Brad Beachy of Wichita has a commentary in today’s Eagle about the new documentary “Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price.” I haven’t seen the film, but I think Beachy could be correct that it may bring to a boil the simmering debate on “what balance should be struck between low-priced products and a decent standard of living for workers and business owners.”
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- HLP on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
88 Comments
Question…is anyone being forced to work at Walmart? To the best of my knowledge, slavery was outlawed a couple centuries ago, and people are free to work where they wish.
Granted, Walmart is huge and employs a lot of people, but there is a simple method in a free society…if you don’t like the place you are working, don’t work there.
It is not up to ’society’ or government to “fix” a problem between an employer and employees.
Another case where I wish that the people being demonized would just simply say….FINE, you want a world without us? We the walton family have plenty of money and dont need more so effective immediatlely…screw you! all doors are closed. all merchandise will be given away in third world countries.
Maybe after a few bold pioneers did this these whiners would realize that big buisness is a good thing!
I agree with the position that people are not forced to work there, but the WalMart Corporation does some questionable things.
Walmart has been sued for telling a pregnant employee who did not yet have insurance to “go get on welfare” -this coming from the RICHEST CORPORATION IN THE WORLD. The corporation that is the number 2 importer of chinese goods, only behind the COUNTRY of Germany. It doesn’t seem that a corporation with these kind of resources should have their employees rely on tax supported health care. At least I don’t think we tax-payers should subsidize the Walton family — I don’t they need any of my tax money.
I would like to see the documentary to see what Beachy has to say.
Since when did employee health care become an employer’s problem?
Wal-Mart has been a recipient of corporate welfare and is one of the business that get in bed with governments to acquire land through eminemnt domain. They are no saints, but health care is not their responsibility.
The problem is not Walmart. It is US. As long as the public flocks to low prices we will have Walmarts and their ilk doing what we want – buying cheap and selling cheap. This will mean no manufacturing in the US since we are not cheap.
Oh, yeah. I forgot.We conservatives are not all cheap bastards. I always buy American when possible. I have driven american made cars all my life even though they are less reliable and were more expensive. I wore American made clothes as long as I could. I only fly Boeing. But at walmart I know I am shopping in China, except for a few Coleman coolers. (Lanterns and stoves went to china) My only hope is that I am bringing Capitolism the the Heathens.
Wal-mart is exactly what WE have made it into. Rant and rave all we want to, it doesn’t change the simple fact that Wally World is the mega-giant that it is because we ALL went there and spent our American dollars on their product. End of story. We all forsook the local businesses for a cheaper deal and our now paying the price. They (Wal-mart) are no different than any other large American business. The practice of going overseas for cheaper products is not exactly a new idea. Giving the workers no more than they absolutely have to is not a new idea either. So, as we all drive past the empty windows of our hometown businesses, do not blame anyone but ourselves.
Puhleeeze. First, the economically-challenged complain oil prices are high, and now their complaining about WalMarts price/quality/availability model. You must have graduated with a Liberal Arts degree, Phil.
Hehe, I love hearing the economic losers defend to the death the right of the world’s largest corporation to exploit their workers and use corporate welfare to subsidize their “low prices.”
If you guys were picking cotton in the Old South, you say that the master’s whip is what puts food on the table. After all, there isn’t anything inherently anti-market about slavery.
That was pretty much the position of the Confederacy, in fact–keep the federal gov’t out of our “peculiar institution.”
Thank goodness for old masser Wal-Mart. We need more tax abatements for Old Masser, more tax payer roads and water and sewer to support Old Masser, more Labor Dept. lackies to look the other way while Old Masser runs union activists out on a rail, more tax payers paying to help Old Masser to put their family grocery or hardware store out of business with their own tax dollars.
When you losers finally realize there’s no decent jobs in this country because you help Old Masser ship them overseas, Wal-Mart will be glad to sell the rope you can end your miserable lives with . . .
Deal with it people! Wal-Mart is here to stay!
BTW, you know what it costs to provide a garment worker with a living wage and health care?
About 50 cents extra an item.
We keep people living in squalor and force them to die sooner than they need to so we can save 50 cents on a Izod polo shirt.
Joe W.– I haven’t set foot in a Wal-Mart for five years.
Deal with it. The grassroots is waking up and we’re gonna kick Wally’s ass . . .
PM,Because employee healthcare is not WalMart’s problem, it has become YOUR problem. PLEASE WAKE UP!
The wages paid by WalMart entitle their employees to WELFARE. In 11 of the 12 states that have disclosed employed people who are on Medicaid, WalMart tops the list.
Wal-Mart, a company where the 4 or 5 surviving Walton members make over $18 billion (with a B) per year. It offends me that this variety of “corporate welfare” is going on today. It should offend everyone, especially people like PM.
On 11-17-05 at (6:30pm) the central public library on Main street, there will be a FREE showing of documentary “Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price”. Go see it.
I saw it tonight at Ford/Rockwell branch Library. I expected to see a not-so-honorable corporate citizen, but instead, I beheld a bunch of criminals who are not in the least be repentant!
oops — should be “least _bit_ repentant!”
The really sad part is that so many people make just enough money that they can’t get help.
Steven E.,
Their healthcare became ‘my problem’ only because idiots voted for any kind of socialized medicine some politician put in their campaign. Government puts a gun to our head to pay for irresponsible citizens and you expect me to blame Wal-Mart?
Galahad, if you were good with math you wouldn’t hold your positions on finance. So give it a rest.
You mean that little kids with cancer were just irresponible citizens?I guess it’s just survival of the fittest, but we can’t have that because it would lend credence to evolution.
