Walmart a major problem (so my husband says)

[PismoPam]

Wal-Mart has done more for poor people than any government program in history.

 

[Apparition]

What about Target, guys?

 

[amy31416]

Wal-Mart has done more for poor people than any government program in history.

I agree here. If my grandma were still alive, she'd probably be a greeter at Wal-Mart and would have been able to afford her prescriptions.

 

[Laughingcow]

Well, they are a problem here because they haven't put a store in my neighborhood yet.

Ditto... Some people in my town have been fighting against them moving here for years, instead all we have is some shoddy Kmart with half an inventory and too high of prices. I'd like to know exactly who is opposing the move so I can have a few words with them...

 

[Dr.3D]

What I tend to see is more and more state run/subsidized monopoly systems.

The once small one room school house is a thing of the past.

Next they put the small farm owners out of business by gobbling up farm land and using corporate farming. (Remember the Grapes of Wrath?)

Now they put the small mom and pop stores out if business by gobbling up a big chunk of land near a city or town and use corporate vending.

What's next, corporate housing?

 

[liberteebell]

What I tend to see is more and more state run/subsidized monopoly systems.

The once small one room school house is a thing of the past.

Next they put the small farm owners out of business by gobbling up farm land and using corporate farming. (Remember the Grapes of Wrath?)

Now they put the small mom and pop stores out if business by gobbling up a big chunk of land near a city or town and use corporate vending.

What's next, corporate housing?

Don't give 'em any ideas...

 

[ghemminger]

Walmart has cheap quality and cheap prices...shop there if you can stand all the illegals and the gestapo tactics at the door

I buy from there and prompty return what I can for my money back after a few weeks...

Anything to screw such a co. is good news to me.

 

[kimo]

I'm not so happy with the way Walmart treats it's employees. Most I have talked to, have told me they only got to work for a maximum of 89 days. After that time, they were let go.

Now I have to ask, is there a 90 day law where if an employer doesn't keep you employed for at least 90 days, they don't have to provide for your unemployment compensation?

Wal-Mart Denies Workers Basic Rights

Weak labor laws perpetuate abuse.
Full report & training video

http://hrw.org/campaigns/walmart/index.htm

 

[tsetsefly]

walmart is a scapegoat for a flawed monetary policy.

+1

 

[VIDEODROME]

I think Walmart can be okay in an average size city especially if there are other competing stores in the area like Costco, Meijer, Kroger, or Target. If the local markets are diverse then I think a Walmart can come in without doing to much damage.

It's the misguided small economies who get screwed. They make concessions to bring in a Walmart thinking it'll bring more property tax and jobs but then their small local economy is unbalanced by the giant retail store competing with the local small businesses.

 

[brianewart]

Walmart wouldn't have as much influence if state and local governments didn't pay them to establish stores in their areas, under the guise that it will "create jobs".

They do create jobs. Good jobs.

Econ 101: The Law of Comparative Advantage

Walmart doesn't cause any of our economic woes. Government regulations do.

 

[AceNZ]

I don't understand the desired end-game.

What would the Walmart haters here like to see Walmart do? Close down their stores and fire everyone? Pay higher wages? Offer more benefits? Only hire union workers? Force the kids and others they've hired in China to go back to working in the fields (or starve)?

 

[Dark Aerow]

I don't understand the desired end-game.

What would the Walmart haters here like to see Walmart do? Close down their stores and fire everyone? Pay higher wages? Offer more benefits? Only hire union workers? Force the kids and others they've hired in China to go back to working in the fields (or starve)?

I want them to lobby to get rid of all the regulations on our industries here in the United States. Including minimum wage laws, and the welfare programs.

That would probably fall on deaf ears coming from them though.

I don't understand the hatred toward corporations in general...the only people anyone should be angry at is the politicians.

I used to be one of the people that thought all of our problems were because of greedy corporations. I can't even figure out why I used to believe that...It just doesn't make any sense to me anymore.

 

[sophocles07]

It isn't really walmart's fault, they are just another greedy corporation and will do whatever they can within the law to compete.

I hate them nonetheless—they are AVARICIOUS motherfuckers.

Besides, they offer the lowest, most unhealthy (in every imaginable way) products available (with a few exceptions). Stroll the aisles looking at Will Smith DVDS, live ’85 albums of hair bands, extra-cheese Doritos, assorted trans. fat products, board games made by hack preachers (literally http://www.shop.com/Your_Best_Life_...steen-39346395-52327888-p!.shtml?sourceid=298 ), etc etc.

This obviously applies to many of these kinds of stores—but Wal-Mart is one of the worst, if not THE worst.

