Walmart - Good or Bad? (Chicago, Polo: lawsuit, versus, business)

[Drover]

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

Right, gotcha: when confronted with information that doesn't support your hypothesis, give up. What else can you do, I suppose.

You're more concerned with saving 2% on mass-produced items than ensuring that your children have a decent job market waiting for them.

And of course, feel free to ignore that other inconvenient reality that underemployed Wal-Mart workers might have families as well.

But keep pretending you're actually on the high road here, it's enlightening.

Race to the bottom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yeah yeah, I know, I'm a moral failure, unpatriotic, unconverned about the plight of my fellow man, blah blah blah, *** *** ***, insert stock snide lecture and moral preening here. I've heard it all before and I can't be arsed anymore.

So here's the deal, sport-o: when you had to resort to calling me a moonbat, it became clear there was no point in carrying on. You seem more interested in winning an argument than having a discussion. Since that's what you seem to need, I'll concede it to you: you win. Congratulations. Pat yourself on the back. But I'm still going to shop at Walmart whenever it suits my needs.

[ajolotl]

Maybe. It's also incredibly easy to go from dominance to irrelevance pretty quickly. There are a lot of clever people out there looking to become the new wal-mart. In the not too distant future someone will. Who could have imagined the current Sears, Montgomery Ward, K-mart, even Microsoft (just a few years ago they were on the cusp of ruling our lives).

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

I think what's being misunderstood here is some idea I (and other WalMart bashers) think Wal-Mart is the Great Satan.

Wal-Mart is a for-profit, out-of-state corporation that is doing exactly what it was chartered to do, make a profit.

But so was Standard Oil back in the day.

There's a reason Standard Oil got busted up. The fact is, once corporations get to a certain size they can't simply "grow," they have to acquire/destroy their competition. They historically have found that corrupting the political process helps, so they lobby to change laws, weaken regulations, etc.

I would HOPE we all agree monopolies are bad for the economy - but maybe assuming people understand why monopolies are bad is an incorrect assumption.

So here's a question for the Wal-Mart supporters - once the competition is gone, what stops Wal-Mart from behaving logically, and raising prices as the market will bear?

Remember that we're not just talking about luxury consumables, we're talking about FOOD.

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by nana053

The risk to society was that Standard Oil, Alcoa or the A&P would lower prices to drive competitors out of business. And then raise prices.

Standard Oil did exactly that.

And all you goof Wal-Mart supporters can shut it as far as I'm concerned until you read this:

THE HISTORY OF THE STANDARD OIL COMPANY

Seriously, you people are a friggin menace to society.

When you give up your health insurance, your sick days, your vacation time, your workers comp laws and OSHA regulations then you can pretend to have ground to stand on.

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by ajolotl

Maybe. It's also incredibly easy to go from dominance to irrelevance pretty quickly. There are a lot of clever people out there looking to become the new wal-mart. In the not too distant future someone will. Who could have imagined the current Sears, Montgomery Ward, K-mart, even Microsoft (just a few years ago they were on the cusp of ruling our lives).

Microsoft was in fact successfully sued for monopolistic behavior, see link at bottom.

Drover- I am most definitely interested in winning this argument, defined as when you stop claiming that looking out for #1 is somehow good for society.

Be as selfish as you want, just don't even think about trying to justify it using economic terms -
Adam Smith may be the most misquoted human being in all of human history.

As for: The Sherman Anti Trust law was used against the monopoly of the phone co which resulted in many smaller co's being formed and the end result was HIGHER PRICES.

Higher prices defined at which point in time? Don't you believe in competition and the free market?

By the way, prices aren't the end-all be-all (you're aware we're talking about Wal-Mart, nobody denies their prices are low). Consumers having choices is also important.

Here's an excellent read.

Sherman Antitrust Act - What Happened Next . . . - Microsoft, Company, Court, Roosevelt, Software, and Companies

[Humboldt1]

Any economics major can tell you that anti-trust lawsuits are so drug out through the courts that by the time they settle the firms are often no longer in a monopolistic market.

One such example is IBM. The government went after them and by the time it settled, IBM was no longer the dominant player that it once was.

The same thing would happen if they went after Wal-Mart. In 30-40 years someone else will be the dominant player, maybe an online grocer or whatever. Nothing remains the same for long.

[tonythetuna]

A possible look at where some of the Walmart's will be located in the city:

Report: Wal-Mart Might Be Interested In Old Borders Sites « CBS Chicago

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by Humboldt1

Any economics major can tell you that anti-trust lawsuits are so drug out through the courts that by the time they settle the firms are often no longer in a monopolistic market.

One such example is IBM. The government went after them and by the time it settled, IBM was no longer the dominant player that it once was.

The same thing would happen if they went after Wal-Mart. In 30-40 years someone else will be the dominant player, maybe an online grocer or whatever. Nothing remains the same for long.

IBM is the wrong model for comparison, they aren't a merchant operation.

Standard Oil is a better one, and it certainly didn't go away, it just got bought up, first Amoco, now BP.

[makossa]

Hate to be such a late comer to this thread and in all honestly I haven't had a chance to read the entire thread yet. But I will.

This dispute is also raging on here in NY:
HERE

Just my two cents, but I think in the long term walmart really isn't good for America.

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by makossa

Just my two cents, but I think in the long term walmart really isn't good for America.

ironically enough, I don't think anyone supporting one in their community necessarily believes that.

this is the pro-corporatist agenda at work, though- set cities & states against each other, competing for the right to give tax breaks to exploitative businesses.

[tonythetuna]

Originally Posted by makossa

This dispute is also raging on here in NY:
HERE

Thanks for the info.