Galahad! You are dreaming. But go ahead and try. I commend you are your army’s efforts.
I for one go to Wal-Mart, Target, K-Mart, Dillions, the mall… I like variety and Wal-Mart is there as one of many places to go to shop for the things you need.
Wal-Mart might not be the best model company, but they have hired many people, who otherwise would be unemployed.
My only problem with wal-mart is the abuse of eminent domain….but then again our city government is trampling that right with or without wal-mart right?
Secondly…All the wal-mart haters are the big buisness is evil crowd so I REALLY wish that one day they would all decide in one of those closed doors meetings you say all the power brokers have, to just quit doing buisness in this country! lets see whether the its the big companay keeping the little man down or whether it is thier own lack of any marketable skills.
If we waved a wand today and redistributed the worlds wealth, made everyone equal. For the mostpart, within 12 months the people who were poor before would have pissed thier money away, the people who were rich before would be rich again because they would be out thier looking at how they can make more by offering the goods and services the rest of people are dying to throw away thier money on!
I went to Wal-Mart yesterday to get some of their Foreign made products. There were more Democrat bumper stickers than Republican. Hypocrites?
Okay, those that believe god is “the free market” and big business is the church in which to worship that god are not convinced that Wal-Mart needs to change.
Surprise, surprise.
But for the rest of us, the MODERATES, who don’t worship the so-called “free market,” and think that the biggest company in the world could take care of its employees and let them have a union, say, we’re getting organized and mobilized.
DR, JM, ID, I got news for you. There is NO FREE MARKET. The whole thing is a racket of power players changing the rules to benefit themselves.
It’s time the people earning the money get to keep some of the money. In Germany, a Walmart employee gets 36 days a year off. She’s got a union.
The only reason we can’t do that here is because of the conservatives who have declared class war on the middle and lower classes and their muddle-headed ENABLERS like dr, ID, and JM Walker.
You can cut your own throats if you want to, losers, but I’ll be damn before you take me and my society down with you.
Joe W.
Slaves had jobs. A prostitute has a job. Bank robbery is an old profession too.
We don’t need “jobs” in this country. We need decent jobs, meaning 35000 a year, health care, and a pension.
It’s not too much to ask from the richest country in the world. And we would have it if it weren’t for the “free market” religious superstition that keeps the powerful in power and keeps everybody else powerless and struggling . . .
Damn Galahad you had a great post going till you started the loser bit. When you do that your credibility suffers along with the readers interest.
Sorry, Tracy, passion for one’s beliefs is not just for the dittoheads anymore.
The stakes are too high.
I know and I agree with you. That means that the last thing you want to do is start sounding like them.Make your point, support your point of view, but the loser bit runs the risk of creating more opposition. And quite frankly it sounds a bit sophomorish.Good post otherwise, and I agree with alot of what you’re saying!
Tracy,
I never said ‘little kids with cancer’ were irresponsible citizens. I’m referring to people want to vote themselves health care or insurance instead of paying for it.
Sorry ProudMan, I misunderstood what you meant by irresposible citizens. My bad.
Here’s a good reason not to see the film:
(From Beachy’s opinion)
“While Greenwald succeeds in putting together a damning indictment of how the Wal-Mart Goliath gets ever bigger at the expense of everyone except perhaps its top management, the film has a “cherry-picked” feel to it. Have no employees been happy working at Wal-Mart? Are all overseas workers abused and exploited in violation of American law? The film makes no attempt to present both sides.”
We don’t need “jobs” in this country. We need decent jobs, meaning 35000 a year, health care, and a pension. -Galahad
See you just dont get it do you….Those of us who actually decided to get marketable job skills don’t have to work at such a low paying job
dr,Are you kidding? I have a friend with an engineering degree and ten years experience that ended up working in a Walmart, for low wages and no benefits, after the latest round of layoffs.If you think your job is secure, just wait! Whatever skills you have may be worth squat next year!
dr–
I so impressed. You have a good job.
But what you CONservatives don’t get is that one person in a society can’t have a good job unless a lot of other people have good jobs too.
I would also guess that you have a highly inflated opinion of your job security. In the 90’s, the hot new jobs were all in computer programming. The guy next door was in computer programming, until his company figured they could have him teach his replacements in Bangalore for a lot less money.
He lost his job and his house. Oh well, he can always get a 39 and a half hour job at Wal-Mart, making jack shit.
Also, if 35K a year plus health care and a pension is such a “nothing” job to dr, then why doesnn’t he expect Wal-Mart to provide it to its employees?
So, Galahad, what do you propose we (or the government) do?
By the way, if you feel that Wal-mart employees are underpaid, you could slip them a few dollars as a tip, if you ever go back and shop there. That way, we could be sure of the sincerity of your beliefs.
Time for a little economic reality. If Wal-Mart raised its’ wages to what Galahad wants, Wal-Mart would have to raise its prices. Then it could not compete and would disappear. Down 1. Then who? Lows, K mart, Dillions? Soon mail order would be the only way to buy – Direct from Taiwan. There will always be rich and poor. Those who prepare prosper. The lazy and irresponsible always have to work cheap to eat.
Mail order is already kicking Wal-Marts’ ass.
Glahad! How are you going to get millions upon millions of people making 35K a year, when the left make every company out to be the bad guy. There are plenty of people working for Wal-Mart that make that much, including Store Managers make 100K a year.
Unfortunately, Joe, life and economic analysis are not that simple. WalMart COULD decide to make less profit in the short run to pay its workers better. This, in turn, would give those workers more money with which to buy goods and services. This would stimulate the local economy…
I’m not saying this is how it would work, but oftentimes what we think will happen is not what will actually happen because we ignore or misunderstand the feedback and feedforward loops in highly intertwined problems like this one.
