Why is it "wrong" for Walmart to run Mom & Pop stores out of town?

[JanMichael]

Is it "wrong" for the three location pharmacy to put the one location pharmacy out of business? That's just "competition, right? Is it "wrong" for the guy with the riding mower to out bid the guy with the push mower? He'd be a whiner to complain that the riding mower was faster and did a better job, wouldn't he? Is it "right" for small grocery stores to charge twice as much for milk when there's no local competion? Or "justifiable" for those quaint old hardware stores to charge outrageous amounts for items that they have that nobody within 100 miles have?

And aren't "small" businesses notoriously bad (on the aggregate) regarding Healthcare and Benefits not to mention wages for their "hired help"? It's also kind of difficult for two or three employees of a Mom & Pop place to unionise, is it not?

Just some fun questions from a notorious Walmart hater and Costco shopper;-)

[951]

1. Its all about unionizing

I know I'm going to get bashed for this but one is entitled to their own opinion here so here it goes if Wal-Mart unionized today no one would give a damn about small businesses.

[brainshrub]

48. I kinda agree with you.

I will not step into a Wal-Mart until I see a Union logo.

But I would still prefer to buy local.

[kikiek]

2. One of the problems has been after they run them out of town.

Some towns have complained that once they wiped out the competition they jacked their prices up. Also they have been known to stay only as long as the town gives them tax breaks, and have left empty stores behind. Not to mention it ends costing tax payers more money because businesses who were paying taxes are forced out.

[movie_girl99]

4. is Blockbuster not guilty as well?

Every small independently owned video store has closed in my area after Blockbuster and or Movie Trading Co. (same companies I think) have popped up across the street.

[kikiek]

8. You would have to see what kind of practices they follow.

Do they demand to be tax free zones? Do they raise the prices once they drive out the competition? We have several video stores in our town of 10,000 and they all survive nicely. No difference in prices. Besides the video business isn't trying to take over all your grocery, gas, drug store business.

[SemperEadem]

80. the franchising in small towns is to blame

I'm getting ready to drive from LA to St. Louis this week and it's going to be really interesting to observe how franchise mentality will have taken over the small towns along the way. WalMart, HomeTown Buffets, McDonald's--you name it, every town has a cluster of them. The local-owned businesses have been forced out of business by the glitz and lights of the franchise corporations. It's really sad to see this happen.

[Medium Baby Jesus]

5. You are right

Florida is littered with empty Walmart stores left vacant when supersized stores were built often right across the street. Walmart should have an obligation to find use for those stores or at least cities should prevent it from happening.

[mahina]

69. We should legislate conversion of abandoned Walmarts to homeless shelters!

With beds and kitchen facilities too!
Dang I wish I'd thought of that before they got in here....

[serryjw]

34. Fascinating.....

Do you have a link concerning Walmart leaving empty stores behind? I never heard that

[Medium Baby Jesus]

3. I don't think it's wrong

But I do think Walmart should pay fair wages and they should treat their employees equally. I also believe individual towns and cities can strictly regulate where superstores locate.

[lightbulb]

6. As the Dude said to Walter in The Big Lebowski...

"No, you're not wrong, Walter

YOU'RE JUST AN ASSHOLE!"

[JanMichael]

27. "You ever hear of the Seattle Seven? That was me. And, um, six other guys.

Like I can play the consumerist role man, and I can play the it's all fucked up no matter how you dice it game too. I can like understand both sides of the wannabee exploiters, big and small, and I don't wanna exploit anyone....

[phantom power]

7. I prefer to think of it as "unhealthy", as opposed to "wrong"

Monopolies, and/or large dominating corporations, are a natural occurrence in a market economy. The more unregulated that economy is, the more likely they are.

They are unhealthy, because consumers and employees lose. It polarizes income, by funneling it towards the owners of the large businesses.

Unions were invented to combat the abusive power of large corporations.

[kikiek]

11. I believe in competitve pricing etc. But when the owners are multi

billionaires I think they could afford to be little more generous to the employees. The employees make or break a company. They don't get enough credit. I believe like you that it can put all the money in the pockets of too few when they act like WalMart.

[DemBones DemBones]

9. The first two replies have hit upon the major problems -- WalMart

workers don't have a union (and Wal-Mart is thus notorious for hiring people to work less than 40 hours a week, which means they are not entitled to benefits) and, after driving all competition out of business, raising their prices, thus screwing the consumers, who now have no place else to go, and sometimes closing their store, leaving a huge store no one else can afford, even if they wanted a store that size, and screwing the consumers, who then have to drive farther to find what they need, and pay higher prices.

[serryjw]

35. Trust me..They are screwing SUPPLIERS also

If you don't play ball and give them dirt cheap pricing they threaten to go off shore direct.

[napi21]

50. You're right, and they do the same with o/s suppliers!

They don't give any breaks to the off shore suppliers either! Their demand is sooo big, they appeal to suppliers everywhere. It's tough for a mfg. to turn down orders for over a million units of anything. Most of 'em sell their products at almost cost to WM because it covers their overhead and the rest of their customers pay the profit.

I don't think this will last forever. At some point, all these suppliers are going to revolt, and WM will have to conceed to price increases, or loose the supplier. The problem is goin gto be that all the others wound want to deal with them either.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

53. China LOVES this

They're the only ones with the correct combination of big+tyrannical to profit maximally from this state of things. No free country can beat slave labor in gulags. That's why everything is "Made from China". Here too, and in Europe too.

[Nikia]

83. This is a big issue that we should be focusing on

Walmart demands lower prices every year for products that they buy from their suppliers. For the most part, raw materials aren't getting any cheaper. For the most part for companies to maintain profits or in some cases to make any profit at all, one of two things usually happens: the product becomes lower quality or labor costs must be cut. Sometimes, both things happen. You have American companies who are lowering their product quality and outsourcing in order to sell their product to them at low prices. Small business is not in a position to demand such things. Walmart is. As a result, we all lose.

