The Democratic leftards hate Wal-Mart because they hate America and everything it stands for. The Democratic party is the home of the socialists, who will stop at nothing to destroy a sucess of capitalism like Wal-Mart.
Remember that the next you're in a voting booth and considering voting for a Democrat.
42 comments
I don't know that the anti-Walmart crowd hates America. They don't trust the idea of free trade and comparative advantage.
As a former small business owner, I know how hard it is to try and stay afloat when the major corporations come into town. We owned a small printing company. We did pretty well until they opened a Staples just down the road. All of a sudden, people started taking their simple print jobs over to Staples. It has been proven that in a town where a Wal-Mart opens, three small businesses will close their doors within the year. I value small business. Sure, small privately owned Mom and Pop businesses may not be open 24/7 and their prices may be a bit higher, but they are an asset to any town. This is especially true in my small town which has become some sort of haven for yuppies and a total gridlock nightmare. We now have both a Lowe's and a Home Depot. We have two Wal-Marts. We have a Super Target, a Circuit City, PetCo, Ross, Office Max, Staples and we're about to get a Best Buy and PetSmart. Alot of smaller businesses in town are suffering. It's sad.
If the consumers agree that the smaller stores are an asset, or if the smaller stores can convince the consumers that they are an asset, then they will survive. If the consumers aren't convinced, the small stores will fail. That's capitalism, and in the long run it's inefficient for a city to single out Wal-Mart for zoning ordinances. Yeah, it sucks that long-standing business owners have to close shop because they can no longer turn a profit, but risk is the name of the game.
Mister Spak -- Exactly. These conservatards are myopic. Their transfixed by low prices to the point that they are willing to ignore that facts that it's Wal-Mart like buying practices that are driving jobs over seas and killing businesses which actually offer services with their products.
Gene, try putting your eight year old kid to work from dawn till dusk in a 19th century cotton mill, collecting (and breathing) dirt and fluff underneath unguarded heavy machinery whilst rapidly going deaf because of the noise, then tell me that unfettered Capitalism has no problems.
I'm going to stick my neck out on this one as a staunch pro-free-trade, pro-WTO kinda guy.
The problem, Wow, is that Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage, a theory which has not been very much adapted since its development in the early 1800s, was created under certain assumptions. One key assumption that is no longer true today is that capital is not going to leave a country. That makes sense in the 1800s when the most important capital was land, it doesn't make sense in today's international financial markets. We gain price advantages from free trade, there is no doubt, and I certainly wouldn't advocate any form of protectionism, that's like amputating a leg to cure a stubbed toe. Nevertheless, when both capital and labor can be shifted overseas then you don't have old economic sectors failing and new economic sectors emerging, instead you have a general economic slump. Of course, this hasn't happened extensively as of yet, but I also don't see much discussion over the problem.
Wow #71987
What Kat said.
David D.G.
I hate Wal*Mart because they move into a town, practice predatory loss-pricing while covering the losses with other stores until they have driven all the local competition out of business. Then they raise their prices to the normal levels and hire all the former small buisnessmen providing them with substantialy lower wages than they had before, thus securing for themselves not only a desperate, captive workforce, but a population so under-paid that they have no choice but to patronize the very retail establishment that caused the situation in the first place.
From what I've read of Adam Smith, capitalism is as dependent upon consumers having valid choices as it is upon economies of scale. While companies that provide products with higher quality and/or at a cheaper price will grow relative to their competition, markets dominated by one or few players weaken the concept of enlightened choice. When retailers like Wal-Mart or software suppliers like Microsoft dominate their markets the tipping point is passed and capitalism slides into oligarchy/monopoly (and, if not stopped, our modern variant of feudalism, fascism). Ironically, the companies weakening capitalism defend themselves as being the true capitalists: "How did we get where we are if we weren't?" The relief valves that save capitalist systems are competition, innovation and, if necessary, anti-trust legislation.
Consumers have plenty of choice in the retail market. They have Wal-Mart; they have Target; they have smaller retailers that have either branded themselves successfully enough to compete or have convinced consumers that it's worth it to pay a premium for their goods; and they have any number of online retailers. The barriers to entry in the retail market are not high enough to warrant fears of a monopoly or an oligarchy. Any number of players could still enter the market and compete.
