Posted on 12/04/2005 3:43:27 AM PST by beaversmom
IF you're among the 100 million Americans who shop at Wal-Mart weekly, it probably never occurred to you that you're supporting a malevolent institution described by critics as a new "Evil Empire." The retail colossus remains so popular and so powerful (its 1.2 million workers make it the nation's biggest private employer) that the persistent sniping about Wal-Mart's business practices inevitably sounds like irrelevant sour grapes.
Nevertheless, filmmaker Robert Greenwald has just unleashed a bitter documentary ("Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price") that has been shown in November in some 3,000 private homes, union halls and churches across the United States before its general DVD release. Produced with support from labor organizations (which resent their inability to unionize Wal-Mart), and endorsed by Hollywood comedian-activists Al Franken and Jeaneane Garofolo, Greenwald's film accuses the company of exploiting employees, despoiling the environment, destroying small businesses, and flooding the United States with sweatshop merchandise from abroad.
Neither Greenwald nor his backers expect to connect with an eager mass audience; it's safe to say more people will visit Wal-Mart stores in any single day than will watch the film over the next 10 years. In fact, all the angry debates over Sam Walton's legacy occupy an elitist, abstract atmosphere utterly disconnected from the real world of shopping and spending.
"Progressive" activists may hate Wal-Mart, but they must recognize that if the company closed tomorrow it would throw hundreds of thousands out of work and make the lives of millions of customers vastly less convenient.
Critics insist they don't want the retail giant to fail: They merely want better salaries and benefits for workers. But even the most rudimentary understanding of economics indicates that paying more for employees leads inevitably to higher prices, leading in turn to less business, less growth and fewer new jobs — particularly the entry-level jobs our economy so desperately needs.
If critics challenge Wal-Mart's business model as woefully misguided, they should be able to press rival companies to deploy their more enlightened notions, thereby displacing the Bentonville behemoth from its position of dominance.
At Arkansas headquarters, corporate leaders aren't exactly holding their breath, but they do seem annoyed by the latest attempt to discredit their brand name. Their public-relations firm has researched Greenwald's filmmaking background and focused new attention on his long-ago creative triumphs such as "Portrait of a Stripper" and "Beach Girls," along with Greenwald's one big budget film, "Xanadu" (which made the dishonor roll in my own 1986 bad-movies book, "Son of Golden Turkey Awards").
More recently, Greenwald has focused on unabashedly left-wing documentaries, including last year's "Outfoxed," an angry "exposé" of Fox News Channel — another profoundly profitable institution that has earned enthusiastic support from the American heartland.
In fact, a consistent contempt for ordinary Americans seems to connect both poles of Greenwald's career: In his earlier, populist "Portrait of a Stripper" phase, he attempted to connect with a mass audience by insulting its intelligence; in his more-recent work as a high-minded documentarian, he has portrayed the people as helpless boobs manipulated by evil corporations, and unable to make appropriate decisions about their own long-term welfare.
One of the sponsors of the new film's premiere, Liza Featherstone of The Nation magazine, begins one of her frequent diatribes against her least-favorite company by sniffing: "Wal-Mart is an unadorned eyesore surrounded by a parking lot, even its logo aggressively devoid of flourish." Of course, most middle-class shoppers will care far more about getting decent value for their money than a logo's flourish or a store's architectural amenities.
Intellectuals have always despised the "bourgeoisie" (In the '20s, H.L. Mencken ceaselessly derided the "boob-oisie") for its hard-headed practicality, refusing to recognize that most people simply don't have the luxury to look beyond narrow notions of self-interest and affordability.
It's true that thousands of (mostly well-heeled) liberals may find hours and dollars to sponsor showings of a new documentary looking down on Wal-Mart, but few of their fellow citizens have the inclination to join them. Most of us work too hard and save too little, struggling to pay credit-card minimums and hoping, some day, to finance braces for the kids.
