Frontline: Is Wal-Mart Good for America?

[lastchance]

I disagree. Unions did not actually have any government support when they were most needed, and first took real action with strikes, as in the early 1900's.

When working conditions are bad all around, it is clear that forming unions is in the worker's best interest.

Strikes are not useful if you do not have many people not working.

I believe there is huge strength in numbers. Unfortunately, I cannot back this up with a model (in a matrix game format).

[EarlCat]

[ QUOTE ]
Plus, I'm not at all sure that capitalism can cope with a shrinking energy sector. So we might be forced to change it wether we want to or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Capitalism dealt fine with a shrinking railroad industry. Why wouldn't it be able to adjust to any other change?

[EarlCat]

[ QUOTE ]
so the only goal for a company is to make as much money as possible while making all of your workers miserable? sounds like a dream world you live in...

[/ QUOTE ]

First off, this crap about everyone thinking Wal-Mart is such a horrible place is bogus. If they were that horrible, they'd be out of business by now. Nobody is shopping at Adolph's Jewish Meat Market, and if Wal-Mart was that bad, nobody would shop there either.

Second, Wal-Mart's (or any corporation's) obligation isn't to employees, it's to stakeholders. Employees aren't the ones carrying the risk. They aren't staking their livlihoods on the success of the company. The investors are, and for that they are the ones who deserve the highest return they can get. If that means some stockboy can barely feed his kids because Wal-Mart only pays $5 an hour, that's too damn bad. Find a better job. Mow some grass or paint some houses. It's not Wal-Mart's problem.

And if anyone thinks they have a right to other peoples' money simplly by virtue of their need, they are the ones living in a dream world.

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
And if anyone thinks they have a right to other peoples' money simplly by virtue of their need, they are the ones living in a dream world.

[/ QUOTE ]
dream world = Europe? = Leftyville?

[Six_of_One]

[ QUOTE ]

So where is this Golem, this alien, this citizen who reaps the benefits (lower prices) but avoids the pitfalls (job loss, community devastation, etc)?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm here, Cyrus. You can stop searching now.

[BadBoyBenny]

I thought employees are generally considered stakeholders, just not shareholders, maybe you have the terms confused.

And in many cases, the employees definitely have their livelihoods riding on the company's success. Just look at what has happened in al the steel towns in the rust belt.

[Senor Choppy]

[ QUOTE ]
How about trying to force it's way into a community that doesn't want it

[/ QUOTE ]

I have yet to see a Wal-Mart without customers.

A vast majority of people are thrilled when they have one nearby.

[MrSoul]

Like Jakethebake said, if you don't like your employer you can go find another job. Why would people continue to work at a job with unsafe conditions, low pay, long hours, and no vacation? Because it was their best alternative.

[MrSoul]

[ QUOTE ]
gender discrimination


[/ QUOTE ]

Can you prove this?

[Kenrick]

[ QUOTE ]
Conservatives always seem to be demanding self-sufficence from people who are left behind by our economy. For example, the 1996 Welfare Reform Act was made specifically to get people off welfare and back to work, so far it has succeeded in getting people back to work, but these people who come off welfare and move into a low-income job working at say...wal-mart, and now have a new situation with no job security, no health insurance and very low pay, and that is without mention of the many documented cases of sexual harassment, racism in hiring and payroll fraud that wal-mart commits apparently in its quest for a better America

[/ QUOTE ]

Who was the evil conservative President in 1996 who signed that welfare reform act?

Overall, I'd say Walmart is good for America. Supposedly they have upcoming union problems which may put them down during the next decade, but we'll see what happens. In the meantime, Walmart runs a tight operation and is competitive in business, which is what businesses strive for.

With so many Walmarts across the country, it's hard to believe the worker tales of woe are as widespread as they may appear. If screwing workers on overtime and things was company policy, I think it would attract far more attention than it has. There are so many Walmarts that it would only take a handfull of them with racist hiring or illegal payroll policies, etc, to make the headlines they have so far. It's like people who say Party Poker is rigged. Party makes so much money they don't need to rig it.