Why Wal-Mart is evil (long, sorry)

Everything else
1

Someone tell me. I was reading an article in the LA Times yesterday about Wal-Mart, and how they’re one of the causes of the grocery strike. I don’t get why they’re evil. I mean, they open these big stores that sell stuff people want for cheaper than the local stores (the paper quoted a study that showed Wal-Mart carts of groceries were something like 20-40% cheaper than the same cart at a supermarket). To grossly simplify things, they do this partly by being more efficient (economies of scale and a super-efficient supply chain that they’ve developed), and partly by paying their workers less (average of $8 an hour, vs. $15 at supermarkets). When they move into an area, they drive mom-and-pop stores out of business, and they at least gravely threaten folks like grocery chains (which is why Kroger and Ralphs were trying to cut worker benefits). If you try to keep them out (such as by zoning in a way that they can’t open), they just open a store in the next town and it still damages the businesses in your town. Is that all correct? Is there anything I’ve missed?

Because if not, and I’m not trying to be an asshole here, I don’t really get it. Wal-Mart sells well and their competitors sell worse because Wal-Mart is what people want. Right? I mean, as Brad said in another thread, if you don’t like Wal-Mart, you want that personal touch, whatever, you don’t shop there and Wal-Mart will go out of business. It’s not like Wal-Mart forces anyone to buy their merchandise. They open their store and say “Here’s what we’ve got, if you want it,” and people come flocking. Right?

I guess the evil is supposed to be that they pay their workers $8 an hour instead of $15 an hour. But again, nobody is forced to work at Wal-Mart. If you think $8 an hour is too little for running the checkout or greeting folks as they come in, you can take your checkout skills somewhere else, can’t you? Again, it seems like Wal-Mart just comes into town and says “I’ve got a bunch of jobs that pay $8 an hour, if anyone wants them,” and people come. I’m sure they bitch and grouse about how they’re undervalued and Wal-Mart is The Man with his foot on their neck and whatever, but if they really thought they were getting fucked, they wouldn’t take the job to begin with, or they’d get another one, wouldn’t they? It’s not like unemployment (particularly in the service sector) is running rampant, although it’s not as good as it once was. But there are lots of no-skill or low-skill service positions available at least where I am. I see the “Help Wanted” signs all over. I’m sure most of those jobs don’t pay any better, of course–it’s not like you’re going to go flip burgers and get a big raise–but I assume that’s just because that’s what that kind of job is worth (not to totally rehash the grocery strike thread).

Maybe they’re evil because they’re so big? Like the way it’s fashionable to hate any big company, because big companies must be bad. But I just don’t see it. Being big, by itself, hardly seems evil. I agree that some big industries do evil things. Microsoft, for example, is very aggressive about fucking over competitors to maintain their marketshare (changing their programs so third-party stuff won’t work, etc.). Airlines are another good example (running at a loss to drive start-ups into the ground). But Wal-Mart isn’t doing that stuff, at least not that I’ve heard. They just have a very successful business model.

Maybe they’re evil because their stuff is so generic, processed, vanilla, etc. I’ll grant you that I think you could do way better, in general, buying stuff from other stores–probably better quality, and certainly more character. Although there aren’t any Wal-Marts near me, there are Targets and K-Marts and so on, and I almost never go to them, because I don’t like the stuff there, by and large. But again, that’s a choice that anyone can make. Apparently–and this is no big surprise to me–many, many average Americans like something that is cheap and white-bread. If Wal-Mart makes a lot of money filling that niche, more power to them. I’m glad those millions of Americans can get what they want (even if it’s not what I want) at a good price. And you might be thinking, “Well, see how you feel when Wal-Mart moves into your area and all those smaller stores that you like shopping at go out of business, and your only choice is Wal-Mart, so you end up getting that white-bread stuff you hate.” Yeah, that will suck. But it won’t be Wal-Mart’s fault; that’s the fault of the dumbass average Americans. It’s like having to suffer through the Bush presidency or hearing Brittney Spears when I go play racquetball at the gym. I don’t like Bush or Brittney, but I don’t blame them for making the best of everyone else’s stupidity.