[PeaceForever]

10. Really good issues raised in this thread.

The thing is about the mom & pop stores, they can always adapt to the marketplace in order to compete with Wal-Mart. But maybe I'm taking too much of an MBA bias here (since I'm an MBA student); I know it's idealistic to tell some 45 year-old local pharmacist that they need to find some other business, as if they could do that at the drop of a hat.

In reality, I think Wal-Mart may be on its way out. It has poor customer service these days, and the quality of many of the stores I've visited has degraded a lot in the past few years.

[kikiek]

13. They tend to look grungier. Funny thing is that Target is now doing

the WalMart and super storing their places. Honest to goodness what would happen to this country if we all quit buying crap we didn't need.

[Silverhair]

55. And WHO defines what we "need"?

What level of needs are you talking about? Would your defination of what I need limit me to the basics to sustain life? I will be the one to define what I need, thank you.

[JanMichael]

59. I doubt that the worldwide effects of your desires concern you but...

...take a look at this article from Common Dreams.

Who knows, maybe some info might help...

[Silverhair]

61. Think of the starving children of China and clean your plate.

I'm not buying into the guilt trip that you are trying to sell me. I've already been manipulated enough by somebody else's idea of guilt.

[JanMichael]

62. I didn't think you gave a shit, thanks for verifying my belief!

Peace out my non-give-a-shit-about-nothing-but-yourself brother!

Me, Me, Me, Me, Me, Me, Me, Me, Me, Me!

What a productive, progressive, enlightened, and egalitarian attitude:-)

[Silverhair]

63. I choose what I will, and what I won't care about.

I can't carry the whole world on my shoulders. I refuse to allow other to manipulate me using their ideas of guilt. There are things that I do for others. I will mention one: There is a boy that the schools have not addressed his special needs. I take time to tutor him in math & science - for free. His mother is too poor to pay anything, except to remember me in her prayers. I won't tell of the other things that I do.

But I reject other's attempts to manipulate me using guilt. So many people seem to be trying that.

[cally]

12. Assuming Walmart paid their employees the same,

gave equal benefits and kept prices low, I would still be against the superstores. Much of town character is lost when all stores are big superstores. The diversity, the unique stores, and the helping hand are gone. For instance, I go to independent bookstores. They know me, recommend books, and have interesting ideas. I go to my local hardware store where they will advise me on the type of nail I need. I go to a smaller crafts store, where they recommend a glue or the type of string to buy to give someone who wanst to start beading. Add on all the local business who support the schools, the sports teams, the girl scout and boy scout teams. I try to use small businesses whenever I can.

Another point, is most new jobs are created by small businesses. It's what drives our economy and they aren't offshoring important functions.

[G_j]

21. also the money leaves the community everyday

to go to the main office in Arkansas. Local businesses 'recycle' the money in the community.

There are so many problems on so many levels.
Box stores have a planned obsolescence and only last so many years before they are abandoned. Once an "anchor store" leaves the others businesses usually go under leaving a 'ghost mall' where there was once probably trees and grass.
There are also often huge problems with storm run-off, pollution and traffic.
Others have touched on the labor and sweatshop issues, but the list of negatives is a long one.

[Silverhair]

57. Local business recycle the money??? Wrong.

That local business has to buy their stock from the same out-of-town supplies that WM does. Money still leaves the town. The store owner may live in town, but so does the WM store manager. And the money that the customer saves on the lower prices definately helps that customer. Now everyone is rich enough to afford the higher prices of being politically correct.

[philosophie_en_rose]

67. No. Local businesses do recycle the money.

There's no way to know how much money is spent locally, but I'm willing to bet you that it's more than Walmart.

Most small employers do not pay a grand amount of money. However, they also don't set up a vicious cycle, where employees have no option but to shop at Walmart.

When an employee spends money at Walmart, Walmart screws employees even more. Example: Employee X is paid $90. She spends $100.00 and receives a 10% employee discount. Walmart's cost is less than $90. So, employee actually works for the value of Walmart's shitty products. Walmart recycles its money internally.

[G_j]

68. politically correct?

I fought Walmart almost full time for three years. I've done my homework. Local businesses do keep more money within the community.
I don't have the links at my disposal, but I have done plenty of research on these issues. Besides buying 'stock' there just happens to be something called profits. Being politically correct has absolutely nothing to do with it!
grrrr..

[Silverhair]

72. OOPS. Typo. Correction to last sentence.

Should read: NOT everyone is rich enough to afford the higher prices of being politically correct.

Regret the sloppy proofreading.

[Silverhair]

56. True, but...

I have to think about the prices too. After all, the money that I pay for something is coming out of MY pocket.

Fortunately, it doesn't ALWAYS go the big guy's way. My local pharmacy has lower prices than Wal-Mart, and they know me by name and have time to talk to me about my family's meds. We spend about $200.00 (After insurance) a month there. The local supermarket is part of a giant out of state chain, so I go to them for quick trips, and to WM for the major trips. Movies I go to a little local place, because the nearest Blockbuster is 13 miles away. But BB does have a better selection of movies, and that is a good thing for me. There are no chain restaurants in town. I hate eating in a chain restaurant anyway. Hardware? Ace is a chain too.

So for me, several different factors get cranked into my buying decision - and price is a major one. And Yes, W-M is cheaper. I have compared the prices. It also helps to have a lot of things under one roof, so I have to only make one trip to get everything. Somewhere, I get to think of myself too, in all of this. I'm not rich so I have to watch the money.

