AMosely

- Frontline: Is wal-mart Good for America : http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/walmart/

-Predatory pricing litigation: http://www.lawmall.com/rpa/chap6.html

-Hidden (taxpayer) costs of walmart jobs: http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/lowwage/walmart.pdf:
"Reliance by wal-mart workers on public assistance programs in California comes at a cost to the taxpayers of an estimated $86 million annually."

This is one of the main areas where I don't find their business practices and philosphies to be sustainable with regard to the global marketplace. No, we can't compete with the labor practices of China right now because those practices border on the inhumane and would be for the most part illegal in this country. Wal-mart's practices perpetuate this imbalance at a significant scale, rapidly expanding the US/Chinese trade deficit, which has been defined as unsustainable under current conditions (namely declining demand for US goods) - http://www.opencrs.com/rpts/RL33186_20051213.pdf and http://www.policyreview.org/dec04/stein_print.html.

I do realize that wal-mart is only part of a larger problem when it comes to economic sustainability, however they do present a rather glaring example of what is wrong with a monopolistic big-box retail market model. It is easy to make an example of them as a negative trendsetter and catalyst for market change.

CingularDuality

I didn't read the article, just your excerpt, but one of the things that I understand WalMart is toying with is mandatory membership in a club. It would be free, but the front doors to the store wouldn't open unless you're carrying your membership card with its imbedded RFID chip in it. When you walk up to a product, the price displayed would be customized for YOU based on your RFID demographic and sales history information. There could be a sale just for you! I understand that they're also flirting with this for a more sinister reason: Those shoppers that do all their shopping at WalMart would get the lowest prices. Those shoppers that usually just buy the sale items would find that their custom prices have gone up everywhere else in an attempt for the store to recoup a bit of money. And this would be persistant. If somebody shops for sale items only for six months, and then has to do some unexpected grocery shopping one day, they're going to end up paying back a LOT of the money that they saved on those sale items in the form of higher priced groceries. So, the smart shoppers would end up having their everyday prices raised, while the "regular" customers would enjoy lower prices throughout the store.

Really, it's just another way to market things, though. It's a way to make people think they're getting a deal when stuff is on sale, when the stores really make their money elsewhere anyway...

__________________

Become a supporting member!

Buy a Tactical Duck!
Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

Steeler

Wow. You know, working in advertising, one of the things you learn very quickly (if you're smart) is that you are being lied to constantly, every minute of every day, in ways you are not even consciously aware of. We are a society of marketing, and it is cold, insidious and inhuman.

__________________

carRamrod

One of my biggest complaints with Wal-mart and other big-box retailers is how they treat their employees during days of utterly massive profits. I applaud states like Maryland who realize it is wrong for large companies to act irresponsibly toward the health of their employees. Maryland just passed a law requiring employers with 10,000 employees or more to spend at least 8% of thier payroll on health benefits.

Of course, Wal-mart spent millions in public relations campaigns to combat this effort. Of course, the Republican governor of Maryland vetoed the bill and he was subsequently overridden by the MD State Legislature.

There must be a balance between corporate interests and the interests of working people. We are way out of balance today.

Kerostasis

Yes, we call it the "Wal-Mart Tax". How often do states pass new laws designed specifically to change the actions of ONE company they don't like?

__________________

El_Gringo_Grande

Probably not very often. But they pass new laws to help individual companies a whole bunch.

Maybe that says something about Wal-Mart, eh?

__________________
I’m not racists, I have republican friends. Radio show host.
- "The essence of tyranny is the denial of complexity". -Jacob Burkhardt
- "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" - Emerson
- "People should not be afraid of it's government, government should be afraid of it's People." - Line from V for Vendetta
- If software were as unreliable as economic theory, there wouldn't be a plane made of anything other than paper that could get off the ground. Jim Fawcette

TG_JBRanger

Okay, I have met the man, and I can truly say this man was all about the good ol' US of A. Down to earth and humble. Yes, I had met him on several occasions.

Now, with that said, his money grubbing kids were just waiting for the ol man to kick the bucket and have started their tyrannical takeover. Ugh, it kills me each and EVERY time I even step into a Wal-Mart.

__________________

Kerostasis

It all depends on who you ask. I'm sure there are plenty of perfectly rational people who take one position, and stick with it---and either criticize both Wal-mart and illegal immigration, or criticize neither and accept both. And I'll trust you are one of them.

But at the same time, there are plenty of political demagogues who pick and choose their stand on the issue based on who is being blamed. They are perfectly happy to blame Walmart for running up state health care costs, while turning a blind eye to all of the costs incurred by the massive illegal population.




*Reads study*

Wow...they certainly do a lot of guessing in that study.

So they start by admitting they have no idea how many Walmart workers actually USE public assistance, and plan to estimate it based on their salaries.

Then they admit they dont even have Wal-mart's salary figures for California, and plan to assume its the same as the rest of the nation. (note that the minimum wage in CA is about $1.60 higher than most of the nation, and I have 2 friends in California who work low-skilled retail jobs and earn several dollars per hour more than in comparable jobs around here)

Next, they explain their plan to estimate public health costs by cross-referencing Wal-marts average wage and demographics against state demographic patterns for public assistance...except they dont have Wal-marts demographic statistics either.

So, by multiplying together a bunch of numbers that they dont have, they have arrived at a new number that they triumphantly tout as the Cost To Taxpayers For Wal-mart. Pick your sources better next time, Mosely.

__________________