Replies

"Their clothing disintegrates upon the first wash..."

So then don't buy clothing from them. Look: Wal-Mart's policy is simple--stock it deep and sell it cheap.

Wal-Mart doesn't sell amazing clothes. If you want a shirt that won't fall apart, order your shirts from Jermyn Street. Sure, your shirt will cost $120, but it won't fall apart. In case you're a little out of the loop, buy from Charles Tyrwhitt. I buy all my dress shirts from them and they are terrific.

http://www.ctshirts.co.uk/CategoryStatic.aspx?StaticItem=/Static/Category/en-GB/formalshirts.html&CurrentCategory=Home|Men|Form

No one puts a gun to your head and makes you buy from Wal-Mart, especially in these days of the Internet, in which you can log online and buy anything from any corner of the world. But there are a lot of people that live in small towns and Wal-Mart does an amazing job at stocking a wide variety of products at a low, low price--which we appreciate. Without Wal-Mart, we wouldn't have the access to the products otherwise available, especially at such low prices.
So its clothes are made in China? So? Consumers have a funny way of preferring lower prices. If you want to spend more, just click on the link above, you can spend until your little heart is content. But don't knock Wal-Mart for the rest of us who appreciate what they've done, especially in the smaller towns in which we live.

I belong to a large Association, we used to hold our Annual Convention in the Hyatt Regency on Wyzada, in Chicago. It "The Association" would bring from two to five thousand people in for a week. We finally moved to New Orleans, the Chicago Union Thugs, were just too much for us. It sometimes cost more to have a Thug run an electrical cord from the wall to a display, than it did to fly the display from California, commercial Airline. Good By Chicago. Figure out how much your Union rate per hour as you stand in the unemployment line.

The problem with the "No one puts a gun to your head and makes you buy from Wal-Mart" mentality is that it ignores human nature, and the negative social effects of unchecked human nature. No one makes people buy crack cocaine or crystal meth, or solicit prostitutes, or pay money for human organs or poach every last bald eagle. But we as a society (at least those with sense in our heads) recognize that such practices are in some way detrimental to society, and hence must be restricted. Therefore, the "no one is forcing you to do it" defense is not an adequate defense of the existence of an institution or practice. That is one of the problems with libertarianism. So what is the cost to our society of the 'Wal-Martization' of America? Outsourcing of manufacturing jobs, displacement and elimination of smaller retail businesses, further distancing of the retailer and the consumer, further distancing of the employer and the employee, increased foreign trade deficit, decreased self-sufficiency, decreased local ecomonic diversity and stability, aesthetic gutting of small-town USA, monopolization of the local market, and the further depersonalization of the local economy, the individual employee and the individual consumer. Recognizing that these losses are real losses, and that they may outweigh the benefits that Wal-Mart provides, does not make one a liberal. Some things are not worth sacrificing so that prices can be cheaper, although this is not generally prima facie obvious to the ordinary individual. If everyone recognized prima facie which practices were harmful to society and invariably avoided them, libertarianism would work. But human nature is not like that. Think about the difference between Pottersville and Bedford Falls. Which had a better economy? Clearly Pottersville. Which was the better place to live? Bedford Falls. But only those individuals with a sufficient degree of virtue and sense recognize that; the rest think, "bring on the drugs and the prostitutes for whoever wants them". The society that maximizes efficiency or wealth is not necessarily the best overall society, since the goods sacrificed in order to achieve that efficiency and wealth may in some cases be worth more. Wal-Mart supporters tend to evaluate the effect of Wal-Mart only by counting dollars, and ignore the intangible social goods that Wal-Mart destroys.