To give you an example..it might seem that the government’s only recourse for raising revenue is to raise taxes. However, tax cuts often serve to put more money back into the economy, resulting in more spending, a better business climate, and more revenue raised through taxation…a loop that seems obvious in hindsight but which has nonetheless not been used often or well.
People sometimes forget that margin and profit are different things. I can build a widget for $100 and sell 1 a year at $130. My margin on that item is 30%…sounds good until you realize I only made $30. On the other hand, if I sell the widget for $101 and sell 1000, then my margin is 1% but I made $1000. I’d rather make the $1000 at 1% margin than the $30 at 30% margin.
This has been a good thread. The questions remain, what do corporations, or governments, owe their people?
Some people say we owe nothing to others. Some say we owe a great deal.
Somewhere in between these extremes, the answer must be.
I believe the answer starts with the definition of “who we are”.
Is the government, “somebody else, and those evil people” or are they you and I?
Please answer. Thanks.
You are perceptive, Brian, in your distinction between static and dynamic analysis.
What do you think Wal-mart’s shareholders would do if the company decided to make less profit?
Would those shareholders sell?
Just who are the shareholders of Wal-mart, anyway?
Joe,
I imagine in the short run they’d sell…businesses undergo reversals and shareholders sell…happens all the time.
However, if the strategy of “employee feedback” worked and employees ended spending their money in tyhe local area which ultimately ended up benefitting WalMart’s bottom line, would shareholders be selling or buying?
I think history has proved that rising standards of living for everyone end up being good for everyone.
It is a mistake to penalize the worker to increase the bottom line. We’re returning to early Industrial Revolution era british thinking…stuff the men down the mines, along with the women and children, for 16 hour days at bare subsistence pay so that the bottom line can look better. Didn’t work then..won’t work now. Aside from the ethical issues, what the British ultimately found was that by using technology, educating their workers and paying them a decent wage for a decent day’s work of 10 hours, resulted in their dominance of world markets.
Now, you could make the claim that businesses today can go overseas to find “early Industrial Revolution” type labor reservoirs where they can pay workers subsistence wages for 14 hour days, 7 days a week, and employ the wife and kiddies too. That’s all true. But here again is one of those feedback loops…in doing so they impoverish the United States where most of their sales are now made. Where is the American worker going to get the money to purchase the goods made by the third world family working 14 hours a day, seven days a week to make the good to be bought by the American consumer at WalMart who now pays their workers less because they have a cheaop labor reservoir in the third world which impoverishes American workers who can’t buy the goods at WalMart produced by the foreign family….. you get the picture.
Wow . . . feel the hate? Wal-mart has sure developed the basic love/hate relationship.
On one side you got your basic haters of big business. These people don’t like much of anything, unless it’s health care in some foreign country masked as socialism. Or unionism uber all.
On the other side you have the “enablers” (whatever that means), who believe in the so-called free market. And the people who don’t make enough to shop at upscale stores, and the people who believe in bargains, and the people on welfare, and the people raising children who grow out of their cloths every other month, and the people that work there.
I shop there because it’s handy and cheap. I expect most of the people who shop there do so for the same reasons. Our wal-mart is open 24/7 and the parking lot is full darn near 24/7. Democracy rules, people; Walmart wins.
But they will go under someday. They all do. Someone will come along with a better idea, and the world will buy it. Maybe it will come with a better heart.
My point was this. What do kind of skills do you really think the average wal-mart employee has? If they didn’t have that job then they would have NO job!
Because remember those local stores everyone is crying about were family owned and run alot of times. You didn’t get hired if you didn’t know the family. If they didn’t like the fact you had a nose ring you didn’t get a job….I digress, but remeber thats what was before wal-mart
wal-mart and all low or minium wage jobs simply are not meant to be a carrer for people. The libs like galahad think that every single job in the country ought to be a wage that will buy a house, raise 2.5 kids, and have 2 new cars in the drive….That is just plain ridiculous.
You can say there is no free market, but The simple fact is this.you are paid by the demand for your knowledge and skill….If the most you can do is stock a shelf or run a cash register then you will be poor…dont think you can just acquire some skill in 6 months of training, If you can be trained in 6 mos…..so can anyone else…You are replaceable….you will be poor. You will become who you surround yourself with, look around you, if all your friends are poor….nobody in your life will rasie the standard for you….you will be poor. Who’s your daddy? mentor? don’t have one? GET ONE! Make sure they are doing alot better off than you, LISTEN, do what they say. Your brillance has gotten you exactly to where you are, until you start paying attention to winners, you will not win. Worry and complaint about what someone else makes NEVER puts any more money into YOUR pocket.
Joe7226First you must be Hindu, you have been reincarnated in many forms LoL!To answer in part your question about stockholders, after associates have been with the company five years they are what is called “vested” they receive stock also a number have money withheld from their check to buy stock. It is part of the retirement plan Wal-mart has. (That may change in the future) So in a sense it is the employees that are part owners. But like other companies with this type of stock ownership, they are non-voting. Each year a proxy is sent to each stock owning associate, giving they share of a vote to another voting stock owner.
drThere is a wide cross section of skilled labor works at Wal-mart, almost every profession has a member that is currently employed at that profession or has been in the past. Teachers often work at Wal-mart as a second job. I have met nurses, legal aids and I for one had been in Law enforcement for seven years.The point being that as one of the largest employers in the nation, Wal-mart ends up being a place of employment. That a growing number end up at, as professional jobs become fewer due to changes in the job market. BTW, back in the 90s I went to school for computer programming, bad timing!But on a side note, our education system has changed also, geared more toward a career at Wal-mart.Not just here in Kansas, but everywhere finally facing the reality of the job market. Most students today will not be able to find professional jobs. There are just so many jobs for designers and engineers to be had.With most companies seeking oversea for those jobs, (try getting help from SBC lately?) India is a growing market for technical expertise.
