NationStates Jolt Archive

A recent study showed that 20,000 American families have fallen below the poverty line as a direct result of Walmart's expansion. On the bright side, they can stretch the pittance they now live on by shopping at Walmart, where prices are low.

So would anyone care to defend Walmart?

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2006/05/15/daily29.html

Walmart wouldn't be successful if so many people didn't shop there.

I've heard too many people cry about Walmart destroying the businesses in their small town - and then see how packed the Walmart was when it was happenning.

Walmart wouldn't be successful if so many people didn't shop there.

I've heard too many people cry about Walmart destroying the businesses in their small town - and then see how packed the Walmart was when it was happenning.
I don't shop there.

Anyway, here's a little anecdote. I went to buy some CDs and a DVD two weeks ago. Went to the local independent record store, but they were out of business. Tried to go to Suncoast for DVDs. They'd been bought out by FYE. Suncoast had a great DVD selection, FYE has virtually no selection. I ended up having to buy the movie and CDs I wanted at Best Buy. They'd driven the local independent stores out of business. After a while there is no option left except for the big box stores. Almost makes me want to start downloading all my entertainment for free.

Of course it seems like it because it pushes low prices, has low wages and puts small businesses under because the small businesses can't compete with the pricees that are offered.

I refuse to shop there.

Wal-Mart are all around asshats.

When you deliver stuff to a Wal-Mart distribution center they charge you to unload their own product (which isn't really unique), they don't pay for any of the stuff they sell until they sell it, and they've put some companies out of business just by doing that. They demand absolutely perfect service by everyone they work with, and will charge you if they don't get it.

I hate Wal-Mart.

When you deliver stuff to a Wal-Mart distribution center they charge you to unload their own product (which isn't really unique), they don't pay for any of the stuff they sell until they sell it, and they've put some companies out of business just by doing that. They demand absolutely perfect service by everyone they work with, and will charge you if they don't get it.
Anyone else starting to think that Wal-Mart may be an extension of Scientology?

I hate Wal-mart. Every time I find something I like, they quit carrying it. Course, everything else is closed at midnight when I shop... so I buy stuff there anyway.

I hate Wal-mart. Every time I find something I like, they quit carrying it. Course, everything else is closed at midnight when I shop... so I buy stuff there anyway.
I love 24/7 grocery stores! It's so much better than Wal-Mart!

In other countries, when the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, people usually blame the government, not Wal-mart.

I love 24/7 grocery stores! It's so much better than Wal-Mart!
I remember stopping at a supermarket that was open late one night after drinking and smoking alot of weed. Well, I actually dont' remember stopping there, but I remember waking up the next morning and finding a half-thawed box of frozen eggrolls and a new kitchen knife on the table.

I don't shop at ASDA, if that makes you guys feel better. In fact, I read somewhere that Morrissons are really struggling to compete with Tesco in the UK.

In other countries, when the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, people usually blame the government, not Wal-mart.
That's because in those countries they don't have walmart. They have factories where people work for a pittance to make crap that's sold at walmart.

A recent study showed that 20,000 American families have fallen below the poverty line as a direct result of Walmart's expansion. On the bright side, they can stretch the pittance they now live on by shopping at Walmart, where prices are low.

So would anyone care to defend Walmart?

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2006/05/15/daily29.html

I do not want to defend Walmart, but the story doesn't really give enough information about this supposed "study". The little information they do give does not prove causality.
During the last decade, dependence on the food stamp program nationwide increased by 8 percent, while in counties with Wal-Mart stores the increase was almost twice as large at 15.3 percent, according to the study.

Perhaps Walmart chose those areas because they saw they were doing poorly and would benefit from some cheap products? You don't really know if this "study" really showed anything or if it was just an opinion piece with no real science behind it.

A recent study showed that 20,000 American families have fallen below the poverty line as a direct result of Walmart's expansion. On the bright side, they can stretch the pittance they now live on by shopping at Walmart, where prices are low.

So would anyone care to defend Walmart?

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2006/05/15/daily29.html

Blah. Same old story. EVIL CAPITALISM TAKES JOBS. Or maybe, IMMIGRANTS STEAL JOBS. Or of course, COMPETITION OHNOES.

The study, which sought to identify the independent effect of Wal-Mart stores on changes in U.S. family-poverty rates at the county level, found that one of the greatest effects of a Wal-Mart opening is the closing of mom-and-pop-type operations.