[catchthefever]

14. Hell-Mart Sucks

* Does not provide affordable health care benefits.
* Fights employee unionization
* #1 importer of stuff from China.
* BIG contributor to republican party (http://www.followyourmoney.com/cgi-bin/FYM.cgi?p=find_c... )
* Does not treat women equally
* Supply Viagra but not PlanB

I read in NYT that once WM pushes out Mom-and-Pops, and other chains, they jack their prices up since they now have a monopoly. Honestly, I'd rather pay a few cents more (since they undercut the competition by PENNIES) to get excellent service somewhere else. I have never shopped at such severely understaffed stores as a Hell-Marts.

In today's Arizona Republic, Chandler edition:
http://www.azcentral.com/community/chandler/articles/1008cr-walmart08Z6.html

What kills me is tha WM is building yet another supercenter within 3-4 mile radii of their first Chandler supercenter. One is being built behind $250-350k homes. I looked in that subdivision. Once I found out about the WM... HELL NO.

[JanMichael]

20. Yes it does but...

* Does not provide affordable health care benefits.

Neither do most small employers.

* Fights employee unionization

See above.

* #1 importer of stuff from China.

Happens in small busineses too. Hell, even in the North Carolina Folk Art Museum...Half of their shit for sale was from China.

* BIG contributor to republican party (http://www.followyourmoney.com/cgi-bin/FYM.cgi?p=find_c ... )

So are most small business owners...

* Does not treat women equally

See above.

* Supply Viagra but not PlanB

Eh?

"I read in NYT that once WM pushes out Mom-and-Pops, and other chains, they jack their prices up since they now have a monopoly."

Same with many small employers.

"Honestly, I'd rather pay a few cents more (since they undercut the competition by PENNIES) to get excellent service somewhere else."

Is it always just a few cents?

"I have never shopped at such severely understaffed stores as a Hell-Marts."

I hate them too, I'm just curious as to the reasoning behind it.

[philosophie_en_rose]

66. Walmart is not a small business.

1) Walmart can afford to pay its workers well. Allegedly, it does not pay some workers at all. (Locking undocumented immigrants into stores. In Washington, Walmart workers have filed a class action lawsuit against Walmart for forcing employees to work without pay.)

2) Walmart's activities have global consequences. Walmart is a systemic abuser of enslaved workers, foreign and domestic. Its political influence enables oppression.

3) Money spent at Walmart isn't circulated through the community. The cheaply paid workers sometimes can only afford to shop at the very store that chooses to pay them so poorly. Profits are sent to corporate headquarters. Walmart kills local economies.

5) Mom & Pop Shops are usually a far better value - environmentally, economically, and socially. Look at Walmart products vs. products made by a craftsperson. No comparison. None.

6) The sheer size of Walmart makes any comparison to a "mom & pop shop" unrealistic.

7) Walmart is on corporate welfare. Its workers are so poorly paid that many depend on public assistance. Walmart chooses to be a shit employer. Instead of paying its employees, it pays politicians to protect its sickening exploitation of everyone involved.

8) Walmart isn't the best value. Go to a thrift shop or a farmer's market. Shop at Target. Order things online. If it's the only choice, it's not anyone's fault if they have to shop there. But, isn't it worth the effort to find somewhere else to shop?

[HEyHEY]

15. Yes VERY VERY wrong

I grew up in a small business and saw my parents, particularily my father, work 16 hour days and never see their children, my sisters and I were coming home from school unsupervised from age nine. Dad busts his ass to make his business work and regardless of what people think, as a small business owner he paid his employees a good wage. Much better than Wal-mart. AS well, he offers better prices and service than his big box competitors.
However superior advertising by them has almost done him in, he had to lay of his presswoman last month for a month.
People don't understand that by going to big box you are contributing to the world become nothing more than a bunch of minimum wage earners working for a big corp. It's sick, people just don't get it.

[JanMichael]

28. Your anecdotal story is moving however it doesn't meet the macro...

...standard that a world of 6 billion people need.

It's way cool that your dad was paying great wages, paying health insurance(Wait you're a Canadian, right?), and providing a pension, but the majority, it's a fact, sorry, do not do such a thing.

[serryjw]

37. May I suggest......change you copy to read.......

How did Chaney's parents KNOW to name him "Dick"

[-democratic-lady-]

16. I avoid Wal-Mart whenever possible

[newyawker99]

49. Hi -democratic-lady-!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[kodi]

17. economics is only part of it, a sense of community is an intangible value

for instance, my 60 year old phamacist and i have been engaged in a running debate for months over a national health program and its potential costs. whenever i stop by (even just to say hello) we talk about it, and other customers join in and we have essentially a town meetings and discuss all sorts of things. from those talks at the drug store other people in the small town in which i resided know me now and say hello. some i have actually registered to vote this summer.

today i dropped by and gave him three articles i downloaded from the net drawn from the new england journal of medicine on how private sector costs has overhead costs 4-5 times higher than public health care services. as soon as he saw me he started laughing and said "oh oh, here comes the town liberal!" but in joking way. it was civil and it reflected a sense of community and mutual respect arising from personal interactions allowed by such a small and intimate environment that mom and pop stores have.

large stores like wal mart are impersonal entities that bring no value other than product cost and availibility.

they bring no sense of community to the customers.

thomas jefferson spoke about how small shopkeepers and artisans were the back bone of american democracy. its still true.

[JanMichael]

25. But the numbers show that they're worse employers, yes?

PS~ I hope that this grapic displys but if not it can be found here.

[Kali]

29. sense of community is key

You hit the nail on the head. Its not about economics, its about community and esthetics. WHEN are we as a culture going to learn that there is more to the universe than material measurments?

When is the last time a wally worker greeted YOU by name? Or even showed signs of recognition?

[lgardengate]

18. All i know is that i buy from the cheepiest store

I have to.I'm disabled and only have social security to live on.My family helps a lot!

[JanMichael]

26. But Walmart isn't always the "cheepiest"!

Depends on what you buy.