Quite a number of associates have college degrees, I have seen several that worked at Wal-mart while attending college. Stay at Wal-mart because they could not find employment in the area they have their degree in. Wal-mart see them self as the world! Their total outlook, their thought process is that there is no other business then Wal-mart. But they also are seeing how that can be a deficit to the company, with some many making Wal-mart a career. The cost of a growing number of people staying, wages going up, the cost of benefits. LOL, in the memo they are truly confused by they are the trend setter in the retail job market as to wages. But the number of associates that qualify for public assistance. “How can we pay so well and our employee be so poor?”.They can not have it both ways, you can not be a number one employer in the nation and not have the largest amount of employees. You can not buy out your suppliers close down their factories, set up a company in another country. Then expect the former employees of the U.S. company you closed to have the money to shop at your stores.
I went to high school in the seventies, we were told that the U.S. was moving from a manufacturing economy to a service economy. Boeing is on the way out and Wal-mart is on the way in, that is fine with Wal-mart! But there is a symbolic relationship between business and worker, the buying power for one depends on the sale power of the other. If Boeing lays off a thousand workers, that cut into the profit of Wal-mart. In turn that means fewer trips on airlines and fewer sales of Boeing aircraft.
It is an illusion that the economy will survive no matter what happens, there is a bottom to the well.As to Wal-mart and the unions, it is because they have given some good benefits that the unions have not made a real foothold in the company. But the recent change in the requirements for being eligible for benefits is a step toward a union. Now in order to qualify for benefits under full time. You have to work 34 hours. When the average associate is scheduled for less, often only 32 hours and full time being more then 28 hours a week.
1. There’s not a damn thing in Wal-Mart I want to buy. I don’t shop there not only because they are the meanest company around, but because I don’t want to buy cheap Chinese crap.
2. “Libs like Galahad think that all jobs have to be 35k a year with health care.” Yes, as a matter of fact I do. If Europe and Japan can do it, why can’t we?
3. Blaming the poor for being poor is a great way for loser conservatives to feel better about yourselves and justify selfishness. But it’s not true. Nobody works harder than poor people. “They take the early bus” doing hard, mindless backbreaking labor, getting screwed by more powerful people every step of the way.
Blame the victim, that’s the epitome of conservatism.
4. Providing a living wage and health care would only require adding a tiny markup or a tiny loss of profits for Wal-Mart. It’s pure greed that keeps thousands of full-time WM employees on gov’t assistance.
5. Local, state, and federal gov’t are subsidizing and providing tax abatements to Wal-Mart. They don’t to other local businesses.
Using mom and pop business’s tax money to help Wal-Mart put them out of business. Yeah, that’s fair.
6. Why don’t you just watch the movie so you know what the hell you’re talking about for once?
Stuck in a low-paying job? The government subsidizes training for qualified people.
How do you find out if you’re qualified? Ask! The first step starts with you. Ain’t nobody going to hold your hand and lead you to the promised paycheck.
You want to make that $35K a year Galahad thinks you should be making? Get the training to do so. Ain’t nobody going to hand you $35K a year for sitting on your duff.
Here is a URL to the Kansas wage estimates for 2005-2006. Pick a job, get trained and get a decent paycheck. If you don’t, Galahad will personally give you the keys to his cigarette boat and jet airplane:-))
http://www.bls.gov/oes/2004/may/oes_ks.htm#b00-0000
A good job is just a mouse click away!
Oh My God, is this a great country or what?
I hope, JM, that you never have to leave conserva-land and join the rest of the county, but if and when you do, good luck, my friend.
Galahad,Evidently, you failed to read my post: It states the first step starts with you. That is the real world, not the Liberal surreal world of “give it to me now because I want it.”
The real world is the one where you get up in the morning, go to work, bust your ass, and take home a paycheck. Millions of Americans do it every day. I’m happy to be one of them:-))
Conserva-land? You’re mistaking me for someone whose ancesters didn’t come from monkeys (or Kansas).
There goes Galahad again, insulting people, believing that is a persuasive argument.
G. you said that government doesn’t subsdize local businesses. What about businesses like Genesis Health Club? Or all the other money Wichita and Sedgwick County spends to lure businesses here?
By the way, if you think greed is so bad, why don’t you do whatever job it is that you do for a lesser salary?
Was reading top down and noticed Sir Galahad wrote “us moderates”. If Galahad is a moderate, John F. Kennedy is one of those mean old hate filled filthy rich neocon (what else do you cut and paste w/each of your posts, Galahad?) CONSERVATIVES.
Oh, BTW, I’m not a Wal Mart shopper. I like Target better. And my Libetarian bias is against Wal Mart taking land away from property owners, BUT, free market and hard work is a hell of a lot better than ‘income redistribution’.
1. Steve, you tried your best for a snappy comeback and you failed miserably. The lesson–never try.
2. IDiot, income redistribution is exactly what I’m pissed off about: the redistribution of tax funds from a good local business like Williams’ Hardware, say, to the richest company in the world, so that they can more easily under cut both prices and wages.
“Welfare cheats” are chimeras (look it up) that you dittoheads can’t quit whining about. Clinton signed legislation kicking people off welfare after two years. Get over it and move on.
It’s not welfare to the poor that’s killing this country, it’s welfare for the rich.