Yeah, Wal-mart out-competes competitors. Holy shit. Is this study the first time you realized that?

But it's not a 'direct result of Wal-Mart's expansion.' It's a direct result of mom and pop not being able to compete with Wal-Mart, and then having mom and pop's families entirely dependent on their 'operation' to be above the poverty line.

I don't need to "defend" Wal-Mart. I also don't have a burning need to villify it as the latest epitome of Evil Capitalism. Used to be, the epitome was Microsoft and Nike, but then Bill Gates proved to be not evil enough and Nike became for whatever reasons less noteworthy in the media. I suppose it'll change in a few years to some other horribly, evilly successful corporation.

That's because in those countries they don't have walmart. They have factories where people work for a pittance to make crap that's sold at walmart.

Actually I was thinking of Australia, England, France, etc. Those weird places.

Blah. Same old story. EVIL CAPITALISM TAKES JOBS. Or maybe, IMMIGRANTS STEAL JOBS. Or of course, COMPETITION OHNOES.



Yeah, Wal-mart out-competes competitors. Holy shit. Is this study the first time you realized that?

But it's not a 'direct result of Wal-Mart's expansion.' It's a direct result of mom and pop not being able to compete with Wal-Mart, and then having mom and pop's families entirely dependent on their 'operation' to be above the poverty line.

I don't need to "defend" Wal-Mart. I also don't have a burning need to villify it as the latest epitome of Evil Capitalism. Used to be, the epitome was Microsoft and Nike, but then Bill Gates proved to be not evil enough and Nike became for whatever reasons less noteworthy in the media. I suppose it'll change in a few years to some other horribly, evilly successful corporation.
Is the purpose of Capitalism just to generate wealth, or to generate wealth that improves the quality of life for all? I tend to go with the latter. Therefore I think the kind of uncontrolled capitalism that Walmart engages in is harmfull. There is no greater engine for creating wealth than capitalism, but if you let it run out of control it does alot of harm as well.

Actually I was thinking of Australia, England, France, etc. Those weird places.
Probably because they have governments that actually make it their business to regulate capitalism?

'The Walmart this way comes' episode of southpark says it all methinks ;)

Wal-Mart is Satan. I have many reasons for not shopping at Wal-Mart and wish the whole world had Costco.

My favorite place is The Natural Living Center, and they have the greatest beverage this side of Kokomo:


STEWARTS ROOT BEER.

And if The NLC goes out of business because of Wal-Maht, I WIL KILL THE LEADER OF THE WAL-MAHT ARMY WITH A KNIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:sniper:

Is the purpose of Capitalism just to generate wealth, or to generate wealth that improves the quality of life for all? I tend to go with the latter. Therefore I think the kind of uncontrolled capitalism that Walmart engages in is harmfull. There is no greater engine for creating wealth than capitalism, but if you let it run out of control it does alot of harm as well.

I tend to go with the former. Capitalism isn't an idealogy, it doesn't make any promises about improving the quality of life for everyone. It's just an economic system. What you seem to have a problem with is not uncontrolled capitalism, but the free market, and so you would seem to want more government interference in business, correct?

My favoriteplace is The Naturl Living Center, and they have thegreatest beverage this sid of Kokomo:


STEWARTS ROOT BEER.

And if The NLC goes out of business because of Wal-Maht, I WIL KILL THE LEADER OF THE WAL-MAHT ARMY WITH A KNIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:sniper:
Stewarts runs little burger stands here in New Jersey. You can get a meal and wash it down with their root beer. They even have car hops that bring a tray and hang it on your car window just like in those movies set in the fifties.

http://i4.tinypic.com/102pnh3.jpg

I tend to go with the former. Capitalism isn't an idealogy, it doesn't make any promises about improving the quality of life for everyone. It's just an economic system. What you seem to have a problem with is not uncontrolled capitalism, but the free market, and so you would seem to want more government interference in business, correct?
Just a little more. I don't want to smother business, but I want to make sure that it benefits everyone a bit more equally.

40-50 years ago big fast food chains were putting mom-and-pop fast food stores out of business all across North America. People shrieked.
Today I don't hear anyone blaming McDonald's, Wendy's, and Harvey's for poverty. Wal-Mart is the latest scapegoat, but it will pass. And people will find some other bogeyman to crucify.

I don't shop there.

