Walmart - Good or Bad? (Oregon, Union: apartment, health insurance, home)

[Lookout Kid]

If you don't like Wal-Mart, vote against it with your dollars and don't shop there! That's what I do. If any alternative to Wal-Mart exists, I always go with it. I'd rather buy from the illegal peddlers at the 95th Street Red Line station than Wal-Mart.

Okay, maybe not...

[aragx6]

Honestly if most people who live in Austin want a Wal-Mart then they should have a Wal-Mart. People should shop where they want to shop. My only point was that in Columbia (along with many parts of this country) people don't have a viable alternative.

Now that I do... I am not going back!

[desibear]

Too much Walmart bashing going on...I don't work for them (or any retailer), so take it for what that's worth, but some points need to be made:
- As some posters have said, no one is pulling anyone's leg to shop there. You don't like their tactics, don't shop there.
- Having a Walmart around is a boon for the poor people. If they are both poor and stupid and buy stuff like lemmings,then maybe not. Walmart keeps the prices down and puts a cap on other retailers prices as well. Translation? Same as getting a small raise as far as the average consumer is concerned
- People bash Walmart, Nike, basically big corps like they are making people work in sweatshops in Asia somewher for $1 / day. What no one points out is that the alternative for those people is somehting way less than even that. They are happy with it. We should strive to improve their working situation but blanket statements against low-cost labor are wrong.

...eh, I can go on and on but gotta run for now..<flame suit on>

[thompson84606]

I currently live in Utah but went to HS in Naperville and am looking to reenter the area, so this topic has interest for me. Utah is one of the western fortresses of Wal-Mart...Why? Because other stores have priced people out of their income trying to increase margin to compete with Wally's. I am a 3 year employee of another major grocery store that was once the parent company of Chicago's favorite grocer. If you want to see price gouging you should monitor the prices carefully of your local Jewel or Dominick's. The current margins in produce (my dpt.) at my store have risen to between 30-70% from historical averages MUCH lower. We're running 20% increases in sales this fiscal year with basically the same number of customers. This means that these 'traditional' grocers are using the public hatred of Wal-Mart to capitalize and shaft them on prices just for the experience of shopping at a "real" store. I am paid much better than a Wal-Mart employee, 13.58/hr although WM recently raised their hiring wage to 9.50 because of our extremely low unemployment rate. Yes I have great insurance, but I pay $65/Week for the privilege. That's 15% of my paycheck. The company expects me to shop there with my 5% discount, which I did for a couple of months. My grocery bills for a family of three were $120/week, when I broke down and went to Wal-mart I paid $80 (we have a set menu on our diet). 50% decrease!!!!! You expect me to play patron to a store that charges me $1.69 for a head of lettuce when it's $.69 at Wal-mart? Not on MY income. Many of my coworkers are on medicaid, food stamps, and the like because they thought that the grocery business was a career path. There are 60 year old men that have lived their entire lives in apartments because they topped out at $13/hr and have no other skills. Is this situation better at Wal-Mart? NO!!! BUT, the people hired in my experience with the two supercenters in our town (and knowing many of the employees) are either A. Second earners to their construction working husbands, B. Former retirees who grew tired of retirement and wanted something to do, C. College kids who need a part-time job and can make more at Wal-Mart than working on Campus, or D. Mentally deficient and or disabled people who before this job had lived off of public assistance because they weren't qualified to work anywhere else. My cousin in AZ left his job at WM because of the emergence of severe and violent schizophrenia, and they held his job for him. Yes he makes $8 an hour, but it's the only place that wants him. My company has had lawsuits for making managers work half their shifts off the clock, and gender preference in promotions, but that doesn't matter when you have WM to criticize. Are the customers rude? Maybe, they're POOR and pissed off like me. Are the employees rude? Maybe, this is probably the longest they've ever held a job. Is everything available there? Yes, but if I'm shopping for groceries I stick to that side of the store and don't wander into the music section. EVERY retail store wants to make as much money as possible, and will lie, cheat and steal to do so. GM and Ford make a ton of their cars in Canada and Mexico, but people still support the "American Brand". The GAP brand and Old Navy get their clothing from foreign sweatshops, but that is ignored when you have Wal-Mart to criticize. I'm getting an education, which is what all Wal-mart and "Traditional Grocery" employees should do, because working at Jewel for 30 years is not a career. It's not a skilled profession and should not be thought of in that light. There is no reason for a lazy journeyman produce clerk to make $20/hr with fully paid benefits in Chicago, causing ME to pay $1.50 for a green pepper. I'll support whoever helps me survive without going on public assistance (which a lot of our customers ARE on, who cares if the government[read taxpayers] pays for expensive groceries?) Where are the people criticizing McDonalds, BK, Wendy's and the like for paying single mothers 7.00/hr? Every time I go to McDonalds I see Hispanic, Asian, and a smattering of White women in their mid 30s to 50s behind the counter, and some 22 yr old punk managing them. Is this fair? Is this similar to Wal-Mart's practices? No and Yes, respectively. But why think of that when you have Wal-Mart to hate? Why boycott another KFC in the neighborhood because of low wages and poor benefits when the UNION is making a big deal about Wal-Mart? Did anyone think of the benefit of increased sales from the #1 retailer in the country to our economy? In a time when many companies are laying off workers, Wal-mart is hiring en mass. Unemployment is 2% here and Utah has been called the 'single best economy in the US'. Homeownership is much higher here than in Chicago where one bedroom in a mildly renovated warehouse goes for 300k. Why? Because cheap labor costs and business costs mean more economic growth and more top end jobs. The low income retail sector supports the white collar growth. If you try and turn that upside down, you get Detroit. So no, I'd never work for Wal-Mart, but I'd never stay at a grocery store for my whole life either (and this is after managing two different departments). Take a look at the wage and benefits packages for 90% of employees at your local Marriott, Hilton, or Embassy Suites. $9/hr and horrible insurance that costs $250 a month typically(My wife worked many years in the hospitality industry). For a job that requires much more tact and intelligence that retail grocery? Oh yea, I forgot about the union. They're not there to bring attention to the press about the inequity of ALL retail. TJ Maxx pays 7.25, you may as well work at Wal-Mart. Think about it people..........................LIFE IS UNFAIR, don't find a scapegoat.