Their motivations and the application/execution of whatever will fulfill goals of wealth result in the lowest cultural manifestation in recorded history—Plato would probably resort to molotov cocktails and pipe bombs in his state of shock were he to be teleported into the local Wal-mart.

Also, I don't want to hear any replies to this about how it's not bad to want to get wealth anyway you can. Dangling useless items before the eyes of complete idiots (consumers, in spandex or otherwise) does nothing but further dumb-down society (I can't imagine what Jefferson would say about this kind of greedy miasmatic operation, but it wouldn't be pretty).

 

[Banana]

Looks like the general consensus is that 90% of evils should be attributed to government, and not Wal-mart. But what about pricing- that's something that Wal-mart decided for itself, no?

What about predatory pricing?

I understand that Wal-Mart has a tendency to go after a big lot on a town's outskirt, build a new store, then underprice their inventory to a point that the new store loses money but get several new customers, thus killing off the mom & pop business. When it has established itself as sole superstore, the prices returns to regular levels and store starts to make some profit but the town's economy is basically destroyed and in end, Wal-Mart closes the store and leaves.

 

[sophocles07]

Looks like the general consensus is that 90% of evils should be attributed to government, and not Wal-mart.

It seems absolutely ridiculous to me to say it is only the government. Anyone who participates with the further destruction of American society should not be let off the hook.

We are so far from:

"The revolution took place in the minds of the people"

idealism it's absolutely disgusting.

 

[AceNZ]

Besides, they offer the lowest, most unhealthy (in every imaginable way) products available (with a few exceptions). Stroll the aisles looking at Will Smith DVDS, live ’85 albums of hair bands, extra-cheese Doritos, assorted trans. fat products, board games made by hack preachers (literally http://www.shop.com/Your_Best_Life_...steen-39346395-52327888-p!.shtml?sourceid=298 ), etc etc.

So, you're saying that as long as Walmart sells the kinds of products that you approve of, then everything would be OK. The fact that people want the low and unhealthy kind of stuff that they currently sell doesn't matter. People should be forced to buy only premium stuff, because they don't know what's good for them, but you do.

Does that about cover it?

 

[AceNZ]

Looks like the general consensus is that 90% of evils should be attributed to government, and not Wal-mart. But what about pricing- that's something that Wal-mart decided for itself, no?

What about pricing? The millions of people who shop there seem pretty happy about the prices.

Or are you saying that it would be better for those people were forced to pay a lot more, so that their nice, friendly, but over-priced and under-stocked neighborhood stores can survive? Wouldn't it be better if Walmart kept their low prices and everyone just sent the owners of those stores a check instead? It would basically be the same thing.... Or maybe the government should raise taxes and then subsidize the small stores. Yeah, that's what they usually do, right?

 

[Banana]

Or are you saying that it would be better for those people were forced to pay a lot more, so that their nice, friendly, but over-priced and under-stocked neighborhood stores can survive? Wouldn't it be better if Walmart kept their low prices and everyone just sent the owners of those stores a check instead? It would basically be the same thing.... Or maybe the government should raise taxes and then subsidize the small stores. Yeah, that's what they usually do, right?

You're missing the point. I'm not talking about whether the price are too low, but rather predatory pricing designed to drive out competition.

As I explained in the first post on this thread (quoted in my second post just above), it has been shown that Wal-Mart would open a new store, then set prices artificially low to attract new customers, thus kicking out the small business out of business, and when it has established a virtual monopoly, returns prices to its usual levels. Wal-Mart usually pumps its profit into the extra store, allowing it to absorb huge loss on its profit margin during the low pricing period, then tries to prop the store up on its own. In some cases, the store just fall flat and thus closes. In the process, the economy is destroyed.

Can this happen in a truly free market? Somehow I'd like to think no...

 

[Dark Aerow]

You're missing the point. I'm not talking about whether the price are too low, but rather predatory pricing designed to drive out competition.

As I explained in the first post on this thread (quoted in my second post just above), it has been shown that Wal-Mart would open a new store, then set prices artificially low to attract new customers, thus kicking out the small business out of business, and when it has established a virtual monopoly, returns prices to its usual levels. Wal-Mart usually pumps its profit into the extra store, allowing it to absorb huge loss on its profit margin during the low pricing period, then tries to prop the store up on its own. In some cases, the store just fall flat and thus closes. In the process, the economy is destroyed.

Can this happen in a truly free market? Somehow I'd like to think no...

The second they raise their prices back up it creates an opening in the market, an opening that would be extremely easy to fill in a free market. Anytime a company isn't doing their best to provide for the customer they are going to lose business to an entreprenuer who wants to make some money. It is simply impossible for a company to practice predatory pricing and still stay in business. Of course, it's much easier to practice predatory pricing in a mixed economy, regulations keep competition to a minimum.

Once again, blame government.