Anyway, here's a little anecdote. I went to buy some CDs and a DVD two weeks ago. Went to the local independent record store, but they were out of business. Tried to go to Suncoast for DVDs. They'd been bought out by FYE. Suncoast had a great DVD selection, FYE has virtually no selection. I ended up having to buy the movie and CDs I wanted at Best Buy. They'd driven the local independent stores out of business. After a while there is no option left except for the big box stores. Almost makes me want to start downloading all my entertainment for free.
Yeah, FYE fucknig sucks - it tries to have as much different stuff as a full store and cram it into a little pansy sized store. I'm glad the Suncoast in our mall is still separate from FYE. They also kept EBGames and Software Etc separate, though EBGames handles only console games now where Software Etc tries to do console and PC.

Remember, big corporations are good things we should put our trust in, until they start putting small business out of business, then we should sanction it.

And how many were brought above said poverty line? Really a study that only looks at the negatives of something is rather meaningless. Now, say it brought 10,000 familis above the poverty line. Then you would have a net loss of 10,000 families. It would be a bad thing. But what if it brought 30,000 families above the poverty line? Then you would have a net gain of 10,000. So would it really then be a bad thing? Somebody needs to do a study.

Of course it seems like it because it pushes low prices, has low wages and puts small businesses under because the small businesses can't compete with the pricees that are offered.

Thats fine, but its how they do it thats questionable.

Stewarts runs little burger stands here in New Jersey. You can get a meal and wash it down with their root beer. They even have car hops that bring a tray and hang it on your car window just like in those movies set in the fifties.

http://i4.tinypic.com/102pnh3.jpg


PPPPPPPLLLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEEE TELL ME THEY ARE LOCATED IN THE STATE OF MAINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Because that's where I live, and I WILL KILL TO GET THERE IF THEY ARE LOCATED IN MAINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!):eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

PPPPPPPLLLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEEE TELL ME THEY ARE LOCATED IN THE STATE OF MAINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Because that's where I live, and I WILL KILL TO GET THERE IF THEY ARE LOCATED IN MAINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!):eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:
I don't know. I can't find an official website for the Stewart's company, but there seem to be plenty for each individual restaurant.

The problem is that people dont care if their access to cheap products unfairly smashes small business, ruines lives. My wifes mom asked why we dont shop at Walmart and I told her and she said "oh yeah, that sucks" and continues to shop there.

But it's not a 'direct result of Wal-Mart's expansion.' It's a direct result of mom and pop not being able to compete with Wal-Mart, and then having mom and pop's families entirely dependent on their 'operation' to be above the poverty line.

I don't need to "defend" Wal-Mart. I also don't have a burning need to villify it as the latest epitome of Evil Capitalism. Used to be, the epitome was Microsoft and Nike, but then Bill Gates proved to be not evil enough and Nike became for whatever reasons less noteworthy in the media. I suppose it'll change in a few years to some other horribly, evilly successful corporation.

Walmart (and other large corporations) policies are horrible for america. You could go on and on about how they crush workers rights, destroy the lives of people and their communities, hoarde wealth that should belong to all of us, monopolize everything in any medium or small town, and break or bypass hundreds of laws just so they make the smallest increase in their enormous profit. But all this would be justified to you because you believe blindly in what you asume is free market capitalism.

So I'll make this argument: Its not free market capitalism that so dearly love. It's socialism for the rich and powerful. Walmart, because of its huge economic sway, gets huge amounts of tax breaks and government help. Roads and water systems are built to service their stores with taxpayer money. It usually involves a huge construction effort to get water to a store that big, and to both widen roads and build new ones out to their building sites. It can cost millions of dollars, and the people are taxed to cover it. This kind of help is never given to an independent store.

Local governments also give Walmart huge tax breaks. Walmart will threaten to build outside city limits to avoid city or county taxes unless the city agrees to reduce them (of course only for Walmart, not for all). This kind of blackmail is usually successful and happens with all levels of government.

There is more, but I'll let you think about these.

Walmart wouldn't be successful if so many people didn't shop there.

I've heard too many people cry about Walmart destroying the businesses in their small town - and then see how packed the Walmart was when it was happenning.


Only because the local shops have gone.

Oh well I'm a farmer in Britain so I either grow or tade most of the stuff I need with my fellow farmers. Or I go into town and shop at the little shops, because they all know me and have what I want.

