Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha
You know, name-calling really degrades the quality of your argument. But, I will try to address your points.
Yep, but calling a tomato a tomato is well.. but I'll refrain
It is not common for communities to pay WalMart to establish in their towns, but there are numerous examples. I can surmise why these communities decided to pay WalMart - they probably expected a growth in jobs and more revenue for the community. They probably saw it as an investment. They were probably unaware of the detrimental effect of WalMart on other businesses, and about the eventual costs to community services (schools, emergency services) as I mentioned earlier.
People took a gamble without doing their homework. Crap happens. If I went out today and bet my entire life savings on a random horse in a race and lost I expect NO ONE to cry a river about it. The fact is, the few communities this happened to did this. Yah, I feel a little pity for them because I'm not heartless, but if any community actually put all their hopes and dreams on Walmart, or any business, then that is their fault. Also, you can't blame walmart for this because it happens everywhere with any major industry that pulls out of a community. It's happened in the past in major automotive towns and it is happening again. It has happened at every little hick town that leeched on to a major military installation that pulled out later. You going to call the US military evil for closing down a base/post because it was no longer needed and thus dooming the community? Look crap happens and the survivors move on and there will be casualties. That does not make Walmart evil or bad in this instance.
Of course WalMart pays minimum wage; I didn't claim they didn't. But again, how is the minimum wage "livable"? Other companies may pay slightly more, which can make a big difference to some people. Regardless, given WalMart's size, they constitute a large percentage of jobs in any community they're established in, so that drives down average wages.
As I said before the vast majority of business everywhere in the US pays only minimum or very close to minimum wage. Sorry, but it's a fact of life. Just because walmart does it while offering a ton of jobs doesn't classify walmart as evil again. Also, to point out a fallacy, walmart actually offers "competitive" wages for an area. This means if the average job in a community pays minimum wage, they offer only minimum wage. If an area offers higher than minimum wage on average, then they do so as well. Another poster above pointed out he makes more than minimum wage as a walmart employee and I have had friends work there before who started off for more. As someone mentioned earlier, the applicant pool is another resource commodity and Walmart does do the bare minimum to get what they need out of it per store. Again, does this make them evil or bad? No.
Regarding overtime, former WalMart managers have gone on record to state that they were forced to fudge timesheet records so that overtime does not count. Even in cases where workers only put in an extra 1-2 hours per week simply to complete their duties because they were so busy, these HOURS WERE NOT COUNTED. Of course companies don't want to grant large amounts of overtime regularly, but to disallow it on a small-scale, piecemeal basis, when it has already been worked, is petty, selfish, and ILLEGAL.
Sad to say, but this crap happens everywhere. Corporations are run by people and people get corrupt. Enron anyone? The WHOLE of Walmart doesn't do this or they would be out of business. As in "fudging" numbers because that is illegal. You get regional, or district managers or others that are looking to keep their jobs at all costs. Middle to upper management corruption is nothing new and will continue to happen in all industry for now and forever into the future so long as humans exist. I can tell you stories of the crap I personally know about from working other large places like 6 Flags over Texas, Circuit City, CompUSA, Best Buy, and other low paying "teenager" jobs. Walmart does its best to stamp this out but will never be free of it. Again, this doesn't make them evil or bad unless they stop doing this.
You've pulled the "tough shit" card on small businesses that fold because of WalMart. Many of these businesses were not on the brink of folding, but had been operating profitably for over 40 years. Beyond that, they provided valuable customer service and a unique presence that enhanced their communities. A large corporation simply cannot provide those benefits.
Yes I pulled that card, and NO they weren't successful. The majority of them may not have been in the "red" as in debt already, but most small business is small because they work basically "pay check to pay check" meaning they have zero growth. Thus they are small. They make little to no profit and only make enough to keep running from day to day. Any financial adviser will tell you this is in FACT on the brink. Why? Because one little push and they are in the red and on the way down. Once you start sinking it's hard to swim back up. Hence, I will stick to this statement I made as I am correct. The majority of these small businesses that were put out by walmart did so because they were on the edge. Again, this has happened before and will forever happen so long as there is competition in business. Anyone else here remember the hub bub that came out when Blockbuster first started? So many mom and pop rental places folded because of it. Did Blockbuster ruin the way of life for America or bring down our economy or social economic structure? No. In fact, Blockbuster is now going under because of Netflicks and Hulu and others that are edging in to the market. Competition exists because of this. Despite what you may think, Walmart will not last forever. Someone will eventually find a better way. HEB has done that in Texas for groceries for example.