[ibegurpard]

19. They're not just driving "mom and pop" stores out of business.

They're driving other LARGE companies away as well. Wal-Mart has ATROCIOUS strong-arm policies with suppliers...that is one reason they can afford to absorb the short-term losses it takes to drive the competition out of business.

[Longhorn]

22. When cities give tax and utility incentives

to new businesses or new locations that are not offered to existing businesses, it's no longer a level playing field -- it's no longer capitalism.

[sweetheart]

23. Were we to respect the cost of the person-day, none.

Although, as consumers, we're supposed to focus on the variables in
our patterns of consumption, the supply chains can use comptuters to
show suprisingly accurately, the exact consumption needs of a
demographic public. The internet itself is only in its supply chain
revolution infancy considering the future of integrated one-off consumption.

I think the critiques are best expressed by this columnist in the
guardian. It is the best thing i've read in that paper in some
time.. she's nailed it. I'm for the form that supports the most long term diversity and complexity in its social tolerances, (a sort
of "socialogical earth quake proof")


<snip>
First, a marketised society offers its participants only two roles: as worker and as consumer. Value and status revolve entirely around these two identities; the market ideal is someone who works very hard and plays very hard. Working and consuming monopolises time, leaving less for activities that have no market price - being a loving parent, a good friend, caring for someone who is dying.
<snip>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1322533,00.html

[karlrschneider]

24. Hard not to be ambivalent on this one, but here's one short vignette...

in the nearest town to where I live, Wagoner, OK, the WM is the only remaining 'grocery' (and general-store-type) - it came along and essentially killed 1 grocery (Homeland, successor to Safeway), 2 drug stores and 1 hardware store. It's more than 25 miles to any other alternatives. Yes, their merchandise, other than groceries, is pretty much Chinese-made crap but it's 'accessible' and does a huge business.
I'll buy the odd bottle of milk or loaf of bread at the nearby lakeside gas-grocery-baitshop (at ridiculously inflated prices) and take a road trip to Muskogee or Tulsa for large purchases but as a practical matter, it's pretty much go 5 miles to the Wally World for day to day purchases.
As much as I despise them, I'm just not gonna drive 55 miles round-trip for regular shopping. Sort of a Catch-22.

[Silverhair]

58. Since when is "Homeland" a Mom & Pop grocery?

Last time I was in a Safeway, they were part of a super chain. Very big corp - ya' know? The other stores that went under - were they chains, or Mom & Pops? In a battle of one big chain against another big chain - I side 100% with me!

[FloridaPat]

30. Walmart imports most of its merchandise. They have little to no

benefits for their workers. Plus they don't make a lot of money. So the smaller stores go out of business because they can't compete and go to work at Walmart. Now the local people who make stuff go out of business.

[JanMichael]

31. For one the local shops didn't necessarily make their own products.

I think that it's a given that small retailers are just as likely to deal in imported products as, let's say, Costco?

And as much as I'd like to believe that the mythical general food store owners arrange for healthcare and benfits I am saddened to say that the facts don't support that myth.

[The Straight Story]

32. My Small Town Experience

I lived in a small town for several years, actually a few different ones in Ohio.

Here are some of my thoughts on the whole thing:

The people in the area were not making a real good living wage wise. Now the cost of living for some things like housing was cheaper, but not a lot else. Most were employed at factories (like rca, crane, etc). The local grocery store cost them a lot more so they had less money and less goods for the money they spent.

There was a wal-mart there, but not a super wal mart. Many I knew drove out of town to go to one so they could buy more for less. This helped them financially. What did they do with the extra money? Well they went to local merchants for the things wal-mart did not have.

I know this firsthand as I was friends with many small business owners including one who owned a small grocery store on main street (whom I gave a lot of business to myself as his store was a few doors down from where I lived and so it was convienent). I knew the lady that owned the hobby shop as well, and the owner of the trinket shop, the owner of the resteraunt, and the the owner of the thrift store.

The shops that hurt the most were not always because of wal-mart. The Hobby shop lady was losing money to the internet. She closed that shop and moved to an area with more people and now has an internet store. The shoe place is still there - they have high end brands not carried at wal-mart. The little grocery store I went to is being sold or has been already - but the owner was leaving to take a job at wright pat (where he worked a lot anyway) with better benefits because his wife, who ran the store while he was away, has a disease which has been getting worse.

Small businesses have problems big ones don't, they come and go all the time in the places I have lived - sometimes they over price things, sometimes personal issues drive them out, sometimes low demand for their goods, and sometimes they want to move to a bigger area with more people.

The last small town I lived in had one place to get your food. I could spend 60-100 there easy and not get a whole lot. Now that I live in a big town the wife can get enough to last more than twice as long with the same amount of money. A wal mart in that small town would shut that one grocery store down inside a week. What would people do with the extra money? Go to the other shops in town and spend it as they don't like having to drive 40 miles as it is for good deals on food. The dollar store there is booming, as is the dollar general (and the dollar store is owned by the same people who own the grocery store and the gas station).

Small towns are a lot like the big ones - they have a few people making the money. The people there often resent the higher prices, but they also like the idea of having someplace they can walk to or take a short drive to from which they can get basic needs.

Wal-Mart comes in. The big shot who owned half the town and the town council gets booted. Things change and people feel more free.

No - I am not pimping wal-mart and the like. I am giving my observations from real life and talking to people in those small towns. One shop owner wanted wal-mart in because it would keep people shopping in the area and they would have more money for her stuff.

Big stores can suck up a lot of things, but they can also have a positive effect. While we may shout about the big evil corporation I have known many who were glad to see the big fish in town get his, and he was sucking more money away from them than wal-mart. From byesville to circleville I have seen it having a good impact, but not to all.