In this context, it's still possible to walk into a vast, bustling sanctuary of a Wal-Mart store and feel dazzled by the startling array of products, reassured by the clockwork efficiency of the whole operation and, yes, unapologetically gratified by the low prices. Michael Medved hosts a nationally syndicated daily radio talk show, broadcast in Seattle on KTTH-AM (770), noon to 3 p.m.
Such ignorance emphasized and enhanced by one's hatred of the very professionals who keep the miscreant Walmart from defrauding these tens of thousands of employees demonstrates a disturbing, no, disgraceful, lack of civic integrity and candor.
Everyone of your ilk hates lawyers until the Walmarts of the world screw them and then, that fashionable hatred among the far right seems to moderate as they themselves seek professional help that only lawyers can provide.
While I would not wish anyone suffer from injustice, I would hope that ignorant folks, like you, learn that the benefits that come from the protections of the civil law are realized because there are lawyers who undertake to represent worthwhile causes like the Walmart employees--and even you, if you need them.
Our WalMart Supercenter pays more per hour than the Mom and Pop grocery stores do and ever did. Mom and pop could get away with paying minimum wage and they don't offer health insurance at all no matter how long an employee works for them.
Maybe in your neck of the woods WalMart doesn't help the local economy but that's not true in my area. As an example, we've had 3 new fast food restaurants, a new jewelry store, an antique mall, two dollar stores and several boutique type stores open here. Home sales are up and people are getting more for their homes than they were pre-WM. The local hospital was able to afford to expand and upgrade. We're able to attract more specialists in the medical field. The local hospital now advertises for more nursing positions as do the local assisted living and nursing homes.
Only one grocery store closed because WalMart built their new store close to it. Of course the grocery store was way overpriced. They've since re-opened in their old spot but are now leaner. They're doing quite well because they've focused on what they did best which is offering excellent meats.
People's standard of living is better because they don't have to pay outlandish prices for every day items. A couple of examples: I now pay 3.50 for 8 bars of Dial/Lever Bros/other name brand soap instead of 3 bars for 4.96. A bottle of 50 extra strength, coated Bayer aspirin now costs me 4.36 instead of 6.50. I can buy the economy sized bottle of my shampoo for what I used to pay for the regular sized bottle. Or store brand Nyquil, I can either pay 3.99 for a regular sized bottle or go to WM and buy 2 family sized bottles for 4.27. I could go on using cereal, canned vegetables, pet food, etc. as examples of saving money by shopping at WalMart.
The money I save shopping at WalMart allows me to splurge at the boutique type shops or to eat steak more than once every couple of months or to put more money in savings.
Fifty new jobs were also added because the old WalMart building has been turned into a warranty facility for WalMart's jewelry.
Is my area the exception? How did we "luck" out?
It's their inner child...still believes in boogie men.
That is actually the point I was trying to make. You made it more clearly.
Thanks.
+Class actions benefit lawyers. Period. Well, OK, the socialist left as well.
No it is not just your area. The facts actually support your anecdotal evidence.
And, for what it's worth, that is exactly how it has happened in our town. In fact, we've had MORE mom and pops open up since they got here than we had before. Go figure.
The railoads were built by capitalists who had to deal with corrupt politicians in order to achieve their goals. "Robber barons" were people who did well by building the nation, in an era of no income tax, and many, such as JP Morgan, were highly ethical. The "company store" belongs to the mining industry not the railroads. Nice try though, and thanks for playing.
As someone who's been a member of a successful "class action," but received practicly nothing, while the amount the lawyers collected was enormous (IIRC, I got a few "free item" coupons, worth about $10 in total, while I was bilked out of well over $100 by the company that lost the judgement), I believe that many "class actions" are initiated by lawyers, simply because they believe that they can rake in lots of money, by going after a very small amount per member of the class, and making it up in volume. They're going after the "deep pockets," not too different than what the lawyers did in the tobacco settlements, which was nothing more than a "legal" shake down. Now maybe there are some "noble" lawyers out there who participate in class actions, but the one I participated in seem to have had their best interests in mind when they filed. And it seems that many other cases I've read about are the same.
