barrel" of prospective employees, because service and competency and their "work ethic" is so terrible, I couldn't see them lasting very long at McDonald's or Popeye's Chicken.
Before you call me a racist, recognize that I also said in my original post that some of these workers will gain practical experience in varied areas as a result, not mention simple employment experience they never would have had previously, and some may "get it" and eventually improve their marketability, but I also said that the better ones will be exposed to even more opportunity to be "hired away" by the tradesmen that shop there, opening possibilities to income that far exceeds their humble "clerk" beginnings.

This is not "good jobs" being replaced by bad jobs at all. Its many new positions in a depressed area.

BTW, as far as "living wages" are concerned, any such number anyone could come up with is arbitrary. If $10/hr minimum is good, for instance, then mandating $15/hr is better, right? where does it end? The same case can be made for either amount.
I never made "minimum wage" longer than 1 week, even when I was 16yrs old because I hustled and worked hard, and made myself worth at least more than the risk of replacing me with someone else who might be worse.....and that was while stoned on pot!!!!

[Patrick Henry]

The following is a expression of opinion:

Walmart is not "anti-competetive", it is extremely competitive! Success speaks for itself. Here we have a superior business model, and the fact that it "puts the mom and pops out of business" tells us that the era of mom and pops has come to an end! If anyone took offense at the establishment of a Walmart in their community, or they disagreed with its business practices, surely they wouldn't shop there. The fact is, Wall Mart is good for everyone. Mom and Pop better find another profession or go work at Walmart where their work will be more productive due to a better business plan.
I shop for some items at Wal-Mart, but generally I find their selection paltry and limited and I dont care for the ambiance too much. But thats my choice. Many others love shopping there and even hang out there like its the mall (i live in a small town).
I agree that the main opposition to Walmart is from the unions and from those affected by their propeganda.

Bob Dobbs, you are clearly a Communist. (not a flame, you might even take it as a compliment)
"i take issue not with the concept of wealth, but with wealth that causes poverty."

Your total lack of understanding of economics is what gives you this ideological bent.
The idea that wealth can cause poverty is totally absurd. America is the richest country in the world. According to your theory, we should then have the greatest amount of poverty in the world.
In reality, even the homeless and "destitute" in America enjoy a standard of living that is far beyond the average citizen in many other countries in the world. The free market makes this possible.

"no one can produce an amount of work equal to the wealth of a rich man."

Karl Marx at his finest.
Clearly you have never even given thought to the idea of starting your own business. That thought, in itself, is work. Creating a business plan and carrying it out is work of the highest degree and is magnitudes more productive than any other kind. The people who do this have earned every penny they make.

Recommending reading: "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal" by Ayn Rand.

[commonsense]

Thanks Morgan for identifying one of the two major causes for persistent Socialistic thinking in the U.S. :
1) lack of understanding of human history (human nature and the corruptive nature of institutionalized power)
2) lack of understanding of economics

Keep up the good work.
Humanitarians like us have over seven decades of calculated effort by socialists founding our american public education system to reverse.

Please read my WalMart posts on this thread, and tell me if you disagree with some of the points I think your evaluation of them leaves out. Welcome to the site.

[tivodan1116]

A few statements of my own to add to this:

1) Commonsense is clearly correct about the free market being the answer to problems.

2) Bearing that in mind, it is important to remember that price is not the only dictator of free market success. There are hundreds of models of car that are less expensive then a Cadillac CTS-V, but if i had $55,000 to spend on a car, would i be buying one? Hell yeah.

To take that prospect to our Wal-Mart situation: I live in a small town which is a satellite of the third largest city in NY. As such, our shopping options are generally unlimited as long as we are willing to drive 15 minutes or so. We have a Wal-Mart supercenter 15 minutes away (and may be getting one about a mile away) that I do not patronize. Why? Because in our town we have a little unstoppable juggernaut of a grocery store called Wegmans. Wegmans is consistently rated as one of the top 100 companies to work for (now in the top 10) by Fortune magazine. They give all of their employees and their families free health and dental insurance. They also realize that, being a grocery store, a large percentage of their retail employees are young people, and as such, have given out more than $16,000,000 in scholarships to over 16,000 employees since 1984. Their company headquarters also happens to be in that large city right nearby.