I like the personal approach and interaction with store owners. That little grocery store on main st I went to I knew the people who ran it. They took care of their customers, you were more than money to them. One night I stopped in to get some chicken legs and cooking oil. I bought a newspaper and drove home (which was a few doors down, I stopped on way home). It was pouring down rain. I was at home cooking and I heard someone pounding on my door (I lived on the second floor above a store). The store owner had come over because his son forgot to bag my newspaper and he knew I would want to read it while eating dinner. He was soaked, the paper was dry. At wal-mart? Forget it.

He filled a niche market for people in the downtown area there, so he was not worried about them - in fact he liked the idea because Kroger was close to his store and was his main competitor - wal mart would be off route 23 so more people would stop in his place when they needed a few things. If wal-mart came in with super-store (which, btw they are now doing) kroger would be run out of town (and they had high prices and terrible service). He would benefit (a moot point now with his wife's illness and they are moving).

But we all know wal-mart will kill a good number of small businesses - and with them will go the close relationship we have with those owners who see their customers as something more than a dollar sign.

I was willing to pay more for the things I did - but some people cannot afford to do so. Wal-Mart will never be the grocery store I went to, but they will save me enough cash that I can go to those places and get the things they offer that wal-mart does not (in this case, some of the best deli sandwiches around that town).

Wal-Mart is driven by need, that is one reason they succeed. Sure they can be real dicks when compared to mom and pop places, but they can also help out the little guy who is scrapping to get by.

I don't know all the answers to this, but I can say that they have helped many with their stores by offering lower prices which keep more money in the wallets of folks who don't have much now. And that small town with the grocery store I so loved? Well they are getting bigger, more stores have come in, more jobs are coming in (which they need since rca has toasted a bunch of jobs there since picture tubes are not in high demand), and things are going ok. Still tons of small shops - they have just changed to meet the demands people have that wal-mart does not meet.

the shoe guy is still there selling red-wings and such, so is the hippie store, the resteraunts I remember still are in business, the bike store is still there selling high-end bikes, the guy who sells fenton glass is still kicking along (and he is in his 80's), the trinket lady has expanded her store and bought two more (including the movie theater), the lady who owns the kids' clothing store which has high end clothes is still there, the nice furniture place is still cranking, and the old style pharmacy - well he weathered cvs as long as he could but is selling the building and closing down (the main reason? He is too old and his kids wanted to do something else).

[wickerwoman]

33. My two biggest objections to Walmart:

1.) The way they (and other superstores) contribute to the car culture in America. I was fortunate to live in a small town in New Jersey that still had a main street and I've lived overseas for 4 years. In towns that haven't been Walmartized you can still walk everywhere, buy everything you need at the small shops and never even need a bicycle let alone a car. Where I grew up, it would be physically impossible to sustain life without a car and this is increasingly true in cities and suburbs where the big superstores have moved in. I live in China now and there is a little mom and pop grocery and fruit store on literally every corner. I can buy real food at least fifteen different places within a five minute walk of my house. How many Americans can say the same? And what are the long term impacts of a culture that requires you to either have a car to get to the supermarket or eat fast food every day? To steal a phrase from Eric Schlosser- Walmart is cheap only if you look at the shelf price. If you look at how superstores are increasing our dependance on foreign oil and damaging the health of our nation by discouraging walking and increasing urban sprawl you start to see the real costs.

2.) I detest their labor practices- not just the resistance to unionization and the fact that a good chunk of their employees make so little they qualify for welfare even when they work 39 hours a week (plus undocumented overtime) but they way they buy overseas from companies with unregulated labor and enviornmental practices and use their cheaper products to drive companies who are doing it right out of business. Find me a mom and pop store that imports products from lead and mercury belching sweatshops in Indonesia and I'll concede that their labor practices are comparable to Walmart.

[JanMichael]

41. Turn over the products in a small store sometime.

Not ALL but many that I've looked at sell the same sweatshop/crappy labor policy/poluting factory shit that Walmart does.

[knitter4democracy]

43. There's a reason for that

I'm trying to open my own yarn shop next fall, and I'm having a hard time finding good-quality American yarns. I've found a few, so I'll definitely be able to offer something, but the vast majority of yarns these days are made in Turkey, Pakistan, and China (with good yarns from Italy). Most of the American mills don't use American fibers, either, but at least the money's mostly staying here.

Our manufacturing job losses affect everyone. We can't find good American products to sell, so we have to sell foreign-made, questionable labor practices stuff. I'm doing what I can to offer fair-trade or American made, but there really isn't much out there (or what there is is so behind in their orders I can't base a business on it).

Honestly, it makes me want to open up a yarn mill--but there's no way I can get the start-up funding for something that big.

[Steelangel]

36. Okay, here's my reasons

First reason: Wal-Mart encourages the child labor in third-world countries. If you have a kid, would you send your child to non-safe industry to work for 6-12 hours with 25-75 cents per hour? I bet you will not. So why should I support them when they did that to these 'third-world' children?

Second reason: Family business created better community. It is well-known fact for many, many, many and many years.

Third reason: Wal-mart signed many 'outsourcing' corporations in third-world countries for cheap labor to manufacture the cheap products (same as child-labor) so why should I support them?

Fourth reason: Despises so-called economy 'boost' reports, Wal-mart does not help our economy at all.

There are several more reasons but I don't see the reason to explain more. Wal-mart sucks, people know it but most choose to not face the fact.

8 letters for Wal-marts: Fuck them

Edit: Sorry if my comments sounded aggressive but I offered the honest opinion about Wal-Mart. I hope I didn't offend anyone..

[rman]

38. Walmart wrecks local economies because their profits leave the community,

as opposed what's the case with local mom and pop shops.

Same thing on a larger scale with big corporations entering the markets of developing nations (globalisation / free trade).

