Walmart

January 5, 2003 7:23 AM

Forget about the US. Walmart is the real empire.
posted by Beholder (52 comments total)

I read that article with what I can only call horrified fascination. Those guys are really brilliant, and they're learning more and more as they go along. Soon they will RULE THE WORLD.
posted by RylandDotNet at 8:34 AM on January 5, 2003

Whether you like them or not, Wal-Mart has some awesome business skills and they continue to grow. For people like me who don't have the time or money to trounce all over town looking for various wares, they're the only logical decision. There have been afternoons where I'll drop the car off in the automotive department to get an oil change, get some groceries, look at some cheap furniture, eat lunch, get my hair cut and do my banking all in the same place. If only the company would treat their employees better.

On a side note, would it have killed the people at Time to edit their articles? The grammar in this article was atrocious.
posted by webratta at 8:47 AM on January 5, 2003

In a draft script for the movie Alien3, there was a reference that "the Corporation" (named elsewhere, I think, as Weyland-Yutani), prior to Ripley's resurrection, got bought out by Wal-Mart.
posted by alumshubby at 9:03 AM on January 5, 2003

Surprised they didn't let it slide!

"Now all restaurants are Taco Bell."
posted by tss at 9:47 AM on January 5, 2003

"If only the company would treat their employees better." - webratta
Exactly why you shouldn't shop there.
Does anyone else find it ironic that Sam Walton's book is entitled Made in America, while the products sold in his stores are increasingly from other countries?
It was his dream to start a successful business. He succeeded, but how many people has he prevented from opening their own hardware store? The Mom and Pop stores that truly capture the American dream are soon to be long gone because they simply can't compete with Walmart's low prices that come from bulk ordering.
Nearly 70 lawsuits filed by unhappy employees. Good old boy Sam would be rolling in his grave.
"If the jobs are so bad," she asks," why are so many people working for Wal-Mart?" That quote followed a few paragraphs about how all Wal-Mart's competition are going out of business or being bought out by Wal-Mart. Unskilled workers are beginning to have very little choice in where they work if there is a Wal-Mart nearby.
The best quote of the article has to be "we've been trying to get the Germans culturalized; we bring them to Bentonville." The Germans have a culture that has been around much longer than any culture that they can recieve from Bentonville, Arkansas. God forbid those savage Germans be happy with the way they've successfully been doing things for hundreds of years.
I am proud to say that I haven't been to a Wal-Mart store in over a year, a trend that more people should start considering.
posted by xamichee at 9:49 AM on January 5, 2003

I, for one, welcome our new capitalist leaders... *cough*
posted by shadow45 at 10:19 AM on January 5, 2003

I was in a Wal-Mart just last week.

I don't particularly like going there because it's always so busy, and busy stores annoy me because it takes so much longer to do everything. At Wal-Mart in particular the other shoppers seem to be from, to put it bluntly, a lower social stratum, and thus don't know that it is inappropriate to allow one's kids to scream at the top of their lungs in public or to park one's cart in the middle of an aisle while wandering off to look at something fifty feet away or to hold a family reunion in the entrance to the store. This is the reason I generally only go there every couple of months.

But damn, I always save a lot of money. By my calculations I saved at least $25 on stuff I would have otherwise bought at the local Target, Fred Meyer, or Safeway. Atkins breakfast bars were $3 less a box. Breathe-Right strips were $5 less. I saved $10 on some flatware. The list goes on and on. It's well worth a little annoyance when you can save that much.

As for the Mom and Pop stores, well, it's tough for the Moms and Pops, but nobody has a right to own their own store. Saying "it's the American dream" is essentially an appeal to tradition, a curiously conservative stance for those who so frequently call themselves "progressives" to take. If Americans found small stores at all valuable, Wal-Mart would not be a serious threat to them. They do not; they generally find low prices more compelling. That is the way it is and unless you have a magic wand you can wave to make the public (especially the poor) willing to pay higher prices to protect someone else's way of life, that's the way it will stay. Change happens, and people are always more interested in themselves and their own families than in others and their families.

I do feel sorry for the people who now have no alternative but to work at Wal-Mart, since it's now the only store. No, wait, I don't feel sorry for them at all, because there are still plenty of other stores besides Wal-Mart, and most of them are not in imminent danger of being put out of business by Wal-Mart (Kmart excepted). Don't like working at Wal-Mart, go work at Target or Sears or JCPenney -- or Nordstrom or Borders or Bed Bath & Beyond or Petsmart or Best Buy. Better yet, get some skills so you don't have to work crap retail jobs anymore. Even if you're stuck in retail, I expect that despite the demise of the Mom and Pop store, there are actually more retail jobs available now than there were ten years ago.

By the way, I don't see many complaints about the common practice of family-owned businesses to employ family members (often minors) at essentially no salary. Surely this is unfair competition for establishments that must hire only adults and pay them at least minimum wage, and tantamount to sweatshop conditions for the children, who should be running free in the woods enjoying their precious childhoods rather than spending hours sweeping floors in a dingy storefront.
posted by kindall at 10:35 AM on January 5, 2003

Compare a small town main street to a Walmart parking lot, and you immediately understand why mom and pop stores are preferable.

The only thing more hideous than shopping inside a Walmart is staring at one from the outside.
posted by Beholder at 11:10 AM on January 5, 2003

Everything Kindall said, only louder.
posted by davidmsc at 11:16 AM on January 5, 2003

These Wally-world defenders take the "millionaires aren't all bad people" argument to a higher level. Where's Ayn when you need her?
posted by kid_twist at 11:23 AM on January 5, 2003

If Americans found small stores at all valuable, Wal-Mart would not be a serious threat to them.