This is way longer than I initially planned. But the basic question is this: everyone loves to dog-pile on Wal-Mart. You can’t mention them in a thread here without a couple of people dropping by to say “Man, Wal-Mart is so evil.” How come? What bad things do they do?

2

I don’t love Wal-Mart. But then, I don’t love K-Mart, either, and Target is sorta borderline. I find most of these places tacky, they don’t have the stuff I typically buy, so I don’t go there.

But if Wal-Mart drives the local competition out of business, you’ll have a situation where those $8/hr checkers have no other choices. Where will they go? If Wal-Mart drives the local competition out of business, it also means I can’t get a lot of the stuff I want. That’s reducing my choices, not increasing them. So I can spend 30% less on stuff I don’t normally buy. Big deal.

To me, Wal-Mart represents the homogenization of the American consumer. And with Wal-Mart expanding overseas, we’ll all have the same limited choices.

However, the real reason Wal-Mart is evil is censorship. They dictate content in music, magazines, books and games. They do this by either forcing the publishers to edit out material they say their customers deem offensive. In reality, some group at Wal-Mart HQ in Arkansas decides if it’s proper or not. So once again, my choices are reduced.

3

The answers are all in your post Rywill.

You say “Wal-Mart drives the local competition out of business”. You acknowledge that you don’t like to shop at Wal-Mart (because they’re tacky) and you say idiotic things like (not direct quotes) “If people don’t like the Wal-Mart pay, they can work elsewhere” and “if you don’t like Wal-Mart, shop elsewhere” but you opened by pointing out that Wal-Mart’s business practices ELIMINATE or drastically reduce the “elsewhere” options.

I value good customer service. I value choice. I value mom and pop stores. So, yeah, I don’t value Wal-Mart and I loathe the influence Wal-Mart has on sales. On employment, etc.,

4

Related Tangent:
I went to Toys R Us in June to get my daughter a kite. They didn’t have any. As the clerk told me, they only sell kites March through May. Fuck that. Someone put sales numbers in a computer and determined I can only buy a fucking kite 3 months out of the year? No back stock? Ugh. The whole chain (and most big chains) are run this way. They’re stocked with what sells well, when it sells well. That makes sense for sleds and such, but a kite is good until October.

I went to a tiny hobby shop and bought my damn kite there.

5

Wal-Mart kills other stores. Period. Wal-Mart kills entire brands and industries that feed them, because you will meet Wal-Mart pricepoints to be put in their store, and if you simply can’t produce the quality/$ necessary to do so, something has to give. Wal-Mart destroys brand loyalty and brand persistence, and that in turn destroys product value, because your name, reputation, and history mean nothing. Only the product you have and the cost of the product. Value is taken out of the equation.

That, right there, is so unfathomably evil it’s rarely even discussed. I would never by Wal-Mart brand hot dogs, for example. The entire thought bespeaks foul and unthinkable sources for whatever protein actually resides in the animal intestine casing. Yet most consumers don’t think twice about buying “Brand X Doorlock - Real, Brass-like finish”. Nevermind the fact that the lock is pot metal, as cheap as possible, designed to meet Wal-Mart’s price points and get wide coverage, because they’re the nations largest retail power. I mean, who cares if the locks are 20% weaker because they’re made with shitty metal; as long as they’re cheap. It’s not like the strength of a lock is at all important, all that matters is the price!

So, anyway, Wal-Mart kills other stores and brands, and then finds itself in the position of saying “Well, sure, you don’t have to take our jobs paying half of what you found necessary to live on. Go ahead, get a job at that hardware store next to us. The one that’s gone from 3 workers to 1 because they just don’t bring in the revenue to justify more than one worker at any time. We’ll still be here with our $8/hr jobs. Oh, have you met Betty and Bob? They used to work at the hardware store next door. They’ll make good workers.”