Just something to think about. Neither democracies or free markets are inherently good (or evil for that matter). They are incomplete in and of themselves. Hitler was elected to his position as Chancellor; the Reichstag voted to grant him absolute authority through the Enabling Acts. Without the dimension of an informed and “moral” citizenry democraciy is as likely as any other system to end up unjust or morally bankrupt.
Similarly, free markets/supply and demand are economic concepts. They also lack a moral dimension.
It’s the internal sense of fair play of a nation’s citizenry coupled with capitalism and republican democracy that leads to good government and good economic policies.
After all, the government agencies that ‘free market’ capitalists like to rail about weren’t enshrined in the Constitution. They were created to regulate the excesses of simple free market capitalism. We abandon them at our peril.
While the markets may dictate the economic justification of low wages for the least capable, least educated, least lucky by dint of the circumstances of their births (yes sheer luck plays a role – there but for the grace of God go I), where’s the social justice for them?
I guess if the market dictates that 12% of the current population lives in poverty (and that number is increasing and accelerating as it does) while 16% don’t have health insurance that’s just the reality of their lazy ass lifestyles. As Scrooge pointed out laissez faire economics isn’t without some semblance of feeling for these poor wretches. After all “are there no prisons… and the Union workhouses, are they still in operation?”
Brian, in a free market, people enter into voluntary transactions that they believe will benefit them.
Government, on the other hand, makes decisions for us that many would not make on their own, and enforces those decisions through coercion.
Which to you seems the moral system?
Galahad, why are you so bitter and insulting? I guess if I shared your view of the world, I might act that way too.
Steve,
I think you’re mixing the theory up with the reality. For example, for me to get a job in my chosen field of endeavor, I have to sign an ‘employment at will’ contract that says I can quit for any reason or no reason or I can be let go for any reason or no reason. Sounds good, huh? But the reality is no one enters into this covenant voluntarily. You must sign it to work or you can take a hike and work at Walmart. I’m sure you’llo respond that I can start my own consulting business or that I can take an idea for a product and start manufacturing it. With what capital? And what do I do in the meantime. If I have to work another 2 jobs to make ends meet, where do I find the time or extra cash? By the way, do you think it is moral in any way for a company to have the option to fire you for ANY reason except race, religion, national origin and the few other covered in the law? And I have been let go because my boss didn’t like my studying chess at my desk on a real board over my lunch hour !
And Steve..I suppose it’s “moral” for Wall Street insiders to use their knowledge to enrich themselves and their buddies at our expense. Even with the SEC in existence this goes on ALL the time. I shudder to think of a “free” market without this tiny bit of regulation.
Oh, and don’t forget about the fact that companies are not people. They are entities with no moral values whose only function is to make a buck. That’s why DuPont was discovered covering up evidence that their teflon like bag liners might be less stable than they claimed with the material ending up inside us. It’s also the reason that Love Canal occurred. It was economically and legally OK to just dump the waste..but I think we all know it wasn’t a wise or a moral decision.
Of course it’s okay that either you or the company you work for can decide to terminate your employment at any time either of you so desires. You don’t own the company; you don’t make the rules.
Discovered a new product and want to go into manufacturing? Ever heard of Government or small business loans? Ever heard of venture capital? Ever heard of entrepreneurship? Ever heard of get off your duff and just do it?
What you Liberals are proposing is Socialism. Well, let me lead you to a site that will explain in details even you can understand why Socialism is an idea and capitalism is a law of nature:http://www.conservativecat.com/mt/archives/2004/11/111504_capitali_1.html
Of course it’s okay if it is negotiated between parties of equal standing..which it never is. …there is no negotiation and the parties are not of equal standing. If everyone offers you the same choice is your acceptance free or coerced? Do you think the government put in place the anti-discrimination statutes because they had nothing better to do or do you think there might actually have been egregios misuse of the terms of the contract?
As far as angel investors and venture venture capitalists are concerned, I hear ya. They are options..however, you usually end up working for them not with them since the price of their help is usually something like a heft 70+% of the venture. Bythe way, aren’t government loans just another example of the government butting into what should be a market based decision? Ditto student loans and the rest.
me again…sorry
JM/BrianOf course there’s going to be disparity between employer and employee: They are hiring you to do a job, not the other way around.
There will always be employers who misuse employees. Its been going on since Igor hired his brother-in-law to chip stones and make wheels out of them.
You see, Igor thought Flug wasn’t good enough for his sister, so he tried to overwork Flug, and force him to quit. Then Igor could tell his sister that Flug was truly a bum and she would divorce him. But Flug, being without a job, wouldn’t be able to pay child support for the three kids he fathered.
But Flug was too smart for that: He started the stone-chippers union, demanded better wages, better benefits, and drove Igor out of business.
Flug’s wife, Gaga, was so ticked that both her husbabd and brother were out of a job, that she kicked the crap out of both of them and went to live with Balg Gutes, who was making interactive stone tablets two villages down the river.
Moral? Never work for relatives.
Well, judging by the 19th Century arguments being advanced here in defense of capitalism, the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Steve wrote,
“In a free market, people enter into voluntary transactions that they believe will benefit them.”
BWAH HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Honestly, Steve, thanks; I haven’t had a laugh like that in a long, long time. Particularly the word ‘voluntary.’
Where ‘work for Walmart or starve’ is the reality for many, many people and their children, the ‘free market’ fiction of ‘voluntary’ participation in a market is, well, a fiction. This idea of parity between Walmart ‘Associates’ and Walmart is a fantasy if ever I heard one.