Nonetheless, Wal-Mart can wreak havoc in a small town with little effort. About ten years ago, Wal-Mart opened a store in a small city about twenty miles away from me, the area was one of the most historic in Louisiana and had actually been the state capital at one time. The area was rather poor, so within a year Wal-Mart had closed all small town competitors. About a year later, Wal-Mart closed the store because they said they were losing too much money from shoplifting.

Fast-forward to today, there is nothing left of that town in the way of small town shops or Wal-Mart. Save for a few small grocery shops that have re-opened, everyone in the town must drive twenty miles to buy anything.

Further, Wal-Mart shutting down local stores effects more than local culture. They are essentially creating monopolies in smaller markets.
posted by ajr at 11:23 AM on January 5, 2003

kindall,

I laughed when I read your very accurate description of a Wal-Mart shopping experience. I cannot understand why it is so effing difficult for yokels to realize that it is rude to block an aisle, entrance or exit. It's as if they don't give a rip about anything around them.

Mom and Pops might have been more expensive, but their owners actually lived in the community, supporting it and having a vested interest in its health and vitality. The hardware store owner might be a local benefactor of various charities or the little league. With their demise, we have large corporations who don't give a rat's ass about the community, off which they profit. If you don't believe me, just check out the numerous vacant buildings Wal-Mart has left behind when they no longer suited their purpose. Mom and Pops generally kept their wealth in the community; with Wal-Mart it's shipped to Bentonville.

Ultimately, our ability to buy cheap toasters is not more important that our local communities. What may be smart for one is effectively dumb for all. Social Darwinism is the food on which Adam Smith's (and Friedman's) disciples eat, but we don't have be the sacrificial lambs.

Check out: .
posted by drstrangelove at 11:31 AM on January 5, 2003

"Typically, what Wal-Mart does is they hire or employ what we call Union Busters, Union-Busting lawyers. And whenever some employee speaks favorably of a union or if there's some evidence of a drive, they send in these Union-busting lawyers. They then get with the supervision in the store and they instruct them in ways to suppress the union, basically. Ways to recognize early on if they hear someone talking about the union to corner them alone and pressure them in an attempt to dissuade them from the union."

Here is some info about walmart's union busting, and here, and here is some more.

When you shop at wal-mart you contribute to this activity, you vote with your dollars and say this is how you want and expect companies to run. If you think that fine, but don't say "God I wish they would treat people better" while you stand in line to hand over your money.

If Americans found small stores at all valuable, Wal-Mart would not be a serious threat to them. They do not; they generally find low prices more compelling. That is the way it is and unless you have a magic wand you can wave to make the public (especially the poor) willing to pay higher prices to protect someone else's way of life, that's the way it will stay.

It's not about people having the right to own small store, I agree that is not a right. It's about the right of workers to appropriate working conditions in regards to pay and health care coverage. Your argument only makes sense if you assume that people know about wal-mart's treatment of their workers. I actually don't shop at wal-mart, and everytime it comes up people are surprised and had no idea. Sure for that poor single mother who needs clothes for her baby it would be hard to convince her even if she did know. But for that suburban wife or professional going in to get a toaster, blender or batteries can they not afford to pay a dollar more?
posted by rhyax at 11:34 AM on January 5, 2003

Er, what happened to my link?

It's: www.kunstler.com

There, that better work.
posted by drstrangelove at 11:35 AM on January 5, 2003

Sell a buck. Save a buck. Repeat. It's that cycle of high-powered logistics engineering and nickel-squeezing huckstering that remains retailing's most potent weapon

I bought some tape recently that did not stick as well as the same tape I had purchased at my local grocery store.

The buck I saved, wasn't. I had to spend gas to go buy a better product and my time was wasted too. And the gas & my time to return it back to Wal-mart was more than the return value...

So I bought trash.
posted by thomcatspike at 11:47 AM on January 5, 2003

If only the company would treat their employees better.

Strangely enough, the British Wal-Mart subsidiary ASDA was voted the best employer to work for in a Sunday Times survey, and they are frequently given as an example of an employer that will give maternity bonuses, flexible hours etc. where others will not. It's a shame they don't seem to keep to these standards elsewhere in the world.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 11:56 AM on January 5, 2003

It's well worth a little annoyance when you can save that much.

bullshit. rationalization. money means nothing, and money means everything. for years now, i have chosen to buy (before i quit) my cigarettes and (still buying!) diet pepsi from the plainfield party store, a bold, adventurous business enterprise owned and operated by a korean immigrant single mom. she is a delight. she is there 7 days a week. she always greets me effusively. she literally lights up when she sees regular customers come in. she juggles the store, 2 elementary school children and god know's what else. her english is poor. often i haven't got a clue what she is saying. it doesn't matter. over the years i have "pissed away" a lot of money because cigs and pop are expensive there compared to the meijer merchandising machine right up the street. on the other hand, that money has had an impact on a scale i'll never fully know. that asshole fred meijer doesn't even miss my custom.
posted by quonsar at 11:57 AM on January 5, 2003

Better yet, get some skills so you don't have to work crap retail jobs anymore.

How do you expect them to get skills when they have to work nonstop because the pay is so shit?

I expect that despite the demise of the Mom and Pop store, there are actually more retail jobs available now than there were ten years ago.

I don't think the quantity of jobs is the problem, Kindall.

By the way, I don't see many complaints about the common practice of family-owned businesses to employ family members (often minors) at essentially no salary. Surely this is unfair competition for establishments that must hire only adults and pay them at least minimum wage, and tantamount to sweatshop conditions for the children, who should be running free in the woods enjoying their precious childhoods rather than spending hours sweeping floors in a dingy storefront.

Often these businesses don't have any choice. They can't afford to hire outside. And your remark about "tantamount to sweatshops"! Is that a joke? Are you aware of the conditions that people who work for minimum wage work under? If you haven't already (and with such ridiculous claims like the one above, I'm betting you haven't), visit your local library and check out this, this, this or this.