[aragx6]

Originally Posted by desibear

- People bash Walmart, Nike, basically big corps like they are making people work in sweatshops in Asia somewher for $1 / day. What no one points out is that the alternative for those people is somehting way less than even that. They are happy with it. We should strive to improve their working situation but blanket statements against low-cost labor are wrong.

By this theory we should just employ the unemployed here in the states with factory work and pay them $1/day. But that won't happen ever. Why? Because Americans wouldn't stand for it. Especially not when the big wigs are making millions a year.

Why then is it acceptable to do this to the extremely poor in other countries??

[Sailaway50]

Originally Posted by aragx6

By this theory we should just employ the unemployed here in the states with factory work and pay them $1/day. But that won't happen ever. Why? Because Americans wouldn't stand for it. Especially not when the big wigs are making millions a year.

Why then is it acceptable to do this to the extremely poor in other countries??

It is not acceptable. The same corporate executives/ big wigs are profiting (only, MORE) from this dollar a day situation. This is basically farmed out/subcontracted work to other countries. Very few profit tremendously.

[thompson84606]

I would think that Chicago (and many cities like it) with its history of gouging low income areas for goods and services because of limited mobility would welcome some competition to bring prices down in urban areas. Why should groceries cost more on the south side than in DuPage county where the income and rent is double?

[Lookout Kid]

It sucks to be number one. Wal-mart, McDonalds, Home Depot, and Nike take all of the crap. Meanwhile, Target, Burger King, Lowe's, and Reebok use pretty much the same business model, but avoid the lion's share of criticism.

[Drover]

Originally Posted by aragx6

Why then is it acceptable to do this to the extremely poor in other countries??

Because there are vastly, vastly different levels of resource development and availability between the United States (and all other industrialized countries for that matter) and other countries that have not industrialized yet. In those other countries, the alternative for most people making a couple bucks a day in a factory is to make zero dollars a day. $2 a day may sound like peanuts to us, but to them it's more money than they've seen in their lives.

Industrialization is a long-term process, not just something you can wish into being. It took the industrialized world centuries to get to where it is today. Though that process has greatly accelerated since then (compare: Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Singapore, Ireland of 40 years ago to today), it still doesn't happen overnight. It's still a process that takes steps. To resist allowing underdeveloped nations to take that first step is to help assure that much of their population continues to earn zero dollars per day. To insist that they be given equivalent wages to the industrialized world is to annihilate the only economic advantage they have over industrialized nations and to assure that they never make it to the first step.

[thompson84606]

Originally Posted by Drover

Because there are vastly, vastly different levels of resource development and availability between the United States (and all other industrialized countries for that matter) and other countries that have not industrialized yet. In those other countries, the alternative for most people making a couple bucks a day in a factory is to make zero dollars a day. $2 a day may sound like peanuts to us, but to them it's more money than they've seen in their lives.

Industrialization is a long-term process, not just something you can wish into being. It took the industrialized world centuries to get to where it is today. Though that process has greatly accelerated since then (compare: Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Singapore, Ireland of 30 years ago to today), it still doesn't happen overnight. It's still a process that takes steps. To resist allowing underdeveloped nations to take that first step is to help assure that much of their population continues to earn zero dollars per day. To insist that they be given equivalent wages to the industrialized world is to annihilate the only economic advantage they have over industrialized nations and to assure that they never make it to the first step.

Rep Point for a well-worded post.