Beyond Wegmans good will policies, I shop there simply because I find their products to be vastly superior to that of Wal-Mart groceries. Wegmans uses local growers wherever possible, and their produce and meat goods are absolutely world-class fantastic. The people they hire seem to be some kind of grocery savants, or at the very least absurdly friendly.

Do I pay an extra $5 or so per $100 shopping trip to the grocery store? Perhaps, although Wegmans prices are quite reasonable. Why do I not care? Because of the reasons i listed above.

This brings me to the point of this whole exercise: Competing with Wal-Mart. Around here, Wegmans absolutely crushes Wal-Mart in grocery sales because they have decided not to compete on Wal-Mart's playing field. By shrugging their shoulders at price wars and instead focusing on quality, service, and being a good neighbor in their community, Wegmans has found their unique selling proposition (USP). That is the way a business succeeds in a free-market economy, by having a USP; that is, something that absolutely makes a person purchase from your business instead of another business that offers the same product or service. You've got to "own your own hill" as we said when i sold advertising.

[bluenadas]

There are 3 things I have to say. One, Juneau, AK doesn't have a Walmart and we seem to get along with relativly low prices for the area. That old thing we called competition seems to keep things in check.

Secondly 7% of ALL money spent in America is spent at WalMart. So please tell me why people complain about their practices? It's quite obvious with sales like they have that the complainers are also shoppers themselves.

And last, with al of the money they make, they've decided to quit accepting Master Card credit card purchases (when using a debit/check card) due to an issue with the cost that Master Card is charging. Name another company that can do that and not be boycotted by the masses?

morgan, walmart beats out mom and pop because walmart pays their workers less money and gives them fewer benefits, primarily because they hire mostly part timers. if you call sweatshop labor a 'superior business model' then i reject your proposal entirely.

in your town's case i suppose a walmart is better than no business at all, but edging out small businesses and artisan jobs in favor of service and retail labor is not an improvement. i suppose some of the slimiest and worst employees now are briefly tolerated at walmart because walmart don't give a shit, but that does not make up for the small business owners and skilled people who lost their job because walmart replaced them.

i am not much of a communist. i'd say more ofa socialist. communism is not real.

wealth causes poverty when it is all concetrated in one family. that is how wealth can cause poverty. we don't just have infinite wealth floating around. there is a finite supply of money, and goods for that money, and some people are hogging most of it, which they got by economically raping others or inheriting it! what does that leave for the others? not a whole helluva lot in some cases.

[Mr.Vicchio]

Sweatshop labor? Mostly part time?

Yeah kids in school can't hold full time jobs nor demand full time pay or benifits.

Yeah that makes a good portion of thier labor force in the seasonal times, Christmas, that sort of thing. What a terrible thing they give these peeps jobs.

[Osborn F Enready]

Collective bargaining built this country. Killing collective bargaining will kill it. Unions are only needed due to the ridiculous laws imposed on business in taxation and trade restrictions to protect the weakest link in the business, the labor.
Unions only voice the workers opinion in unison, as opposed to individually. Name a union that currently does differently?

Take away the power of the group by seperating them, and you play to the old adage "divide and conquer". That is exactly what is happening in our entire society right now.

Wal Mart, STAUNCHLY ANTI-UNION.