On the other hand, do you know anyone who's worked in a family run business for little or no pay? I know plenty and have never heard any complaints about the conditions. The contrary is what I've found to be true. Their families are generally closer than other families; the kids learn about the proper handling of money, customer service, providing quality work.

The influx of large retail chains are ruining the culture of retail. Anyone who is a regular at a well-run independent store knows the difference between paying extra and being treated properly--being served by people who enjoy their jobs--and the overall sense of doom and gloom present when shopping in these large retail stores.

One of the most valuable things I do daily is go out of my way to shop at the non-blockbusters, the non-wal-marts, the non-chapters. Justifying your purchase at the mega stores for the sake of ease is nothing more than rationalization. I say eliminate "convenience" from your life before it swallows everything around you.

on preview: what quonsar said. :)
posted by dobbs at 12:10 PM on January 5, 2003

Want to beat big stores?

Well, you need to turn the tables. As a company, stop bitching and moaning at their lower prices. You can't do anything about that -- there's no way you can beat them on price.

As far as customer service goes, you can beat them at this for a while, but certainly not forever... They (box stores) can and will respond to customers deserting them for places with better customer service.

So what's the winning card? What can you do that they won't? Provide more variety, and more options for your products.

I hate buying most modern electronics because nothing comes with a real manual anymore (ahh... for the days when you got a circuit diagram with every TV!), there's always a slew of special adaptors that the manufacturers leave out of the box, and, worse yet, you can't even get specialised products anymore! If you're a small store and start doing this, I promise I'll quit shopping at Wal-Mart, Future Shop, whatever and shop at your store.

As long as the only benefit to me is that you provide a smile at the counter, sorry, it's just not enough.
posted by shepd at 1:06 PM on January 5, 2003

Sounds like it's time for a breakup. How many companies could they split Wal-Mart into? Hmmm...
posted by mrbula at 1:15 PM on January 5, 2003

As long as the only benefit to me is that you provide a smile at the counter, sorry, it's just not enough.

A smile at the counter is just a starting point, not an ending point. The indie stores I shop at have friendly, knowledgeable, happy staff. They can answer my questions with authority because they've used the products they sell (have read the books they're selling, seen the films they're renting, read the manuals for all the electronics, etc.), and treat me like a person. They think about me when I'm not there (a new item comes in they know is up my alley they let me know the next time I'm in; if I'm away for a while, they notice and enquire if all is okay); they care about what I think about their service, goods, and shopping environment (I know this because they ask--not because they waited for me to be fed up to the point of complaint); they don't just know my name, they know my tastes; they can tell when I'm in the mood to browse and when I'm in a rush and they know how to serve me under both circumstances; they don't mind me coming in and asking questions when I have no intention of spending that day; they're great at their jobs and take pride in their work.

Never shopped at a place like that? Doesn't surprise me in the slightest. There are less and less of them every day. They do exist though (in Toronto for instance: Hoax Couture, Soundscapes, Gio's (The Nose), Vortex Records at Y&E, Theatrebooks, Revue Video, Penguin Music, Salad King, Ipswich, Decibel, New York Subway, Fresh Baked Goods, OTA Computers, and, what used to be my favorite place on the planet: the now defunct Art & Trash Video).
posted by dobbs at 1:55 PM on January 5, 2003

Slightly higher prices in mom and pop's do more than just help support the local community through all of the various ways others have mentioned above. They also keep me, at least, from buying all kinds of crap that I DO NOT NEED. If I have to shell out 5 bucks for a really good, organic toothpaste that I buy at the local organic's, then I do not have any money left over to buy some awful garbage crap that is put on endcaps for me to buy on impulse. Not Made In Korea Sweatshop 100% acrylic pink sweater. No socks with SpongeBob on them. Noooo crap.
posted by oflinkey at 2:52 PM on January 5, 2003

dobbs, quonsar:

It depends on what you want. I don't want to be greeted effusively or see someone light up when I enter their store; all I want to do is have a civil, anonymous, to-the-point transaction with them. I don't care to remember who they are, and I don't want them to remember me, what books I've bought, what movies I've rented, or really anything else that I think of as being private. I don't much care if a machine somewhere is spitting out correlations and factor-analyses of what I bought, but as far as the flesh and blood person goes, all I want to be is another anonymous customer. And in my experience it's been the same "helpful," get-to-know-you stores that give me the disdainful glance when I rent a stack of awful schlock horror flicks to make grading less painful. Really, I don't want either.

When I'm shopping, I want to be left the hell alone unless I approach and ask for directions or help, and if I'm spending more than about $50 on something I'll have done research on it myself and usually know what I want down to the model number.

So big-box stores work fine for me, except for the long lines at Wally World, and the net is even better for stuff I don't want the same day.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 3:28 PM on January 5, 2003

I think oflinkey nailed it, right there - go to WalMart, get what you were thinking of getting, and pick up this and that and another thing while you're walking around. That seems like the real success of the big-box store - getting you to buy the stuff you didn't need.
posted by danwalker at 3:56 PM on January 5, 2003

Xenophobe,

When I'm shopping, I want to be left the hell alone

Fair enough. A lot of people do. Often, I'm one of them. However, I still stand by my statement above ("they can tell when I'm in the mood to browse...and they know how to serve me under [those] circumstances" [ie leave me alone]).

I think you're confusing the kind of service I'm talking about with the kind where you can't wait to get out of the store because the staff won't stop asking you if you need assistance. I'm not.

And in my experience it's been the same "helpful," get-to-know-you stores that give me the disdainful glance when I rent a stack of awful schlock horror flicks to make grading less painful.

Sorry to hear it. The shops I rent videos at are populated by staff who love schlock horror flicks. They also love films at the opposite end of the scale.

The difference, of course, is that these shops will get the rare horror films because of this. The Blockbusters will get what will rent to the masses and if they get something that won't, something that appeals to a minority, it's a fluke. I know this because I managed one for 13 months.