I, for one, am not entirely sure this study works. Counties without a Wal-Mart were probably fairly wealthy in the first place. After all, a store like Wal-Mart is most likely to expand into counties that have the greatest need for lower prices.

In order for me to believe that this is valid, I need to see a comparitive study of the wealth of these counties before the Wal-Mart began to expand. I suspect that the wealthiest counties in such a study would be the ones into which Wal-Mart hasn't expanded. Next I need to see a study of how the past wealth of counties correlates to current wealth. It is possible that Wal-Mart simply moved into poorer counties and those poorer counties merely reflected a general trend of increasing poverty.

Also, this could just be a matter of Wal-Mart causing wealth to move away. Note this statement from the article provided by the OP:
The study concludes that it is likely that these more highly-educated individuals depart from the rural community in pursuit of better opportunities elsewhere.
What is happening here could be that Wal-Mart is driving Mom-and-Pop stores out of business because most of the county residents prefer its lower prices. The rich people, however, start to move away (a process which accelerates as more of them begin to move) because they prefered the higher quality of service provided by locally owned small businesses. Noone actually became poorer, but county wide statistics made it seem as such because the wealth moved away.

Finally, I would like to see the effect of Wal-Mart expansion on real incomes. While Wal-Mart expansion may cause nominal incomes to drop, lower prices at Wal-Mart may contribute to an overall increase in real incomes.

It is also important to note that Wal-Mart's ability to outcompete small businesses for lower prices is partially caused by regulation. Regulation tends to effect smaller businesses more signifantly than larger businesses. It often becomes impossible for small businesses comply with regulation and continue compete with large businesses. Therefore, regulation rather than Wal-Mart, might be the cause of decreases in quality jobs.

In conclusion, this study (or at least what I could gather of it from the article) does not adequetly show that an anti-Wal-Mart policy would be helpful in reducing poverty.

I work for Wall-Mart (well, Sam's Club, but same thing), and I gotta tell you- it sucks. Pretty much everyone is part time, so they don't have to give anyone benefits. At my store, we are desperately shorthanded, but we still can't work over 34 hours a week because it might give us "de facto" full time status, and we would be able to legally demand benefits from the company. Oh, you can get medical insurance, but you have to be there 2 years first. And they have all this propoganda too- mandatory videos about how unions are bad, and these posters everywhere talking about "Get the facts from us". It has a website address on it, so you can go find out the "facts" about Wall-Mart, from Wall-Mart; and not be swayed by the "media bias" and all the people who are "jealous of the company's success". If I didn't already have a second job, and didn't have bills out the ass, I would be outta there, but I can't afford to quit.

Wal-MArt's official propoganda page:

http://www.walmartfacts.com/

Walmart (and other large corporations) policies are horrible for america. You could go on and on about how they crush workers rights, destroy the lives of people and their communities, hoarde wealth that should belong to all of us, monopolize everything in any medium or small town, and break or bypass hundreds of laws just so they make the smallest increase in their enormous profit. But all this would be justified to you because you believe blindly in what you asume is free market capitalism.

So I'll make this argument: Its not free market capitalism that so dearly love. It's socialism for the rich and powerful. Walmart, because of its huge economic sway, gets huge amounts of tax breaks and government help. Roads and water systems are built to service their stores with taxpayer money. It usually involves a huge construction effort to get water to a store that big, and to both widen roads and build new ones out to their building sites. It can cost millions of dollars, and the people are taxed to cover it. This kind of help is never given to an independent store.

Local governments also give Walmart huge tax breaks. Walmart will threaten to build outside city limits to avoid city or county taxes unless the city agrees to reduce them (of course only for Walmart, not for all). This kind of blackmail is usually successful and happens with all levels of government.

There is more, but I'll let you think about these.
This is point is entirely valid. I completely agree that there have been many overlooked interferances on the free market for the benifit of the wealthy (especially with regards to Wal-Mart). If we eliminated such interferances, Wal-Mart would have to compete on a level playing field with small businesses. The way capitalism is meant to work is that the only way businesses can maximize profit is by balancing the wants of consumers with the demands of workers. When we interfere in the market on behalf of large businesses (with subsidies and other benifits) we eliminate the necessity of these businesses to serve the interests of the general populace.

I don't know why, but Walmart is the only place that doesn't look down upon buying 6000 rounds of ammo at a time. Plus you can get it for CHEAP! Winchester battlepacks for 12$.

Also Ramen. A staple. 10C a pop.