Again, competition where the better survive and the weak fall is AMERICA. Unless you want to call this country evil, I advise you to watch your tongue on this point
As I stated before, even profitable small businesses simply cannot compete with WalMart. It's a numbers game, and they will lose every time. It's even worse when WalMart is granted unfair advantages, as it has been in some cases. It's a slanted playing field.
Wrong, see my point above. HEB was small business and has stolen the grocery market in Texas from Walmart. Circuit City and Conns were the major electronic consumer store players WAY before Best buy and look who is on top now? When Blockbuster came out they put many mom and pop stores under, but not all of them. Hollywood video came out to compete and held ground, but now both are losing out to Netflix, Hulu, and on demand cable. Look at the American automotive market. You do realize what the "Big Three" did back in their hay-day right? Go read up on tucker cars and other car manufacturers the ig three tried to screw over. It happens, and while I don't agree with the SLAPS (wiki the term) or some of the more illegal practices they did back in the day, it happened. Now look at where the "Big Three" are? Collapsing due to economic pressure put on by the foreign market. Again i say, so what if the weak fall? No one stays on top forever.
One more point on this. Not every small business goes under when Walmart comes to town. Name one single community that can only claim, Well, we have a Walmart and there's a field over there. Every community allows for niche markets and Walmart doesn't fill them all.
Your stance on usage of government programs is preposterous. Government programs are supposed to be for people who are unemployed, disabled, or attending school, etc. I don't condone working people needing to rely on the government just to survive.
If WalMart wants to hire elderly and disabled people, that's great, but they're a minority of workers.
No, government assisstance by it's very nature MUST BE UNBIASED. If a government program is put out that grants help to those that hire elderly and cripples, then it must do so for ALL. that program is in place to give incentive to businesses to hire those that can do a job, but would otherwise never get a job compared to able bodied workers. On this point I have to hold back from my refrain and call you a hypocrite. Do your homework on this because Sam Walton major thing when he started his little store in a small town in Arkansas was to provide some jobs to those around him that were suffering and couldn't find work. He did not do it for some tax breaks. In fact, those weren't claimed until much later. In this regards, that puts Walmart on a much higher ethical pedestal than other businesses that REFUSE to hire someone even if they could get a government benefit for doing so.
What about the significant numbers of able-bodied, working age people who need to use food stamps and other government aid, because their WalMart job doesn't pay enough to cover all the basic necessities (rent, food, clothes, transportation, etc.). I think many people would agree that is a major problem.
I will point out once more that the vast majority of jobs, regardless of the industry, only pay minimum wage. This has nothing to do with Walmart and is why minimum wage keeps rising year after year. Because America is founded on capitalism and competition you are going to have winners and you are going to have losers. The losers from an economic standpoint will be the poor. You may not like it, or find it unfair, but there is no perfect system out there. America's founding fathers picked this system and look where it has led us so far in the past couple hundred years? I'm not calling it perfect, and it has plenty of flaws, but don't be blaming Walmart for this. Just because walmart does what the system allows doesn't make it wrong.
Think about this. What do you think would happen to Walmart if it payed out double minimum wage everywhere? Don't you forsee even worse consequences? Most businesses then would have to pay more to keep employees. Most of those small business that I mentioned that were on the "brink" meaning no growth but no debt would definitely fold. On top of that, do you think Walmart could continue to keep paying employees like that and maintain low price points for their products? I don't think so. They would fold and something else would come up in it's place. That is just how the free market economy works.
You stated that you don't like WalMart because of their dirty stores and poor customer service, so you shop elsewhere. Fine. That is your right as a consumer to shop where you please.
However, don't try to claim that this is a system of fair choices. WalMart is unfairly (and in some cases illegally) stacking the system in its favour, to the detriment of other businesses, workers, and the public. That so many are willing to turn a blind eye in the name of cheaper prices is absolutely shameful.
I never claimed the American economic system was fair. In fact it is not as any economics major or philospher will tell you. It does however work. It is a system in place that has winners and losers and drives humans forward. It is based on competition which is the basic instinct of all living animals on this planet. Everyone and everything competes for resources. Humans have tried other systems, and have succeeded and failed to various degrees. Even the American current take on the worlds free market will eventually adapt and change or fall. It is just how the world works. This is more P&N and has nothing to do with Walmart despite you trying to hang it on Walmart.
Facebook
Twitter