Also, this does not financialy hurt those who make the regulations (policians) so that such big corporations are alowed to do this. It does however hurt the local populations who's interests those politicians are supposed to represent.

[Jose Diablo]

39. One of the key things anti-trust legislation address

are what is considered 'unfair' competitive advantages used by very large organizations to the ultimate disadvantage of both the community and the consumers.

Think about it in terms of a 'vertical' delivery system. Each step in the overall process of converting a raw material into a consumption item has the potential to be totally 'owned' by a single or small group of investors. When a single or a small group of investors gain control over some part of the delivery system it is easy to restrict the supply from that point forward to the consumer or control the upstream supply also by the nature of being the only customer at that point, thus being able to "unfairly" dictate and maximize profit to the detriment of all others that have a stake in that delivery system.

This is why unregulated competition is wrong in a 'mature' system. By 'mature' I mean a system that has all the infrastructure installed and in place.

Now if the infrastructure is not in place, then monopolistic systems are the best way to build the infrastructure due to the high rate of return investors can achieve because of the inherently higher risk while developing the infrastructure.

But after the infrastructure is in place, it would be better for all the players to move to a more regulated form of capitalism. A form of capitalism called Pluralistic Economy (like FDR economy) is better for a fully developed industry. This form has each member or participant receiving a share of the profit with government enforcing a system of 'rules' for behavior that guarantees each participant has a voice in determining how the profit from the developed infrastructure is distributed.

The supplier of raw material, the processors of the raw material (including labor) and the consumers of the product each share the benefit the infrastructure provides. After all, the government allowed and encouraged the development of the infrastructure by granting tax abatements and granting land etc, and the government IS 'we the people' therefore for a single participant in the infrastructure to profit at others expense is 'unfair'.

The dismantling of FDR's Pluralistic Economy form of capitalism began in Reagans Administration. We are now seeing the results of this attack on our country's economics.

Make no mistake, the economic system of society has a vital role in deciding the social system the country has. If you prefer a fuedal system then monopolistic capitalism is the way to go. A system of 90% living in subsistence living with 9% administrators a little better off and 1% elite, this describes a fuedal system.

Or a regulated form of capitalism, like FDR's Pluralistic Economy which provides a democratic representative form of social system that has 5% living at subsistence level (but with many chances to advance to a higher level). And 90% of the people living comfortably with extra income to invest in the future of their children and 5% at elite level.

The first system results in a extremely unstable social system unable to advance humanity. The only stability achieved is with whips, chains and guns. The second is extremely stable with humanity advancing continuely to higher and higher levels of achievement. Stability achieved voluntarily by all participants because the system is by and large fair.

Now which system is better?

[Lone_Wolf]

40. Walmart and others of its ilk extract wealth from communities...

I love how public officials will often claim that bringing a Walmart in is some sort of financial benefit to a community. They often claim that it will bring in tax revenue and create jobs.

The only reason Walmart goes into a community is because they know they can take more money out of that community than they put into it. This is the only way they can make profit. They exist simply to extract wealth from communities.

[HEIL PRESIDENT GOD]

42. Big box is the wrong direction for food

Cheaper-than-supermarket but supermarket-quality food stores are only viable until really figures out how to create a network of local (50 mi. radius) producers. This will take over the mid-grade niche from the ailing supermarkets (which are neither organic nor the cheapest option with Walmart). Once there is a good midpriced option again WM's grocery business will fall to the level of bulk buy stores in the 80s and 90s.

Packaged goods producers hate WM because they loan out money on traditionally generous sales terms. Old "gentlemanly" companies always gave each other thirty days or more to pay; WM uses this courtesy to fund its consumer lending operations.

As far as other small businesses go: well, I'm not a market idealist as the poster seems to be, and I think things work differently at different scales. (My training is in geography but I have worked in packaged goods at the corporate level.) As democrats we should consider that most minority-owned businesses are personal services (hair and nails), food, toy, and gift stores (in Latino areas). America's small towns have been dying for generations without Walmart's help. We should look to our inner cities, in particular, to see where the real damage will be done.

[JanMichael]

46. I'm certainly not a market idealist.

What I was hoping to do is, in base terms, get people to consider systemic issues (Fundamental problems in my opinion with our Economic arrangements) over knee-jerk rote responses.

You've actually done what I was intending with your last sentance: "America's small towns have been dying for generations without Walmart's help. We should look to our inner cities, in particular, to see where the real damage will be done."

Not to say that the other responders haven't had some very valid critiques of Walmart (Which I detest and haven't shopped there in years), they've been very good, but I was looking for a somewhat different angle.

On a side note I also have a GIS background; I love the statistical capabilities and the easy to understand projections of social issues that it provides to anyone interested enough to use it. GIS is a remarkable planning tool.

[HEIL PRESIDENT GOD]

47. Thanks for clarifying

I just didn't want to get sucked into one of those debates where a free-market cheerleader tries to use Kantian imperatives. "If you think anyone should have any choice in any matter at all, you must support Walmart!" I'm sure you've bumped into that.

I am tired of the stereotypes in this debate, too. But I think if you replace Mom and Pop with Mama y Papa they begin to verge on the truth. Walmart dovetails with the Bush economic vision by providing a new category of employment somewhere between illegal immigrant labor and American blue collar work.

[Barney Rocks]

64. I have been told that

I will go further in my career if I learn GIS. Can you tell me the easiest way to get started? Is there any software that is easier to learn--any courses on-line, that kind of thing that you could recommend?

(I recently got a job in the area of Civil and Environmental Engineering).

[JanMichael]

75. Try your local community college for certificate programs.

This link looks pretty thorough.

I suggest CCs because of cost, ESRI and private programs are super expensive, although your employer may pay for your tuition because it's probably in their best interest.

The CC classes might very well be online too. But in order to run the GIS programs your home computer would have to meet some high standards.