[Patrick Henry]

Originally posted by Bob_Dobbs,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Bob_Dobbs,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>morgan, walmart beats out mom and pop because walmart pays their workers less money and gives them fewer benefits, primarily because they hire mostly part timers. if you call sweatshop labor a 'superior business model' then i reject your proposal entirely.[/b]

I have no idea what you mean to suggest by emphasising the fact that Walmart hires mostly part-time (whether its true or not). Is there something bad about part-time work , in your opinion?
I don't know whether its true that Wallmart pays less, but that's not very relevant either. Every employee working there has voluntarily negotiated a contract, so obviously they are satisified with their pay. And yes, paying employees less IS a better business plan, IF you can do it without losing talent. Since there is virtually no skill involved in stocking shelves, yes, I can imagine that the pay would be low and that's exactly how it should be.
If you find this unfair, I recommend you consider moving to North Korea, where you will make exactly as much money mopping floors as an electronics technician will: zero.
As for being a sweat shop, yes, your right, every time I go to Wallmart I see rows of employees furiously scrubbing the floor with a supervisor whipping their backs. Good thing I have Amnesty International on speed-dial.

Originally posted by Bob_Dobbs,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Bob_Dobbs,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> in your town's case i suppose a walmart is better than no business at all, but edging out small businesses and artisan jobs in favor of service and retail labor is not an improvement. i suppose some of the slimiest and worst employees now are briefly tolerated at walmart because walmart don't give a shit, but that does not make up for the small business owners and skilled people who lost their job because walmart replaced them.[/b]

Let me see if I understand you correctly:
Having "small" businesses around, in and of itself, is a good thing and something worth using government to enforce? Is that what your trying to say?

Better get that Business Size Commissioner out there, running around and measuring up all the stores with his business tape measure, making sure that they dont exceed their mandated growth cap!

Yes, penalize success I say! Legitimize mediocrity! Make it so no one really ever has to try at anything!

<!--QuoteBegin-Bob_Dobbs,@

i am not much of a communist. i'd say more ofa socialist. communism is not real. [/quote]

Socialist = inconsistent Communist


<!--QuoteBegin-Bob_Dobbs,

wealth causes poverty when it is all concetrated in one family. that is how wealth can cause poverty. we don't just have infinite wealth floating around. there is a finite supply of money, and goods for that money, and some people are hogging most of it, which they got by economically raping others or inheriting it! what does that leave for the others? not a whole helluva lot in some cases.[/quote]

I see you've read Das Kapital.

But here's what I can't figure out:
At what point in history did our caveman ancestors (who presumably?? had nothing in their possession) mistaken stumble into that sacred, secret vale containing a vast supply of pristine, ready-made computers, airplanes, televisions, antibiotics, automobiles, etc. that make up our modern industrial society??? This is a mystery that I'm sure archeology will one day solve...

[gregh]

I live in Arkansas, so as you can imagine, walmart is everything. However i have noticed something lately, and have been working to test this theory out.

What I have seen is that no walmart carries any Democrat or Liberal slanted books. I remember that for 2 weeks after it was released that walmart carried the Hillary book here, but she is from the state so of course it is going to sell.

However, i've traveled to several around the state(believe me there are a lot) to check out this theory and it has come back correct everytime.

I first noticed this when I was going to pick up the recent Al Franken book, and the dinky town that i am in for the moment has no real book store. At the time it was #1 in the NY Times, yet Walmart did not carry it. So i ran to the nearest town of any size and picked it up at booksamillion. On the way out i stoped in at their walmart and it too did not have it. So i went to my former hometown of Little Rock a few months later right when the Richard Clarke book was released and was atop the NY Times. Now keep in mind this is not even a Liberal slanted book, just one that pissed republicans off. Again, no book.

SO i decided just to skim through all their books. They had the hannity book, the O'Reily book, several books about Bush... Yet out of about 10 walmarts i visited no book of any kind that was democrat or liberal. This is amazing coming from the homestate of clinton and they not even having a clinton book or two, not even hillary's book.

For what it is worth, they do have democrat and liberal based books listed on the website, although oddly enough very far into the categories. Yet they do not appear in any of the stores that i visited.