Mind you, it’s not just Wal-Mart and their brand stores (Sam’s is particularly heinous about this. If you find something that’s not a staple at Sam’s that you really like, you damn well better buy all they have. There’s a good chance they won’t have it next time you’re there, nor ever again. Might’ve been too expensive, or just not sold in enough volume to make the 2cents per unit profit worth carrying it any longer. But no loss, there’s probably some other product that’s more or less the same, and what’s the difference anyway?) It’s more of a pervasive culture thing; it’s why MCI has to cook their books. Because we’re all being trained as consumers to see value simply as dollars per unit, completely disregarding quality and service and the like.

I don’t know about you, but the thought of teaching the American populace to even further disregard ideas of quality is soberingly frightening. I don’t look forward to days of interchangeable meatlike products, dull brown unisex jumpers or the like. And while that may seem (and is) extreme right now, it’s also the inevitable destination of complete, bottom line mediocrity.

6

Evil: Union busting, treating their employees as slave labor.

Not evil: Efficient JIT delivery system, incredible inventory and demand management.

Might be evil: absurdly large influence on suppliers.

Looks evil, but actually isn’t: destroys inefficient small town businesses.

Conservatives complain about the place because it’s destroying their idyllic small towns, busting up their closed economies and bringing them into the twentieth century (all the complaints levied at them apply to every form of distribution larger than selling out of a wagon).

Liberals complain about the place because it fucks with their nostaglia and demand for “individualistic” sales; never mind that Trader Joe’s is the same damn thing. There’s also the seriously amazingly evil treatment of employees.

7

That, right there, is so unfathomably evil it’s rarely even discussed. I would never by Wal-Mart brand hot dogs, for example. The entire thought bespeaks foul and unthinkable sources for whatever protein actually resides in the animal intestine casing. Yet most consumers don’t think twice about buying “Brand X Doorlock - Real, Brass-like finish”. Nevermind the fact that the lock is pot metal, as cheap as possible, designed to meet Wal-Mart’s price points and get wide coverage, because they’re the nations largest retail power. I mean, who cares if the locks are 20% weaker because they’re made with shitty metal; as long as they’re cheap. It’s not like the strength of a lock is at all important, all that matters is the price!

If you think other brands of hot dogs are any better, you’re sorely mistaken.

The point of locks is to keep casual thieves out. If they’re bashing at it with a hammer, you’ve already lost; 20% metal doesn’t matter a whit.

And who gives a goddamn about brand loyalty?

8

Looks like Jason done read an article about this!

What about efficient small town businesses? It destroys them too. Did the article you read mention that? Or is this a way to feel better? “Small town business are inefficient so we don’t have to feel bad about them!”

And Trader Joes? That’s a correlation? I’ve only been in one once… but I didn’t see much inside of Trader Joes I could actually get elsewhere. It’s not like they’re stocking the same stuff as the mom & pops and undercutting them in terms of price.

You forgot this one:

Evil: Wal-Mart benefits from huge amounts of corporate welfare and tax breaks (mostly) unavailable to their competition.

9

Walmart also has a nice human resources ‘benefits’ dept. Employees can pick up all the forms for state medical assistance programs, right in the store. That is their health plan for the bulk of their employees - your tax dollars.

10

Ok, got it, proof positive that McCullough doesn’t know anything about hot dogs. Check.

11

You’re right, I try to avoid the filthy shit. Aren’t they all beaks and assholes?

What about efficient small town businesses? It destroys them too. Did the article you read mention that? Or is this a way to feel better? “Small town business are inefficient so we don’t have to feel bad about them!”

My point was that protecting inefficient businesses from competition isn’t exactly a core American value. And if small towners hate Wal-Mart so much, why do they shop there?

Evil: Wal-Mart benefits from huge amounts of corporate welfare and tax breaks (mostly) unavailable to their competition.

True, but so does Haliburton.

Trader Joe destroys a lot of “edgy” speciality shops, I think.

12

Of course not. Some are Kosher, some are gourmet, some are real sausages, some are beaks and assholes, some are tofu, some are 100% meat (no byproducts)… the point is: you probably should be afraid, very afraid, of the Wal-Mart brand hot dogs. You can buy better meat products, but you probably can’t buy worse than that.