Then there’s JM Walker’s unshakeable religious faith in the salvific properties of free markets. He writes, “Socialism is an idea and capitalism is a law of nature.” No, J M, capitalism is an ideology that legitimates greed.
And if your reply is that greed is natural, I have two responses: first, you’re mistaking greed for a cause of capitalism when really it is an effect; and second, even if it were ‘natural’, which it isn’t, that wouldn’t provide it with any moral justification. If you’re a Christian, or just call yourself one, read Mark 10:25: ‘it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.’
Capitalism is legal robbery provided with a theological justification. Pretty much an irresistable combination.
CF,Ever hear of humor? It’s where you hear something funny and laugh. So in response to your post: I’m still laughing. HAHAHAHA!
Ya know, you die-hard capitalist reactionaries that want to return the US to the glorious days of the robber barons . . . just watch the movie.
When you see the rock-ribbed Republicans with their VFW hats on who spent 40 years building their local business, paying taxes and contributing mightily to their community and small-town quality of life WIPED OUT in three months by a collusion of Wal-Mart and local government . . . then maybe, just maybe, you’ll see what everybody else but you can see.
Although even then, I’m not holding my breath.
BTW, Steve, I’m not bitter.
I’m stoical and hardbitten because I know how difficult it is to raise the consciousness of people like you who have absorbed the Limbaugh, O’Lielly, Hannity et al. indoctrination that the America was perfect until before liberals “changed” it.
For this spewing of the free enterprise religion, they are richly rewarded by their corporate masters.
But I may be one of the few people you know, Steve, who ISN’T bitter, for I have the satisfaction of knowing that I strive to make people’s live better, to make our society more just, and to make our nation the shining city on a hill its founders envisioned for us.
Galahad, you might want to read again things like the Federalist Papers and the writings of Thomas Jefferson, who believed in limited government. I haven’t formed the impression that you believe in the same things.
When Wal-mart and local governments collude, that’s not a free market or capitalism. That’s big government at work, and Republicans are just about as fond of it as are Democrats.
By the way, I don’t listen to or watch “Limbaugh, O’Lielly, Hannity.” But I do know enough about Limbaugh to know that pokinig fun at a person’s name (O’Lielly) is a favorite way he uses to convince others of the superiority of his positions. Funny how it doesn’t work form him, and not for you, either.
“When Wal-mart and local governments collude, that’s not a free market or capitalism. That’s big government at work.”
Uhm . . . okay. You’re against “big government” as an article of faith. But who’s going to stop Wal-Mart when it improperly stores pesticides and rainwater carries it right into the drinking water for your town? The drinking water that moms are using to make kool-aid for their little kids?
Who is going to stop Wal-Mart when it comes in and undercuts the prices of every grocery store in town until those stores go out of business at which time they are then free to charge whatever they want without any real competition?
It sounds like you agree that what Wal-Mart and gov’t is doing is wrong.
So why are you arguing about it?
BTW, I’ll re-read Thomas Jefferson if you see the movie.
Jus got back from Wal-Mart and I feel good.
Walmart paid a fine for pollution in Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Massachusetts. They established a 4.5 million dollar fund to bring themselves into compliance with all federal and state regulations.
The fines walmart paid were leveled at 22 stores. How many does walmart Have? Many more. I would venture to guess that the managers of those stores are not employed by walmart anymore. I would also venture to guess that the stores responsible for the pollution were in violation of company policy.
There are many more polluters, both large and small, not caught and fined. Do you realize that every time you pour bleach down the drain you’re violating federal pollution standards? Do you realize that every time you over fertilize your lawn and/or flowers you’re violating federal polution standards via rainwater runoff? Think that doesn’t add up to a major source of pollution?
I am in no way justifying the pollution, but take it in perspective and it takes on a different veneer.
Walmart does drive out the mom and pop stores. But . . . what were you, and the people without jobs, paying for food? A lot more than you are paying at walmart. And those people without jobs? Their now working at walmart and bringing home a check.
They couldn’t get a job because the mom and pop stores hired maybe 6~7 people. And what did they pay when you could get a job there? Probably not a whole lot more, if any, than walmart. And benefits at the mom and pop? Good luck.
Like it or not, CF, we don’t value the work that Wal-mart workers perform any more than what Wal-mart is paying them.
If it was true that Wal-mart workers are performing work worth more than what Wal-mart pays them, couldn’t those workers get higher-paying jobs somewhere else?
By the way, Wal-mart recently has advocated raising the minimum wage. They were applauded for doing so. Consider, though, that Wal-mart pays quite a bit more than minimum wage already. An increase in the minimum wage would increase the employment costs of many of Wal-mart’s competitors, some of whom don’t pay much more than minimum wage. So what is Wal-mart’s motivation for advocating an increase in the minimum wage? Concern for the economic plight of the masses, or wanting government to pass laws that hamstring its competitors?
And Galahad, when you wrote: “Who is going to stop Wal-Mart when it comes in and undercuts the prices of every grocery store in town …” were you advocating some sort of minimum price laws for grocery items? Isn’t that what it would take?
Brian, you cite examples where government regulation, like the SEC and insider trading, is not working. I don’t understand what your point is. You seem to be wanting more government regulation, such as one preventing your employer from firing you except with government approval, but you then tell me that these types of regulations aren’t working. I’m sorry I don’t understand your reasoning.
Okay, I give up. You have to have a basic understanding of how the world works. I’m not interested in remediating back to the fourth grade.
But I’ll just leave you with this, German Wal-Mart workers have 36 days a year off and are represented by a union. I assume that Wal-Mart makes makes a decent profit there.
So why can’t Wal-Mart workers here have something similar?