Such ignorance emphasized and enhanced by one's hatred of the very professionals who keep the miscreant Walmart from defrauding these tens of thousands of employees demonstrates a disturbing, no, disgraceful, lack of civic integrity and candor.
As I mentioned, in the post you've responed to, I wish that the vast majority of the judgements go to those who were cheated out of their earned wages. If these cases were filed on a case by case basis, using contingency fees, the judgements would go with about 1/3 to the lawyer, and 2/3 to the injured party. I feel that's fair. But it seems to me that in many cases, class action suits dilute the judgements, to the point where a plaintiff who should have a good case for a judgement to be made whole, loses out due to the number of members of the class. In fact, I believe that if there was even a threat for tens of thousands of law suits, Walmart would offer very fair settlements to every cheated employee that would probably far exceed the amount of a class action judgement.
Everyone of your ilk hates lawyers until the Walmarts of the world screw them and then, that fashionable hatred among the far right seems to moderate as they themselves seek professional help that only lawyers can provide.
Actually, I was in exactly this sort of situation years ago, and it seems that my lawyer was either completely incompetant or corrupt, so yes, I have a personal dislike for some lawyers, although I now know a few that I would trust. Of course, one only handles capital cases, and he's a law professor. So I guess I'm OK if I'm ever accused of murdering someone.
While I would not wish anyone suffer from injustice, I would hope that ignorant folks, like you, learn that the benefits that come from the protections of the civil law are realized because there are lawyers who undertake to represent worthwhile causes like the Walmart employees--and even you, if you need them.
Well, being one who HAS sufferred either from innept or corrupt lawyers in the past, I can say that I have been screwed by a major corporation (a subsidiary of Pepsico) about 30 years ago. While I couldn't even get reimbursed for my medical bills from a gas explosion at work, or even get workmans comp (that's how badly the lawyer screwed things up), the corporation I worked for WAS able to get a settlement from the local utility company. So, yes, I do have a "bad taste in my mouth" when it comes to lawyers.
Mark
Thanks.
Well, please don't tell anybody. I've got a reputation to protect, and if anyone finds out that I stated something clearly, there'll be hell to pay!
Mark
It makes good economic sense more mom and pop shops open when a WalMart SuperCenter opens. In the post of mine you responded to I mentioned we had several boutique specialty shops open when WalMart opened. One of the major reasons a store can be successful is location. Locating a specialty shop near a Supercenter brings in traffic. I can open a boutique specialty shop which offers unique quality items but if I don't have the exposure I'm not going to succeed.
There's a reason the adage of "Location, location, location!" is true. :)
No, Rush has faith in the Free Market....a trait you do not share.
You worry that Wal-Mart is abusive. If it is, it will not exist for very long, regardless of gov't intervention.
We don't shop much at WalMart up here in the great white north. There selection of touques are really limited.
Bump and a drip!
BigM
OK---I was a member of a class and received a check for the full amount of the fraud imposed on me (actually my wife) through credit card cheating by one of the largest banks issuing cards. The envelope contained a check for $4,000 (plus). Of course there are sleazy lawyers and I don't like them any more than you. But the nature of the procedure is sound and not flawed.
Howdy from the not-much-farther-south frozen north :-)
BS!!! Any "Progressive" or Conservative with a brain realizes if there is a need for goods and services, some enterprising person will provide. I guess we all lived in caves before Walmart showed up.
It would take some time to fill the void. The Wal-Mart behemoth wasn't built overnight and if it was easily replicated their competition wouldn't be lagging so far behind. I know I would miss them if they vanished tomorrow, and I'm sure the 100 million people that shop there weekly would miss them as well.
It might take a month or two IF they all disappeared overnight. Hardly realistic to assume they would though.
We are witnessing a downturn in Walmarts dominance, leading to more competition, which is a good thing.
Now, you may hold some personal fondness for Walmart. But I seriously doubt most care what name hangs over the door. Their only concern is, someone is there to sell goods at a price they are willing to pay.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.