So big-box stores work fine for me, except for the long lines at Wally World, and the net is even better for stuff I don't want the same day.

The only problem is that right now you have a choice of where to shop (mom and pop/specialty store or behemoth). In the future, you won't.
posted by dobbs at 4:54 PM on January 5, 2003

Ity seems like yesterday, but was actually about three decades ago, when a small American town with a historic main street of shopping areas and crowds was a favorite stumbling ground of yours truly, until the shopping malls in the suburbs drained away the customers and the business until all but a few of the quaintery of yore was boarded dreary storefronts and 'bankruptcy' announcements, which remained for about fifteen years until the shopping malls were decimated by the Tyrannosaurus-Marts.

Nowadays, the quaintery of old is returning, thanks to affordable rents and a new generation of customers to whom Monster-Marts lack novelty and who prefer smaller shops and restaurants to shopping tract chain stores.

Life's delightful pageant thankfully continues to change its cast.

Meanwhile in Korea, people are decrying the encroachment of big discount stores like Price Club on the traditional style outdoor markets, and so far, the two co-exist without much incident.

It depends on what you want, and how you want to buy it. If you'd rather pile into a car and drive 40 minutes to save a few bucks, rather than buy an orange at the corner market, it's up to you.

I can't really see Wal-mart having much of an impact on the big cities, where mom-and-pop corner shops are still the norm.
posted by hama7 at 6:02 PM on January 5, 2003

I fear that this age will be remembered as the coming of the homogenized shopping experience, whereupon the apocalypse is marked not by fire, brimstone and judgement, but by the uniform world-wide shopping conscience. *sigh* At least I can get exotic lightbulbs at four in the morning.
posted by jdaura at 6:07 PM on January 5, 2003

I think you're confusing the kind of service I'm talking about with the kind where you can't wait to get out of the store because the staff won't stop asking you if you need assistance. I'm not.

I suspect some of it is a difference between small non-big-chain stores in Toronto and small not-big-chain stores in the suburban and rural South.

You think of funky little stores with sharp, attentive help, I think of that crappy little disorganized store with the creepy old lady behind the counter who's always looking at people funny and that never has quite what you want, but usually has something close enough for government work if you look in the wrong section for it. It's stores like these that Wally World and Circuit Shitty are mopping the floor with, and they're what I think of as "mom and pop" stores.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 6:10 PM on January 5, 2003

I don't understand why people think that unionizing would be such a great idea for Wal Mart workers. Wal Mart is practically a non-entity here on account of Meijer, so I must say: I've known a lot of people who worked at one point for Meijer. Meijer is unionized (United Food and Commercial Workers) and the workers are still paid worth shit and laid off and all that.

I wouldn't want our megastores to go away, because I've been to Germany, where more traditional shopping is prevalent, and while it has its charm, I am not giving up my ability to shop on Sunday. Or Saturday afternoon. Or some time after six in the evening. Also, I don't have the luxury, like many here, to complain that someone has cheap prices.

Plus they support Linux. And they do listen to people, which the article mentioned, and I've seen myself by how walmart.com has handled sales of OS-less and Linux based PC's. Negative reviews because the OS-less PC contains a winmodem? They get a new modem. Complaints about offering only Lindows? They carry Mandrake.
posted by dagnyscott at 6:16 PM on January 5, 2003

I don't usually shop at WalMart, but honestly, I don't see what's wrong with it.

They make an effort to hire older workers. They give regular benefits and pay increases (far more regularly than your Mom + Pop, I can tell you that). They're clean, they're cheap and they have everything I want. They don't have everything I need, as the Veblen disciples here seem to insist all stores should stock. You need food and a roof. You don't need that organic toothpaste. You wanted it.

However, I also like going to the local stores too. I enjoy being a "regular" - though, I'll note, there are as many chain stores, such as the Blockbuster down the street, that recognize me as there are mom and pops. The local stores do tend to contribute to the community more than a WalMart would.

In any case, it's impossible to have a local WalMart. The size and selection necessitate millions in startup, which is tough to justify except under a franchise banner.
posted by Kevs at 6:20 PM on January 5, 2003

This is my pet topic nowadays, so it delights me to see good points being raised on both sides of this issue.

I think the real damage done by Wal-Mart and their ilk is the undermining of the local economic structure. Wal-Mart is veiwed by many as the apotheosis of supply-chain efficiency, but what is more insidious is the complete erosion of valuable local economic networks. Where once there was a rich and symbiotic web of relationships between suppliers, vendors, middlemen (not necessarily a bad thing) and retailers, all with a vested interest and a stake in the health (economic and otherwise) of the community, now there is this monolith that peddles cheap plastic crap at a discount.

Reminds me of a quote by Irvine Welsh I read in a recent Onion interview: " The whole point of consumer society was to give us more choices. And the irony of it is, we're becoming like the Soviet Union, but with money."
posted by yalestar at 6:30 PM on January 5, 2003

The anti Wal-Mart argument that I always hear seems to be "Do you want a soul or do you want convenience?" I'm in the former's camp, but to judge from the success of Big Retail, I'm in the minority. Perhaps the fans of "big box" retailers are correct and kaufen macht frei.
posted by Mayor Curley at 6:33 PM on January 5, 2003

This is kind of scattershot; I'm replying to a bunch of comments in no particular order. Sorry 'bout that.

Ultimately, our ability to buy cheap toasters is not more important that our local communities.

This is certainly open to debate. Why should a place where you spend most of your time unconscious be so important? Certainly it's not axiomatic.

Often these businesses don't have any choice. They can't afford to hire outside. ... And your remark about "tantamount to sweatshops"! Is that a joke?

Sarcasm, more like. After all, the same people who oppose WalMart also often oppose the low wages paid in overseas factories. This kind of exploitation is apparently acceptable as long as it's American kids who are working for nothing. If it's okay for American families to work their kids in the family business, then it must be okay for Elbonian families to send their kids off to work in a factory. It's logically inconsistent to believe otherwise. I often find logical inconsistencies worthy of ridicule.