[Barney Rocks]

79. Thanks!

I will get on it!

[in_cog_ni_to]

44. As my 6 year old great nephew says

"Walmart is bad because they put my Zany Brainy store out of business because they are so big and they can have toys cheaper than MY Zany Brainy store can."

EVERY time he hears some ADULT mention how "wonderful" Walmart is, he gives them an earful about HIS Zany Brainy store going out of business because of Walmart undercutting prices. :7

I've not noticed our local small grocer charging twice the price for a gallon of milk. Or the local hardware store charging outrageous prices. Granted, they may charge a few cents more, but they also pay more for the products because they can't by in the HUGE quantities Walmart does. "I" prefer to pay a little more rather than ever step foot in a Walmart. I like being able to just drive down the street to my local hardware store, buy what I need and get the hell out in 2 minutes instead of waiting in line for 30 minutes at Walmart. Plus, the Walmart is farther away....so, add gas usage to the price of Walmart products....it's not that big of a savings. My TIME is WORTH a few cents.

Also, a lot of mom and pop stores are just that...mom, pop and the FAMILY who work it. They don't necessarily have employees who are not family. If they do have employees, then the employee knows the benefits, or lack thereof, going in, right? They are there for other reasons. Maybe they hate Walmart too?

We have a local, high end, bicycle shop...all family members work it. A local appliance store that has been in business for 50+ years, all family members work it. They have very nice, big name appliances at competitive prices and offer awesome SERVICE. You don't get that at Walmart or Sam's Club. At Walmart or Sam's Club you have to pick up the appliances yourself. First, find a truck to use, next, find people to help you load it on a truck, then unload it and get it into the house. Hardly convenient! I LIKE being able to go buy the appliance, pay for it, have it delivered, and have the same people service it. That all is included when I consider "Everyday Low Prices." :( Gas, convenience and service. I hate Walmart.

[Solon]

45. My biggest objections....

Illegal practices are one, I worked at Wal*Mart and I was FORCED to work overtime without pay. I was forced to work less that 40 hours a week because they didn't have a 3% growth in a month. Price fixing, undercutting, and scams are common in ALL Wallyworld stores in my area, I should know, I worked in all of them. BTW: To anyone currently employed at wallyworld, KEEP YOUR OWN RECORD FOR ALL HOURS WORKED, date it, make sure you have the hours worked and OT, otherwise they will screw you (I know I was). They also have seniority discrimination by trying to make older (2+ year) experience workers quit.

Sex discrimination was a big one as well, I have actually heard managers say that women don't need they money cause their "man" will take care of them. They have one of the worst work records of many companies out there, and I refuse to shop there. Not to mention the incompetency of the managers, imagine having to hold down the store on a Saturday with one junior Associate Manager, 1 cashier, and Me in L+G. THAT WAS A NIGHTMARE!!! For some reason the Store Manager wouldn't answer his damned phone either.

[truthbetold]

51. Wal-Mart has killed my town.

We have a small little town which used to be lively and flourishing with privately owned businesses. We had a local mall that had been in business for over 50 years, and was not a huge strip mall but rather a quaint little gathering of stores.
Then Wal-Mart came in. Now the mall is closed down, ready to be bulldozed and the lot made into a Super Wal-Mart. Any ma and pop stores left are going bankrupt. Meanwhile, Wal-Mart is jacking up the prices now that we have nowhere left to shop (unless we want to drive an extra half hour).
So, my response? Fuck you, Wal-Mart.

[realFedUp]

52. Livin' in a Wal-Mart World- a haiku

You know it's autumn
livin' in a Wal-Mart world
candy corn and masks

[murdoch]

54. From a Marxist perspective...

Karl Marx would have said absolutely not. You have a small town with money flowing around it with conservative small shop-owners as pillars of the existing order. Wal-Mart comes in and destroys all of that - the stores go out of business, maybe they wind up at Wal-Mart as managers or employees, and the money starts flowing out to Sam Walton's heir in Arkansas. It takes a conservative town and turns it into wage workers and a far-away owner who sucks off the profit. In Marx's view this was not a bad thing, he saw the tendency in capitalism to distribution centers like Wal-Mart as normal. Of course, once that came in the workers would have to struggle to organize in a union.

[JanMichael]

60. I made a comment at a Chiles restaurant back in 1994 that went...

..."Ray Crock and Sam Walton, America's forgotten Stalinists". I was then subjected to the usual good Liberal mocking of my mocking of the status quo.

I don't mind the results of efficiency, given that the human element is rewarded for their participation in a way that reflects what the end profit is, ignoring tax manipulation of the very wealthy.

[FatSlob]

65. There is nothing wrong with it, it is called capitalism.

It is either good nor bad, it just is.

[Steelangel]

70. I agree that it is called 'capitalism'

but I don't agree that it is ok to have child-labor. that is definitely 'bad'.

[FatSlob]

78. I don't see what that has to do with anything,

but I agree.

[mahina]

71. Addressing the 'right and wrong' aspect of your question,

I'm no philospher but I remember that one measure of whether something was right or wrong was to consider how you would like the consequences if the behavior was universal. (Littering for example. )
If we all shop at Walmart then the little shops will be gone. So how you gonna like that?

[LWolf]

73. Ok, I'm up for some fun this morning!

:hi:

Let's see; this first: Is it "wrong" for the three location pharmacy to put the one location pharmacy out of business? That's just "competition, right?