I realize I'm about to get crucified for my opinion. I've noticed a lot of people getting into histrionics about "Republicans this" and "Conservatards that." I haven't tried to make generalizations about all Democrats, or all self-described liberals - I've only tried to present my own views on free trade. And hey, I'm not 100% pro-Wal-Mart, either.
It was Adam Smith who talked about perfect competition and how capitalism was to be a counter to the mercantilism that was prevleant in his day. Barriers to entry into a market (such as the massive size of Wal-Mart or Target) didn't exist then. From John Ikerd, From Capitalism to Corporatism , The Betrayal of Adam Smith by David Korten.
Smith is quoted on a Federal Reserve Bank website :
"The monopolists, by keeping the market constantly under-stocked, by never fully supplying the effectual demand, sell their commodities much above the natural price, and raise their emoluments, whether they consist in wages or profit, greatly above their natural rate. (p. 61)"
So Smith himself would think that corporations had and shouldn't grow so large as to dominate a market.
And if I can address Gene's original post about "Democratic leftards....who will stop at nothing to destroy a sucess [sic] of capitalism like Wal-Mart....Remember that the next [time?] you're in a voting booth and considering voting for a Democrat."
I believe that people can have reasonable differences of opinion. Just don't pigeonhole me as a moron right-winger. Consumers have plenty of choice in the retail market. They have Wal-Mart; they have Target; they have smaller retailers that have either branded themselves successfully enough to compete or have convinced consumers that it's worth it to pay a premium for their goods; and they have any number of online retailers.
Well by definition a market dominated by Walmart, Target, and other large retailers is an oligopoly. That may be less so in city, where you can have speciality retailers along with the larger chains. In a city you can also have chains competing with each other, offering at least some choice (the little that is available in an oligopic market). Now in more rural areas, where you may only have a single chain store, you have a total monopoly.
You make a good point with online retailers. Of course, the online retailers also have to add shipping to each individual item, the consumer has to pay for that somewhere along the line. Thus the prices offered by online retailers are not as attractive as those of local retailers.
Ah yes - each member of one family turns into multi-billionaires by exploiting tens of millions of others, at home and abroad, stymying the economy, and proliferating waste and destruction of precious resources by peddling crap by the bucket load.
"Wow," I certainly don't crucify you for your opinion, even though I don't echo all of it. Also, I thank you for the extensive explanation of the causes of the Depression -- I don't understand most of the vocabulary in it, but I thank you for it just the same!
David -
The Democratic leftards hate Wal-Mart because they hate America and everything it stands for. The Democratic party is the home of the socialists
As a socialist, I resent that. We're far too liberal to be democrats.
who will stop at nothing to destroy a sucess of capitalism like Wal-Mart.
If Wally world is a success of capitalism, it just proves my point that capitalism needs to be abolished. But I think it's more a success of corporatism than capitalism.
"I hate Wal*Mart because they move into a town, practice predatory loss-pricing while covering the losses with other stores until they have driven all the local competition out of business. Then they raise their prices to the normal levels and hire all the former small buisnessmen providing them with substantialy lower wages than they had before, thus securing for themselves not only a desperate, captive workforce, but a population so under-paid that they have no choice but to patronize the very retail establishment that caused the situation in the first place."
Exactly.
This has been an interesting discussion, but I'm still missing the connection between Democrats and Wal-Mart. Maybe it's my perspective from the affluent part of the Northeast, but around here, most of the people are Republicans, and while Bloomies and Williams-Sonomas are a dime a dozen, you'd have to drive 30 miles to find a Wal-Mart. If I suggested we get a Wal-Mart around here, my Republican neighbors would show up at my house with torches and pitchforks; although the Wall-Streeters with Wal-Mart in their portfolios would be happy to see one built in some fundie community in Arkansas. When did Wal-Mart become a Democrat-vs-Republican issue?
Just because they don´t buy in a sumpermaket?, well, in that case I am not a patriot, because I don´t buy in El Corte inglés(I´m Spanish)?
Alrighty, let's take Gene and make him work at a Wal-Mart. Take away his assets so he's forced to live on a Wal-Mart wage. Eventually, he'll get the point.that point.
http://www.jibjab.com/originals/
(Note: Top, farthest on right.)
Well, I can hate hamburguers, because I don´t like their taste, and because they are told to exploit people(which I find unfair), am I anti-american?
And here we see the Republicans' true god: The Almighty Dollar.
I'm not American, but no conservative will ever get my vote. For anything.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