Oh yeah. If they can't afford to pay their employees anything, then they should do something else because their business is not a viable one.

Slightly higher prices in mom and pop's do more than just help support the local community through all of the various ways others have mentioned above. They also keep me, at least, from buying all kinds of crap that I DO NOT NEED.

Well, you could just refrain from buying stuff you don't need. Spending money stupidly is not a virtue.

Justifying your purchase at the mega stores for the sake of ease is nothing more than rationalization.

You can't rationalize something that's already rational. On the contrary, this nostalgia for Mom and Pop stores is the opposite of rationalizing -- it's sentimentalizing.

The influx of large retail chains are ruining the culture of retail.

This is another one of those inconsistencies I like to ridicule (see above). Business is destroying culture -- that was created by business!

the overall sense of doom and gloom present when shopping in these large retail stores.

This is all in your head. You find them full of doom and gloom because you have already decided you don't like them. In reality, they're just buildings where stuff is sold, like mililons of other such buildings in the world. They're simply bigger than most. You go in, buy your stuff, and leave. No need to get all emotional about it.

over the years i have "pissed away" a lot of money because cigs and pop are expensive there compared to the meijer merchandising machine right up the street.

Another one who considers spending more money than they have to a virtue. Where exactly does that come from, anyway?

Fast-forward to today, there is nothing left of that town in the way of small town shops or Wal-Mart. Save for a few small grocery shops that have re-opened, everyone in the town must drive twenty miles to buy anything.

Then someone should open up a decent store in town. They'd make a mint! Oh, wait, if there was any money to be made by doing that, Wal-Mart wouldn't have closed their store.

The only thing more hideous than shopping inside a Walmart is staring at one from the outside.

So if Wal-Mart made their stores prettier, you'd be okay with them? We should choose where we shop based primarily on the aesthetics of the building? Sheesh.

It's about the right of workers to appropriate working conditions in regards to pay and health care coverage.

I don't understand why people think they have any such rights. You have the right to whatever you have the leverage to demand. Unskilled workers have very little leverage because there are so many of them and they are basically interchangeable. The only long-term solution is to get some skills. Of course, the people who have the skills might not appreciate the competion, but speaking as one with skills, any unskilled worker who competes with me has my permission in advance to tell me to fuck off if I ever give them any shit about it. I mean, we were all born unskilled.

Mom and Pops generally kept their wealth in the community; with Wal-Mart it's shipped to Bentonville.

And when you buy a car the wealth is shipped to Detroit or Germany or Japan or Korea or wherever. Guess you should only buy locally-made cars, then, and "keep the wealth in the community." In fact every community should be self-sustaining in all ways; who needs those pesky economies of scale?

Coming back to the real world, every community has major employers that siphon wealth from the rest of the country. What Seattle "loses" to Wal-Mart it gets back from Microsoft and Boeing and many, many others. "Keeping the wealth in the community" is just a marketing slogan that local businesses use against larger, more efficient competitors. I'm surprised that people who are usually so suspicious of advertising fall for this one so quickly. Or maybe it's not so surprising -- if you tell people what they already want to believe, you can sell them anything.

The anti Wal-Mart argument that I always hear seems to be "Do you want a soul or do you want convenience?"

This is the best one, of course, since nobody can define what a "soul" is to begin with or how certain forms of commerce can cause one to lose it.
posted by kindall at 6:42 PM on January 5, 2003

I live in an area that's pretty much corporationed out. All but two grocery stores are chains. 70% of the resturants are chains, and 90% of the really good resturants. The only non-chain bookstores and record stores are the places that sell used stuff as well, and cater to a fairly small clientele with their non-used merchandise.

That said, we don't have a Walmart. The nearest is 45 minutes from me (unless you count Sam's Club, a bulk store owned by Wally) smacked in the middle of white trash heaven. We don't shop there. We do, however, have three Meijers within 15 minutes. Meijers is pretty damn like Walmart: I've worked there. It sucks. But they do have a union, and health benefits for the full timers, and there's no way they would have made us work overtime without getting the crap sacked out of them.

I try, I honestly do. I usually shop at the fruit market/grocery run by locals because they have better quality stuff than the chains. But they don't have everything. Sometimes it's easier to go to Meijer's. And yes, it's cheaper. Welcome to the capitalist world.

Still, in any thing that caters to the common denominator you're going to find a fair amount of crap. In the battle between quality and quanity, sometimes quality wins out. I might buy eggs and shampoo at Meijer, but I'm still going to go to the fruit market, because even if the owner is an ass (worked there, too), he sells the best apples - and stocks bread that doesn't taste like molded sawdust.
posted by fujikosmurf at 6:43 PM on January 5, 2003

If it's okay for American families to work their kids in the family business, then it must be okay for Elbonian families to send their kids off to work in a factory.

If you're talking about the fact that "children are working" (and you think that's wrong), I guess you have a point. However, saying that a kid who is working the cash register at mom and dad's restaurant (or book store or convenience store or whatever) is tantamount to kids working sweatshops in china and elsewhere than you don't have a point. They're not comparable.

Oh yeah. If they can't afford to pay their employees anything, then they should do something else because their business is not a viable one.

This is a ridiculous statement. Not everyone is trying to get rich. Lots of people are content working hard know they're providing a service in a unique way. There are plenty of people who live hand to mouth working for someone else. You're implying that if someone does this and happens to own their own business they should pack it up. You're ignoring far too many things that aren't related to $.