13

And on the inefficient businesses thing: it’s literally impossible for small town businesses to have smaller overhead per unit than Wal-Mart.

It’s not like Wal-Mart moves into town and firebombs the local businesses; what happens is everyone goes to the new Wal-Mart, which drives all the small shops out of business. Entirely voluntary on everyone’s part. Sure, Wal-Mart will raise prices a bit once the competiiton is gone, but prices will still be lower than they were before Wal-Mart showed up.

14

True, but you didn’t actually say that. And small towners do hate Wal-Mart, just not enough of them hate it. I have family in very small towns and most of them are happy when one comes to town. Always nice to avoid a 50 mile commute to shop when you can.

And I’m a real hypocrite myself with these kinds of complaints. I stopped shopping at corner bookstores because Barnes & Noble had what I wanted. And I now shop at Amazon because they have an even better selection. I hate searching for the obscure things I want. I like one-stop shopping.

I think Wal-Mart should be around, for capitalistic reasons, but I think the gov should level the playing field. I’d rather see 5 competing Wal-Marts in the country than one monolith.

15

Holy living fuck, I actually totally agree with Jason McCollough. It really is the Apocalypse.

Bub quotes:

“What about efficient small town businesses? It destroys them too.”

I assume that by “inefficient” Jason means “Not efficient enough to compete.” By definition, you’re mistaken, Andrew. If the business is efficient (i.e., as efficient as Wal-Mart), it won’t get destroyed. If it’s less efficient than Wal-Mart, then it’s just normal business when they get destroyed. Interesting tidbit: that Times article I read made the point that stores should be competing with Wal-Mart on things other than price. Offer better selection, more personalized service, etc. Differentiate yourself that way. The article argued that too many retailers immediately try to become like Wal-Mart when Wal-Mart comes into town, but that’s the wrong move, because Wal-Mart invented this business model and it’s unlikely you’ll ever beat them at it.

"Someone put sales numbers in a computer and determined I can only buy a fucking kite 3 months out of the year? No back stock? Ugh. The whole chain (and most big chains) are run this way. They’re stocked with what sells well, when it sells well. That makes sense for sleds and such, but a kite is good until October. "

What makes you think you know how to sell toys better than Toys R Us does? If it costs them $1,000 to keep kites in stock from March to October, and all they’re going to get out of it is selling a kite to you for $10, why should they do it? Because they owe you a convenient kite or something? If you hate their store so much, why is it your first stop when you go kite-shopping?

"You acknowledge that you don’t like to shop at Wal-Mart (because they’re tacky) and you say idiotic things like (not direct quotes) “If people don’t like the Wal-Mart pay, they can work elsewhere” and “if you don’t like Wal-Mart, shop elsewhere” but you opened by pointing out that Wal-Mart’s business practices ELIMINATE or drastically reduce the “elsewhere” options. "

As for places to shop, I already addressed that in my first post, so I won’t repeat myself here. As for places to work, although it’s true that Wal-Mart may close down the mom & pop’s hardware, it’s not like they close down every other business in the city. You can work in food service, or Target, or any of a hundred other places. (I would make the same response to Loyd’s similar point.)

mouslock:

“Only the product you have and the cost of the product. Value is taken out of the equation.”

What definition of “value” are you using? Because the definition I’m using, there’s nothing relevant to value other than the two things you mentioned: the product and its cost. If you’re arguing that Wal-Mart products are worse than other stores’, and therefore a worse value, how do you explain that it sells so well? Could it be that everyone else is happy to pay 20% less for a 20% worse lock, because they don’t think they need some super lock? That people are willing to pay 50% less for metal chairs than nice wooden ones because they don’t care that much about the wood?

16

[quote=“Bub_Andrew”]

True, but you didn’t actually say that. And small towners do hate Wal-Mart, just not enough of them hate it. I have family in very small towns and most of them are happy when one comes to town. Always nice to avoid a 50 mile commute to shop when you can.

And I’m a real hypocrite myself with these kinds of complaints. I stopped shopping at corner bookstores because Barnes & Noble had what I wanted. And I now shop at Amazon because they have an even better selection. I hate searching for the obscure things I want. I like one-stop shopping.

