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.
Me too, but handicapped parking is a government privilege -- actually enforceable by the police. Wal-Mart cannot do that on its own. If there aren't enough handicapped slots, blame the politicians.
At the nearest Wal-Mart, I go about a hundred yards to the left and use Petsmart's handicapped parking, which is not as busy :-)
In actuality, economists have proven that the 'evils' of big oil existed in the minds of corrupt Washington politicians. Big oil actually lowered the cost of gas and oil, efficiently providing it at low costs to millions of consumers. The net result of 'anti-monoplist' legislation was to re-direct millions of dollars from effieceint provision of goods and services to line the pockets of lobbyists and politicians of both parties. Of course, the leftist 'history' textbooks and teachings in our anti-capitalist, anti-business schools teach the exact opposite.
Querstions for my fellow Catholics here. How does Rerum Novarum - http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_15051891_rerum-novarum_en.html - the great encyclical on economics by HH Pope Leo XIII apply? How does Walmart differ from Kmart, Target, Shopko, Walgreens, Costco and the others in that regards? Is it a sin for a Catholic to shop at one particular store rather than another? Does the refusal by Walmart to carry the so-called "morning after" pill affect your opinions?
But most Walmart employees feel that they are in a BETTER job than the one they left. Go figure. Stoopid people, right?
"U.S. counties where Wal-Mart stores were built from 1987 to 1998 had higher poverty levels than anywhere else."
That's right! Why? Walmart built in low wag, lost cost areas.
The Taft Hartley Act? Can you explain that? What effect does that act have on competition?
Because, as Rush says so many times, economic education in this country is abysmal.
There are many good conservatives that do not understand how a market economy works. They react with emotion rather than reason, picking on 'big oil' only when prices are high and picking on Wal-Mart only when bad news is in the air.
Is this even a valid comparison? The figure posted for Wal-Mart is for sales clerks, while the figures posted for Costco and Sam's appear to be for all employees. I don't think any high-volume retailer could stay in business paying its clerks $11-$15 per hour.
Perhaps the taxes in Huntington are too high? It might be the same reason why people are moving out of the larger cities? They are not bad citizens, just saavy consumers.
Their employees are free to seek employment anywhere they wish at any time. If you are not satisfied with the wage or working conditions of your job, then it is your responsibility, and your responsibility alone to rectify the situation. Employers have a duty to stockholders to keep costs low and profits high. That is the only reason to be in business.
Yes, you didn't 'follow' me and my comments aren't directed at you so you don't need to defend. But...
If I made the differentiation between essential attributes and marketing attributes, would that make things a bit clearer? No one needs an item with these marketed attributes, they're not essential to anyone and certainly not worth $20+
But WM is praised for enabling consumption.
I use WM after looking else where for my product.
I sleep in on Sundays, and I'm not awake good yet. Was that sarcasm?
Walmart's so-called, ''Made in America'' campaign was a fraud. The ''American'' manufacturing venues were Pacific islands, U.S. protectorates, where they imported thousands, upon thousands of Chinese and other Asian indentured, confined, necessitious workers to whom they paid a mere few cents per hour and whose paycheck went back to Walmart for their meager food, slum, barrack-style housing and disgraceful living conditions. A retrogression to the 'company store' of the Robber Baron days of the 1880s railroad construction across the U.S.
In theory, U.S. labor and minimum wage laws are supposed to apply on those islands. In practice, they don't and Walmart took advantange of the absence of the labor law enforcement as they appled ''Made in the USA'' tag on the product you bought thinking you were supporting the American economy.
Not true!
According to these 'conservatives' posting here, Wal-Mart should do the following:
provide full, no-deductible health-care for all employees
provide full, lifetime child-care for all employees
provide wages higher than the national average..no higher
purchase only products made in the USA, regardless of cost, but not raise prices to consumers
pay taxes in every community affected by their business
subsidize every Mom & Pop store affected by their presence
deposit their money at the local bank forever
unionize their entire workforce
etc, etc, etc
These are conservatives?
Using an $8.23 an hour job to subsist on is not something that a responsible adult cannot change. It is always possible to return to school and acquire more and new marketable job skills that will lead to an even better job at Walmart or somewhere else. Employers do not pay and should not pay $20 an hour for a job that is only worth $8 an hour.
ping
Please be serious. If you go to any Walmart, there are ten times the amount of handicapped spaces that are actually necessary. They sit vacant frequently.
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.