Two of the stores I mentioned above are (were) own(ed) by a chap named Bert Myers. His record store (Vortex) has consistenly been named the best used record store in the city, year after year. His video store (before it closed) was considered one of the best in the country. He's been asked to expand (more locations) or move (larger location). If he did this, he could make a lot more money. He doesn't want to. He's happy running his business his way. He's had some of the same employees for over two decades, happily working retail with him. I myself worked with him for five years and would be doing so again if I had the chance.
You find them full of doom and gloom because you have already decided you don't like them.

I'm not talking about my feelings. I'm talking about what you see when you look around. The majority of staff look miserable and like they'd rather be someplace else. Ask them if they like their jobs or if it's a good place to work and the majority of times they'll answer that it "pays the bills" or "is okay for now". The only reason they're smiling is because they're paid to do so! Look at their faces when they're not talking to a customer. I've worked in giant retail stores and fast food outlets. The lunch rooms in these places contain mostly miserable people who are caught between a rock and a hard place.

Business is destroying culture -- that was created by business!

Your paraphrase misses the mark. I never said business destroys culture. I said "The influx of large retail chains are ruining the culture of retail." By culture of retail I'm referring to businesses that are part of a community--stores that have unique personalities stemming from their choice of staff, location, stock, and decor--instead of a homogenized and nauseatic lack of individuality.

I'm surprised that people who are usually so suspicious of advertising fall for this one so quickly.

What are you talking about? I don't need advertising to tell me that I'm treated differently at my favorite shops. It's easily apparent!

On the contrary, this nostalgia for Mom and Pop stores is the opposite of rationalizing -- it's sentimentalizing.

Of course it's sentimentalizing! We're (well, I am at least. I won't claim to speak for anyone else) bemoaning the absence of more than just a store. Whereas I can see why someone who shops regularly at the large stores would only miss products and convenience when that store closes, you cannot seem to see how anyone could possibly miss out (and be emotional about) the things they're losing when an independent closes.

Out of curiousity, what line of work are you in?
posted by dobbs at 7:23 PM on January 5, 2003

I'm from Germany and I'd like to comment on the Wal-Mart situation here. Wal-Mart bought a chain of stores about 5 years ago and scared the s**t out of Germany's retailers with their boastful plans to expand like hell. Well, now the only thing Wal-Mart competitors complain about is the steady flow of résumés from their employees who want to jump off the sinking ship.

The Time article that reads like a "buy-our-great-stock" brochure totally underreports the difficulties Wal-Mart has here. Wal-Mart's German operations are a total disaster. They made all imaginable mistakes, and still there seems no end to their ineptitude.

They bleed cash at a massive rate of 5% of their turnover in an industry where you're doing fine with a 1% profit margin and great with a 3% margin. They can't compete price wise: studies found goods to be 11% to 25% more expensive than the competition. They have lousy service. They can't even sell their money losing operations. They are the industry's laughing stock.

Wal-Mart is unimpressive in Britain too: they seem to learn more from Asda than the other way round. Wal-Mart's European involvement (UK + Germany) shows the company to be cash rich but fundamentally unimpressive in a "hard" environment filled with aggressive and healthy competitors (= well funded, not like competitors in developing countries). I don't think the US is a "hard" environment: when I was in the US on vacation 4 years ago, I've seen many large supermarkets to be family run. I found this astonishing as those have been eradicated by chains here back in the 70's. Somehow the industry's concentration process is less advanced in the US than in Europe. Food margins are also a good indicator of how "hard" the competition is: 1-3% in Ger, 2-5% in France, 4-6% in the UK and even more in the US.

My conclusion is that Wal-mart has been able to grow into a massively dominant position in the relatively uncompetitive US market. From there they can squeeze their suppliers like nobody else and make huge profits. That's their true edge, not this data mining whiz they constantly feed to the press and potential investors with. I find them unimpressive and wouldn't recommend their stock - it looks "bubbly" to me.
posted by ugly_n_sticky at 7:32 PM on January 5, 2003

And here I am, in suburban Boston, wishing that there was a Wal-Mart within reasonable distance so I could save some money and buy everything at one stop.

Mom and Pop are overrated.

(also: Wal-Mart snobbery rears its head on Mefi yet again, some of you guys need to get out into the reality sometime soon)
posted by owillis at 7:38 PM on January 5, 2003

And when you buy a car the wealth is shipped to Detroit or Germany or Japan or Korea or wherever. Guess you should only buy locally-made cars, then, and "keep the wealth in the community." In fact every community should be self-sustaining in all ways; who needs those pesky economies of scale?


When I buy a car, I buy from a local dealership. Their profits and wealth stay within the community. I never said I expected everything I purchase to be made within my community.


I don't understand why people think they have any such rights. You have the right to whatever you have the leverage to demand. Unskilled workers have very little leverage because there are so many of them and they are basically interchangeable. The only long-term solution is to get some skills. Of course, the people who have the skills might not appreciate the competion, but speaking as one with skills, any unskilled worker who competes with me has my permission in advance to tell me to fuck off if I ever give them any shit about it. I mean, we were all born unskilled.

Frankly, that is an elitest attitude. Believe it or not, there are people out there who are probably "unskillable." Those that are spend their waking hours working. I suppose you'd also think mass layoffs, in the name of efficiency and in a healthy company, are legitimate, since nobody owes anyone a living. These companies that take advantage of our free market have some responsibility to take good care of their workers.

This is certainly open to debate. Why should a place where you spend most of your time unconscious be so important? Certainly it's not axiomatic.

What do you know about me? I live and work within my community. Believe it or not, kindall, there are people in this world who don't look at their home as a "market" or mere sleeping quarters. Perhaps in this nation of people who move every 3.4 seconds, community ties no longer mean anything, and throwing up whatever piece of crap the world corporate deems necessary to turn a quick buck is perfectly legitimate and even honorable.
posted by drstrangelove at 7:48 PM on January 5, 2003

It's been over a year since I set foot in a Wal-Mart, and I couldn't be happier. For every item there that I would buy, i can find the same thing for the same price or a bit more without having to deal with the mind-numbing, zombie brain inducing experience that is Wal-Mart.