Don’t strain yourself too much thinking about this. The answer is, they could, if gov’t was protecting the workers instead of the corporation.
NoJo–
I can see you enjoying shopping at Wal-Mart. Just your speed. Did you buy a bale of tube socks? You know, they’re coming out with a Wal-Mart labelled wine, because nothing says sophistication and taste like Wal-Mart.
Galahad, please give us the benefit of your knowledge. I’ve seen you run away from many debates on these forums.
Why don’t you address the points people make?
How do you propose that government protect the workers?
What specifically could the government do to raise the wage of Wal-mart workers in America so that they are the same as Germany’s, if that is what you are advocating?
Galahad says: “… for I have the satisfaction of knowing that I strive to make people’s live better.”
Galahad, please tell us how you will make our lives better. How is it that we have survived without you?
Steve,
My point was this. You cite a very basic sort of economic picture. You liken the situation to of employer/employee to two individual barterers coming to an agreement, shaking hands on a voluntary arrangement. That is certainly not the situation as 200 years of labor history have shown.
Corporations have behind them staffs of economists, attorneys, and human resource people. The individual has none of these. If you say that the individual can go out and hire attorneys, subscribe to the same data services that HR people do to get wage information, etc., then you certainly are being naive. The purpose of unions, at least in part, is to close the gap between the virtually unlimited resources of many corporations and the virtually nonexstent resources of the individual. I would suppose that you must be fanatically pro-union since your view of business employment economics is a negotiation between equals.
Also, a contract is just a piece of paper unless there is some enforcement mechanism behind it. Enter the government. The government has a vested interest in fulfilling the SPIRIT of the laws and statutes upon which the republic was founded. Before the anti-discrimination statutes were in place, it was legal to fire people because of race, national origin, religion, etc. As I said, this may have been legal under the terms of the contract but it was clearly not legitimate. We all expect to be judged on the quality of our contribution tothe bottom line, not on ancillary factors like the color of our skin. Government has tried, sometimes unsuccessfully, to add legitimacy to legality. As I said in an earlier post, economic theory is amoral; it requires outside intervention to impose upon it the standards of human decency we all expect as described in Amendment 9 – unenumerated rights that trump contractual legalism and sophistry.
Steve,
You’ll also have to explain very carefully the observations of 200 years of labor history..As both Galahad and I mentioned, workers were exploited and abused terribly in England. But over time, they organized, won concessions, and the bad old government chipped in by making it illegal to employ children under 10, for example. And even with these terrible affronts on the preogatives of management the British managed to dominate world markets until WWI.
There needs to be a balance between the type of pure laissez faire capitalism you espouse and the democratic rights and ideals enshrined in the Enlightenment thinking of the founding fathers. We don’t want to make the mistakes of the British who nationalized many of their important industries and ruined them, but neither do we want to have a situation where 8 year old children work 14 hours a day weaving rugs for the international market, as they do in India and Pakistan today. Every example of a successful democratic/economic combination you can name has had everyone’s boat rise with the tide of success. Every combination where this has not occurred has resulted in revolution.
First of all, we don’t have a Pakistan environment where 8 year old children work 14 hours a day, so even mentioning it Proves no points about walmart.
Second, our forefathers never espoused a unionized system of employer/employee protection.
Third, please show me where in any government laws, regs, whatever, it stops walmart workers from unionizing.
In california, the brown act was used to unionize college employees. I was one of them. It would make it illegal for walmart to attempt to stop unionizing by its employees. Yet I don’t see any unionizing going on in california.
How many walmart employees have you asked how they feel about their job? The ones I’ve talked to seem happy enough. But their happiness may not coorelate with your idea of happiness, so in your mind, they should be unhappy. There’s something wrong with someones thinking, and I don’t think it’s the walmart employees.
JM,
The founding fathers never said anything about free travel among the various states either. I think however it was pretty clear that they intended it. And they never said anything about a right to free association. So what? They also never commented on the FCC dividing the available frequency spectrum up for use by radio, TV, cell phone, short wave, etc. Again, so what? Are we supposed to assume they’d be opposed to it because they didn’t comment on it? Your reasoning falls under a fallacy of distraction called arguing from ignorance: because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false.
As to children working at 8, why don’t you ask Nike about that? Maybe they can explain why it’s unethical here but not in Thailand.
The rule of law may be a bulwark of freedom, but it is not the essence of freedom. The theory of laissez faire capitalism may be a cornerstone of all current free enterprise models but we should not expect either economics or the law to dictate morality.
So, let me ask, JM, should all oversight of economic activity be eliminated? And if you say “no”, then what should remain, and how did you arrive at your decisions?
Gal,HA HA HA HA HA HA HA. It’s fun to push your buttons and see you react in your typically imature manner.
Of course there should be some oversight by government regarding business as it pertains to employees, but it should be very limited. They don’t call it the private sector for nothing.
With regards to federal and state laws governing the right to work without involving race, creed, etc., the laws are on the books: it is illegal to use those as a point of employment. As well it should be. It is also illegal to use a child labor force in the United States.
If Nike is indeed having their shoes, whatever, made in Thailand by children, then you and I have an obligation to refuse to buy anything Nike sells. It is the job of the so-called world court to stop these practices.
Your question to me is way too encompassing: “Should all oversight of economic activity be eliminated?”
What is that? Don’t be ridiculous. There will always be oversight needed, if only for tax purposes. And to ensure that pension plans meet what the company promised (which is something Bush is trying to make happen . . . I’ll give him that.) But where does government oversight end? You apparently want a system that is “fair” to everybody. How do you go about making that happen? Germany is trying to do that and are under a mountain of debt, along with unemployment above what the “European Union” deems acceptable. France, the same thing, only they have fighting in the streets.