I think Wal-Mart should be around, for capitalistic reasons, but I think the gov should level the playing field. I’d rather see 5 competing Wal-Marts in the country than one monolith.[/quote]

They’re called “Target”.

I don’t know, I grew up in the idyllic small town that’s always referenced by these discussions and have a pretty cynical take on it. Henrietta, TX was controlled by the interests of the small downtown and they managed to keep the zoning board from letting Wal-Mart come in; they’ve just ensured a long, slow slide into bankruptcy rather than an immediate one, as people can still drive the half-hour to Wichita Falls to shop.

Wal-Mart could probably be nailed for anti-competitive practices and maybe some anti-trust action, but that’s almost a side issue here.

17

There are, among hot dogs, bad and good. Hebrew National >> Generic Franks.

The point of locks is to keep casual thieves out. If they’re bashing at it with a hammer, you’ve already lost; 20% metal doesn’t matter a whit.

There’s a big difference between holding and snapping the bolt because the metal had a large pocket of zinc/copper causing a critical weakness across the bolt. Really, processing quality is important.

And who gives a goddamn about brand loyalty?

Me? Not because I think a brand deserves loyalty bar none, but because I think setting up a positive reward feedback cycle (you make a good product, you deserve a larger share of the return than someone who makes a mediocre one) is a healthy thing for a consumer driven economy. Wal-Mart type businesses muck with that, essentially substituting their brand for the product’s through market clout. Which would be fine if we could implicity trust Wal-Mart’s decisions for ourselves, but we can’t.

Hence why it’s evil.

18

No small town business, no matter how efficient, can match Wal-Mart’s bulk-buy prices. And I consider the way they drive small town businesses under to be heinously evil. In my own home town (population 50,000), Wal-Mart was refused permission to build for two years. So they literally bought the local county election, as proved later in court, got the building permit and proceeded to drive the local businesses out. They were fined some pathetically small amount by the court for bribing public officials and raised the prices once they owned the bulk of the local sundries trade.

The real clincher for me, though, is the censorship. Which is why I refuse to shop at Wal-Mart.

19

Evil = The Wal-Mart edition of Strike Fighters

Good = Wal-Mart being instrumental in the adoption of the new small software boxes

20

Yes, that’s exactly what it is. The problem being that the monolithic force that Wal-Mart represents removes the other options. I’m not inherently anti-Wal-Mart because they offer cheap shit to folks who think more is better even if it’s more crap. I’m inherently anti-Wal-Mart because they do it in what is effectively a “slash and burn” manner.

If they said:

“We need to offer product X for 20% less. Go out and find us someone who can meet that price point.” it’d be fine. That’s the Dollar General Store around the corner from me. I won’t buy most things from there, but when I needed a toilet plunger, I didn’t really care about longevity, quality rubber or the like. I’m fine with that model.

What galls me is Wal-Mart says:

“We need to offer product X for 20% less. Manufacturer Y, make us this product at this price point. If you don’t, you don’t get into any of our stores and if you’re not in our stores you have no visibility.” And they’re right, because consumers are so consumed by the drive to save 30% that they quit having any discernment at all. Why go elsewhere when you can get everything at Wal-Mart? How long does it take until you forget that Wal-Mart is crap, and that while some things you needed aren’t important whether or not they’re crap, others are? How long until we see Wal-Mart brand brake pads? 30% cheaper, and only 5% less effective! Who cares about 5%, anyway, right?

It’s not so much that Wal-Mart is evil, I guess, as they just happily and cheerfully perpetuate the backslide into absolute minimal standards. I’m pretty sure that’s not a good thing for society as a whole, but fuck, who really cares if they control what I think and read and listen to and the quality of my food and the goods I can surround myself with, as long as they do it for 30% less? The populace is dumb and Wal-Mart cheerfully feeds into that on both sides to turn a buck. It’s the American way, after all! So, not evil in the “Over Satan threatening your babies way.” But still a vile and nasty blight on our landscape.