I do feel sorry for the people who now have no alternative but to work at Wal-Mart, since it's now the only store. No, wait, I don't feel sorry for them at all, because there are still plenty of other stores besides Wal-Mart, and most of them are not in imminent danger of being put out of business by Wal-Mart (Kmart excepted). Don't like working at Wal-Mart, go work at Target or Sears or JCPenney -- or Nordstrom or Borders or Bed Bath & Beyond or Petsmart or Best Buy. Better yet, get some skills so you don't have to work crap retail jobs anymore. Even if you're stuck in retail, I expect that despite the demise of the Mom and Pop store, there are actually more retail jobs available now than there were ten years ago.

kindall -- much, much easier said than done. I moved from Tulsa to Dallas without a job in March. I have a degree in Economics from a fairly respectable university (especially in this area of the country). I was having a hard time finding a "respectable job" and was trying to find something in the meantime to pay the bills. I went to Borders, Best Buy, and Bed, Bath, and Beyond (all three of which had signs up saying that they were hiring). I didn't leak into the fact that I was only looking for temp work in my interviews. I (especially at Borders, which is a store that I really like) was very enthusiastic, flexible, and I've had retail experience. I didn't get call back from any of them. I entered "going wage" in all of the salary request slots. What the hell? I don't know. It's not as simple as you think it is.
posted by Ufez Jones at 7:59 PM on January 5, 2003

If Walmart and Microsoft ever merge, it will be the end of the world as we know it...
posted by MediaMan at 8:24 PM on January 5, 2003

When I buy a car, I buy from a local dealership. Their profits and wealth stay within the community.

So a tiny percentage of the value of the car stays in your community. That's mighty big of you, to grant the community that pittance. You'd think what with as much as you value the community, you'd want them to get much more.

In dollar value, I would wager that the average Wal-Mart store "gives back" more to the community than your typical car dealership. Their employees don't get paid as much as those at a car dealer, probably, but there are a lot more of them, and they all pay taxes and spend their salaries in the community. The store pays property taxes too and bought a big chunk of land from someone local (maybe the city itself).

Frankly, that is an elitest attitude.

Well, of course it is. Is acknowledging that better is in fact better supposed to be evil or something?

Believe it or not, kindall, there are people in this world who don't look at their home as a "market" or mere sleeping quarters.

I'm sure there are. If you got all 10,000 of them together in one place, then they could have that "small town experience" they value so much and leave the rest of us alone.

[regarding getting skilled] kindall -- much, much easier said than done.

Well, that's certainly true these days, but it probably won't always be true. Over the long term it certainly isn't. You can always learn a trade. Good plumbers and electricians and carpenters make absolutely stupid money. During the recent lockout, I was astonished to learn that senior dockworkers at the Port of Seattle clear six figures, although I expect that won't last more than another ten or twenty years (most of these jobs can probably be automated, and so eventually will be). For younger people, the armed forces have much to offer, although that's not for everyone.

I'm going to go off on a bit of a personal and off-topic rant here. My father was a hillbilly from southern Ohio, born in the depths of the Great Depression, who grew up with eight brothers on a farm. My mother was the daughter of a poor Irish family from the industrial town of Canton, Ohio whose mother urged her to marry my father because "those Kindalls have money." Hah! The joke was on her; she was thinking of a different family. My father had had rheumatic fever three times as a kid (each time he was expected to die), didn't graduate high school until he was 21, and didn't plan to live past thirty. (When he hit 32 and was still in good health, he gave in to my mother's persistent demands and had children.) During World War II, the Army turned him down due to a heart murmur.

Nevertheless he and my mother put two kids through college, own their own home, and now have a comfortable retirement and sufficient money to care for themselves to the end of their days. My father is now 70 years old and has, in the last few years, defeated two different kinds of cancer. He will probably live to be ninety.

Are there people who are "unskillable"? Probably. I think there are a lot fewer of them than people assume, though. My dad could have easily considered himself beyond hope -- hell, everyone else did. He was a heavy drinker and a hellraiser during his younger days and nobody expected him to amount to much. My father had basically every circumstance arrayed against him that a white man can face -- the only thing that could possibly have made his situation worse would have been if he'd been black. But he managed to make something of himself, and more importantly, he gave his kids an excellent start in life. My sister and I will exceed him in many ways, but we always know that in a sense, our accomplishements are partly his. The two of us are standing on the shoulders of giants. (I don't mean to diminish my mother's contribution, either; not only did she run the household efficiently, she went back to school at the age of forty, became a nurse, and afterward was the chief breadwinner for our family until she retired due to illness.)

This is why I have so little sympathy for people who go on about their "right" to not just a job but a "living" wage. Someone has to work for that shit. If not you, who? If not now, when? Nothing worth having comes easily. If you seem to have it easy, it is only because one of your ancestors worked hard to give you the opportunity, and you should bow down on their grave and thank them for it. But there is nothing to prevent anyone, even today -- especially today! -- from lifting themselves by their own bootstraps. People want it to happen instantly, but that's just not the way the world works. Sure, it may take a lifetime. So what? Are you doing something more important with your life?
posted by kindall at 9:16 PM on January 5, 2003

saying that a kid who is working the cash register at mom and dad's restaurant (or book store or convenience store or whatever) is tantamount to kids working sweatshops in china and elsewhere than you don't have a point. They're not comparable.

Of course they're comparable. In both cases, a kid is stuck in an unenriching job. Sure, the kid working the register is less likely to get an RSI than a kid in a sweatshop, but hours spent behind a register are hours spent not learning or playing (ie, also learning).

My conclusion is that Wal-mart has been able to grow into a massively dominant position in the relatively uncompetitive US market.