By making more laws and rules mandated by government with regards to employment behavior, you are asking the same employers to move their manufacturing operations overseas, thus losing more jobs in this country. And supplying jobs for the child corps out there to be abused by.
I will state this for the Nth and last time: Walmart supplies jobs to the community they build in. Their labor is cheap, their benefits not very good, but the employees don’t have to work there. They can get an education and get a better job. One that pays more with better benefits. No one is holding a gun to their head… except the Liberal community that wants to shut down Walmart and its clones and put the same people on the street.
JM,Problem is, when Wal-Mart comes into small towns, they run the other retailers out of business, thus limiting employment options for the residents. If they want jobs in retail, they’re stuck with working for Wal-Mart or moving away.
Jed,How many did the retailers that walmart “ran out” employ? More than the grand total of employees walmart employed after comming to town? Did the wages and benefits change with the arrival? Are the employees better or worse off?
Please state facts, not opinions.
I guess I’m the only dupe in town. I don’t investigate every object I buy to see if it has been manufactured ethically. I wouldn’t even know where to start. Nor do I remember seeing signs up at WalMart or any Nike retailers informing me with a sign “These products made by enslaved child labor”.
Theory is nice. In practice, what I’ve seen is that markets aren’t transparent. If Nike wants to cover up their manufacturing practices, I’m certainly not going to be able to discover them. And I’ve also found that few people put their ethics or religious beliefs ahead of their pocketbooks.
Brian,Welcome to the real world.
Steve and JM–actually Brian did a fine job of defending exactly what I was trying to say.
I don’t have the patience to deal with knuckleheads like he does.
1. I don’t run away from arguments, Steve. I give up on people that I feel are being willfully ignorant. A three year old kid can keep asking “why” over and over again. At some point you’ve got to move on . . .
2. “In california, the brown act was used to unionize college employees. I was one of them. It would make it illegal for walmart to attempt to stop unionizing by its employees. Yet I don’t see any unionizing going on in california.”
Well, welcome to the real world yourself, JM. Wal-Mart has a crack team of union busters with their own private jet. Wal-Mart employees get fired just for talking about the union, they can get fired just for talking in hushed voices to one another. As soon as a manager gets wind that any employee is even thinking union, he calls Benton, Arkansas.
Which brings me to
3. Steve’s idiot question “what do you propose the gov’t should do about it?” Steve, the government should just ENFORCE THE LAWS that are already on the books to stop what Wal-Mart is doing.
But, hey, those multi-millions in donations to Bush and the Republicans weren’t charity, you know? Just ask Enron. It was semi-legal graft, pure and simple, and it paid off in spades, baby . . .
Isn’t interesting how the people that think “big gov’t” is the answer to the IMPOSSIBLE TASK of fusing the Kurds, the Sunnis, and the Shias together in a viable democratic state built from the ground up are the same people that think “big gov’t” does nothing but cause problems and limit freedom when it comes to the relatively EASY TASK of protections FOR workers’ rights and AGAINST corporate rip-offs (Enron, Wal-Mart, etc).
But “I’m running from the argument” because I don’t say exactly what government can do.
Okay, here’s what they do. Beef up their enforcement units–SEC, anti-trust, and labor law compliance–and nail these bastards to the wall for breaking the law. A little jail time for top management will clear their minds wonderfully.
It’s not rocket science.
What law(s) are they breaking? Please state section, paragraph, et al.
I have your word that walmart has a cadre of union busters. Where did you get that info? From the movie? The film was so onesided I had to lean to my left side to watch it. (Yes, I did see it) Not once was there an opposing point of view offered. Kind of reminds one of both parties, doesn’t it?
Galahad isn’t interested in anything big business. What he wants is Socialism, pure and simple. It doesn’t take a “rocket scientist” to figure that out.
The only thing “fair” in his world, is spreading the wealth out evenly. Doesn’t matter if you’re a rocket scientist or a janitor. You’ll all get the same because you’ll all be the same.
Got an innovative mind? Got a notion to do something to get ahead? Don’t matter. Your neighbor will get what’s comming to you, and you’ll be ostrasized for being “different”. Sound familiar? Atlas what? The Liberal creed:”One size fits all.”
If walmart is breaking federal and or state law, they should be called on the carpet for it. And pay the penalty, be it monetary or penal. That’s called justice.
If congressmen, senators, and presidents are taking money to look the other way, DON”T ELECT THEM! Get a backbone. Vote for someone who CAN make a difference.
But, you see, that’s where the problem with a two party system creates the conflict: They’re all in bed with each other.
J.M.–If I’m a socialist, I’ll say I am. I don’t need you to say it for me.
I’m not a socialist. Your entire argument is a straw man, you accuse me of a position I DON’T HOLD, and then attack that position as if it represents me.
I don’t have any quarrel with big business per se or small business either. Microsoft is a big company that has provided a lot of value for people. I don’t believe in big gov’t taking money from the rich and directly giving it to the poor. However, I do believe in taxing everyone in society who benefits materially from our society so that basic infrastructure, education, protections and opportunities can be funded.
But I’m even more outraged when gov’t TAKES MONEY FROM THE POOR AND GIVES IT TO THE RICH. And that’s exactly what is happening with Wal-Mart.
The movie is one-sided, granted. Partly that’s because Wal-Mart top management refused to be interviewed. But just because it’s one-sided doesn’t mean it’s incorrect.
Firing people for wanting a union is against the law. Period. Wal-Mart gets away with it because they can. Period.
Galahad
I think that everybody ought to quit working, then Government moochers would have to find a real job.