Yes. First of all, that's not competition. That's removing the competition. But let's address the issue of competition itself; Americans are obsessed with it. Like most things, if a little bit of something is good or works, we saturate everything with it until there is no escape. Americans can't seem to understand that if a little is good, more is not better. Our obsession with competition, with winners and "losers," is a weapon of community destruction, imo. For another perspective, try reading Alfie Kohn's "No Contest." He writes about public ed, so the main focus is competition in schools, but the concept works everywhere. http://www.alfiekohn.org/books/nc.htm

Instead of focusing on competition, perhaps we should focus on choice. Should consumers have a choice about where to shop or about the kind of goods they consume, or should one or two mega corporations control that choice? Which of course, leads us to media; should a few mega corporations control the airwaves?

Is it "wrong" for the guy with the riding mower to out bid the guy with the push mower? He'd be a whiner to complain that the riding mower was faster and did a better job, wouldn't he?

Yes. It's wrong, and he'd be a whiner. The guy with the push mower is environmentally and physically superior; refusing fossil fuels and doing his part to slow down the obesity epidemic. In the big picture, the guy with the push mower is smarter and more ethical; he has a legitimate place.

Is it "right" for small grocery stores to charge twice as much for milk when there's no local competion? Or "justifiable" for those quaint old hardware stores to charge outrageous amounts for items that they have that nobody within 100 miles have?

It's "right" for them to charge whatever they have to pay for it, plus a reasonable profit. When you buy in small amounts, your wholesale costs are higher than the big box, that buys massive amounts of things. Thinking outside of the "big box," here are some preferred ideas:

Instead of buying from the same few big corporate "dairies," if we return to small family farms, etc., small local businesses could focus on providing local produce, milk, etc.. Fresh food, locally grown, encourages responsible farming/growing habits, and avoids over-processed frankenfoods from several states or nations away.

And they could seek out "micro" producers of many products, instead of buying the corporate brands available at the big boxes. A small chain I shop at does just this; I can find organic food, non gmo foods, and an interesting variety of choices for prices as good or better than my local Vons or Albertson's, etc.: Trader Joe's rocks.

And, of course, there are co-ops; small businesses that group together to buy their wholesale goods at cheaper prices. We could have internet co-op organizations and meetings; many possibilities there.

And aren't "small" businesses notoriously bad (on the aggregate) regarding Healthcare and Benefits not to mention wages for their "hired help"? It's also kind of difficult for two or three employees of a Mom & Pop place to unionise, is it not?

Health care and union support are issues for small business employees. Since small business offers so much more value to communities than big boxes, I think we have to think outside the "big box" again.

How about universal, single-payer health care for all? Then small businesses would not pay any more than big businesses for health care for their employees. And I do believe that the costs should be passed on in product prices; more about that later.

How about a national living wage instead of a "minimum wage" that doesn't make sure a day's work makes a living? How about our department of labor? Could we make sure our national labor standards protect small business employees who don't belong to a union?

How about small business employee "co-op" labor organizations?

And last of all:

Should Americans consume less and pay the cost to produce goods and services with living wages, etc.?

My answer: Yes. Our "consumer culture" is dependent on goods made where labor and environmental practices do not meet our own standards; and if we want a living wage, our own standards aren't high enough. Could we do with less "stuff," in the interests of ethical labor and environmental practices across the globe? Absolutely. Would it be a good thing for American culture to stop obsessing about how much junk and how many toys they have collected, return to a simpler life-style, with fewer posessions? Yes. Doing our part to support ethical labor and environmental practices across the globe, and simultaneously reducing the amount of waste, just in packaging, let alone the broken junk itself, we send to our landfills every week.

How'd I do? Fun enough for an early Sunday morning? ;-)

[G_j]

74. (you did great !)

the best answers to the original post IMO.
You were able to step back and really take in the picture on multiple levels: choice, the myth of competition, fossil fuels..connecting the dots..

wonderful post! :toast:

[JanMichael]

76. You did great for a Sunday morning! Matter of fact I don't have the...

...mental acuity to say much other than that.

Well done!

[LWolf]

77. Thank you both, JM & G_J.

And thanks for bringing us some significant issues to have a conversation about.

:donut:

[sweetheart]

81. What's wrong is the use of the question framing

The question presume's there is a "right"? The whole issue is
predicated on a pyramid of assumptions about privitization,
consumption culture, rights to private property, and how culture
should define itself to the consumer and the worker.

Walmart presumes the model of centrallized sourcing, and is exploiting a market imperfection taught in business schools regarding
the natural preference to increase scale, that being the global
hypermarket is a more efficient allocater of goods than the local
farm-coop that sell's its own member's produce. One certainly is
more economically "controllable" from wall street.

So then embedded is the question of centrallizing authority to a few
preferable to diversifying authority to many. I frankly could care
less, if there was a decent bloody market around. I'd love to have
markets that were so nicely laid out with flowers, lights and spacing,
that shopping for groceries was REALLLy private and pleasurable by
the impeccability of the markets... which i can't say any market
does better... walmart... local tiny shoppes... I like walmart for
shopping... i don't know about politics.

Small businesses empower the diverse fringe of democratic society,
th many, and in considering this fringe, the potential to spread
wealth and the greatest potential for economic uplift to the many.
There, just end the war, and be a good creditor.. bush has done
neither.

[ikojo]

82. I agree that small businesses are not the saints they are

portrayed as here. The primary reason for buying local versus buying from any national chain is that a dollar spent in a locally owned business stays in the community. The owner of that business lives in the community and probably banks in the community. That small business owner has an interest in the community (by community I mean a metropolitan area or around a small town). I have heard it said that a dollar spent locally moves over seven times or something like that.

A dollar spent in a national chain, Wal-Mart or anywhere, is sucked out of the community. I think the formula is different if the place of business is a franchise though, because the franchise owner is also likely to live in the community.

Another reason successful local businesses are important to local communities is in the arts. Most arts are funded by donations and with the increase in corporate mergers fewer and fewer cities have corporate headquarters. That means that the executives do not live in town and therefore do not frequent the local arts such as the symphony and theatre. Without that connection many arts organizations are suffering.