That would be my guess, too. Wal-Mart made its fortune by moving into rural-ish markets that were underserved by retailers. In the old days, there was a mom and pop hardware store and if you didn't want what they had at the price they felt like offering, you could drive ~45 minutes or an hour to the nearest 100,000+ person city. Wal-Mart beat the tar out of it. Of course, K-Mart or Target or Caldor's would have beat the snot out of Mom 'n' Pop Hardware too, but they didn't move into Podunk.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:23 PM on January 5, 2003

Well, that's certainly true these days, but it probably won't always be true. Over the long term it certainly isn't. You can always learn a trade. Good plumbers and electricians and carpenters make absolutely stupid money. During the recent lockout, I was astonished to learn that senior dockworkers at the Port of Seattle clear six figures, although I expect that won't last more than another ten or twenty years (most of these jobs can probably be automated, and so eventually will be). For younger people, the armed forces have much to offer, although that's not for everyone. (etc.)

A) with all due respect to your parents, Kindall (and my grandfather, who is my only living relative that lived through the Great Depression) that doesn't matter for anything here and now. You didn't address my quandry at all. Maybe I got screwed b/c of my education (which was put on all of my applications...and btw, I also applied at many restaurants and Pier 1, World Market, and a few other places). This doesn't do anything to go against the fact that many uneducated workers don't earn a living wage, if they have a job to begin with, which very hard to find these days as it is. I was lucky and finally (13 months after I graduated from college) landed a great job. But I still remember that year plus when I was unemployed and how vulnerable, depressed, useless, and fucked up that I felt. That's an emotion that I wouldn't wish upon anyone. It screwed with my relationships with my girlfriend of 2+ years, my family, and my friends. There's no way to describe it. If you've been there, then you know. If it was a long time ago, I hope you haven't forgotten. I hope I never forget that feeling.
posted by Ufez Jones at 9:45 PM on January 5, 2003

The store pays property taxes too and bought a big chunk of land from someone local (maybe the city itself).

Well, don't forget that a number of Wal-Mart stores (and distro centers) have received hefty tax breaks for moving into an area.

In any case, have fun at Wal-Mart.
posted by gluechunk at 10:19 PM on January 5, 2003

Oh yeah, I didn't really address that part, did I? I must admit I find the problems college-educated people have getting jobs baffling. My sister has a master's and makes half what I make, and considers herself to be doing well. I have a two year "degree." I've often considered getting a bachelor's, but at this stage, I don't think I could stand the pay cut!

Possibly there are simply too many people with college degrees; the job market is flooded with them. Some of them are overqualified for many jobs they're applying for, and conversely, many of the people who have them would have been better off learning a trade. I've actually seen people recommending that job-seekers leave off their college experience on their resumes.

This sucks, I agree. But you did eventually get a job, as most people do. The people I take issue with are those who give up because they think the deck is too stacked against them. What is a year or two spent trying to get traction when you'll be alive for seventy, eighty, ninety?

I was "unemployed" for five years, but I called it "running my own business." Eventually I decided it wasn't what I wanted to do, but not until I had run up $50,000 worth of credit card debt and given myself a case of low-grade depression for which I was prescribed medication. It was, I think, even more stressful than the times I was unemployed. (I was unemployed for a couple months late last year. I could pay all my bills with the unemployment check, and the state assured me I was eligible for up to a year's worth of them. Not much stress there..)
posted by kindall at 10:42 PM on January 5, 2003

I just had a thought, I've never heard Wal-Mart said, only seen it written. Please tell me its pronounced Wall-Mart and not Wol-Mart...
posted by Orange Goblin at 1:04 AM on January 6, 2003

and given myself a case of low-grade depression for which I was prescribed medication. It was, I think, even more stressful than the times I was unemployed.

By "it", do you mean the medication or the depression?

I ask because I want to agree, but I'm not sure what to agree with.
posted by hama7 at 3:20 AM on January 6, 2003

So a tiny percentage of the value of the car stays in your community. That's mighty big of you, to grant the community that pittance. You'd think what with as much as you value the community, you'd want them to get much more.

What am I supposed to do? Cobble together a car from parts bought at the local hardware store?

The dealers in town make good money, tend to invest in local charities, and their staff are paid well. If a Wal-Mart car dealer came to town, you know they'd pay bottom dollar wages.

In dollar value, I would wager that the average Wal-Mart store "gives back" more to the community than your typical car dealership. Their employees don't get paid as much as those at a car dealer, probably, but there are a lot more of them, and they all pay taxes and spend their salaries in the community. The store pays property taxes too and bought a big chunk of land from someone local (maybe the city itself).

That's really not true. First of all, without a Wal-Mart, these people would be working somewhere, perhaps in a Mom and Pop.

Many towns offer incentives for new Wal-Mart stores. As for the land, when Wal-Mart built their new store in my old hometown, they used front companies to purchase the land cheaply, because they knew they'd be gouged otherwise. So Wal-Mart isn't really adding much to the community in that regard, either.

Lastly, kindall, I do work for my income. I'm fortunate to be in a professional field, yet it requires a great deal of effort, energy and stomach lining. However, I'm clued in to the fact that there are those who are really struggling to make it at low-wage jobs. Real wages have been on a downward slope since the early 70s, while CEO and exec pay has exploded. As these inequities broaden, there will be discontent and a possible breakdown of society...
posted by drstrangelove at 6:30 AM on January 6, 2003

Wal*Mart: wahl mare
Target: tar zhay
posted by NortonDC at 9:05 AM on January 6, 2003

By "it", do you mean the medication or the depression?

Neither. I meant working for myself.
posted by kindall at 11:51 AM on January 6, 2003

Why is it exactly that paying people less for their work as a great sin, but expecting them to pay more for goods is nothing?
posted by dagnyscott at 3:07 PM on January 6, 2003

One in every 200 Americans works at Wallmart. One half of one percent of all of America.
posted by stbalbach at 3:41 PM on January 6, 2003