Is Wal-Mart Good for the American Working Class?

[Edstock]

From Slate, written by Jason Furman

 

This is not a Wal-Mart slam, but a reasonably fair look on big-box retailing's effect on the US. Boldface my emphasis.

"Together with a few sister "big box" stores (Target, Best Buy, and Home Depot),

Wal-Mart accounts for roughly 50% of America's much vaunted productivity growth edge over Europe during the last decade

. Fifty percent! Similar advances in wholesaling supply chains account for another 25%! The notion that Americans have gotten better at everything while other rich countries have stood still is thus wildly misleading. The US productivity miracle and the emergence of Wal-Mart-style retailing are virtually synonymous"

http://www.slate.com/id/2144517/entry/2144521/

 

Fascinating. He has a PDF report that is also well worth reading, with more detail and citations.

 

http://homepages.nyu.edu/~jf1264/walmart.pdf

 

The point is, good or bad, the Big Box is the way it is, and probably isn't going to disappear anytime soon, and these are the effects of this change in society. Read and reflect. 50%. Yikes.

[Pioneer]

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/walmart/

[sprinter]

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/walmart/

 

 

I watched some of the show on TV. It was very good and filled with a lot of information. The best part for me was when they interviewed a gentleman that was hired by Wal-Mart to check on the working conditions of the foreign plants that made products to be sold in Wal-Mart stores. He would call his wife at night crying to her about the horribly bad conditions the workers, women and children, had to endure. He finally started complaining about the conditions to the executives and guess what? No more job. He really didn’t realize that his job was to distort and hide the truth of what goes on in these sweatshops. Some Americans might get upset that children are working 12+ hour days, 6 days a week, so you can have that new cheap outfit from Wal-Mart.

It was also interesting to see the Walton’s dooms day bunker. I wonder if it stocks Sam’s choice water?

[RangerM]

........the horribly bad conditions the workers, women and children, had to endure.................. Some Americans might get upset that children are working 12+ hour days, 6 days a week, so you can have that new cheap outfit from Wal-Mart.

 

Interesting, and if the horribly bad conditions weren't there at all, what would their lives be like?

 

This is not intended as a "let them eat cake" question. I am merely asking that without such 'conditions', what would these peoples' lives be like? Do you honestly believe that their lives would be better?

 

If the choice is a bad job, or no job, I'll take the former. No one here is above anything if it means feeding a family; or more basic, staying alive.

 

These are interesting:

 

Wal-Mart Hatred Video, Part 1

 

Wal-Mart Hatred Video, Part 2

 

Wal-Mart Hatred Video, Part 3

Edited August 9, 2008 by RangerM

[sprinter]

Interesting, and if the horribly bad conditions weren't there at all, what would their lives be like?

 

This is not intended as a "let them eat cake" question. I am merely asking that without such 'conditions', what would these peoples' lives be like? Do you honestly believe that their lives would be better?

 

If the choice is a bad job, or no job, I'll take the former. No one here is above anything if it means feeding a family; or more basic, staying alive.

 

That is the mindset of corporations. And it is clearly obvious they have the same intentions for the American middle class; to eliminate it for the majority of workers.

[theoldwizard]

The title of this post has a much broader question.

 

What salary constitutes the "American Working Class" ?

 

With the huge decline in manufacturing lead by the former Big 3, the "American Working Class" makes a lot less money today (and will probably make even less in the future) than they did in the year 2000.

 

Example. I know a 26 year old, with a high school education. Hard worker but never wanted to work in a factory, so he works for a non-automotive parts distributor in the office. He has been there 3 years and is still making less than $15/hour. He gets minimal medical and dental and 3 weeks of vacation. The chances of him ever making $20/hour in that job are probably zero. He moved back with his parents so he could afford a new car to replace the 10 year one he was driving.

 

Another example. New grade school teacher in NC. Starting pay is less than $30K. Sure you can say it is only 9 months, but you don't even think it is an 8 hour a day job. She's driving a 15 year old car and can not afford cable TV ! Next year she will be sharing a house with a couple other teachers.

 

At less than $30K a year, could you afford an apartment, utilities, food and say a new Focus ? Forget having a "significant other" that you might want to entertain !

 

Even with a working spouse, the "American Working Class" family probably brings home less than $75K/year. What does day care cost for a 3 year old ? How much is a latch key program for an 8 and a 10 year old ?

 

Wal-mart is a God-send. Where else can you work part time and get medical (albeit you have to pay a portion of it) for a family ? Where are all of the Wixom employees going to get jobs, let alone the thousands of white collar workers let go ? And we still haven't counted the impact on the supplier companies. Visteon has very few engineers left now that Ford has pretty much stopped buying all electronic component from them.

 

The American middle class is going the way of the Do-Do bird. There will be those that have and those that don't and not much in between. The future looks grim for Harley Davidson, Winnebago, Ski-Doo and Sea Ray as the Working Class will be spending all their money on food, clothing, shelter and education (to keep the dream alive). Any entertainment will be low end, cable TV, video game, and fast food.

[RangerM]

That is the mindset of corporations. And it is clearly obvious they have the same intentions for the American middle class; to eliminate it for the majority of workers.

 

I am the VP of my C-type Corporation. We ask a lot our employees, and we give a lot as well. THE LOWEST PAID EMPLOYEE MADE OVER $40K LAST YEAR, not including their benefits. That is a decent living in Raleigh, NC.

 

We provide Full Medical (for the employee AND family) benefits. We provide 1 day per month of paid vacation AND paid sick leave, which increases over time. We also provide the legal maximum per diem allowances, that most don't spend and therefore put in their pockets TAX FREE.

 

You only prove that you believe in a stereotype. What you may not realize is that you prove a stereotype yourself.

 

Most corporations don't act as robber barons. If you haven't been successful because of a perceived unfairness, perhaps you should look within.

Edited August 9, 2008 by RangerM

[Edstock]

The American middle class is going the way of the Do-Do bird. There will be those that have and those that don't and not much in between. The future looks grim for Harley Davidson, Winnebago, Ski-Doo and Sea Ray as the Working Class will be spending all their money on food, clothing, shelter and education (to keep the dream alive). Any entertainment will be low end, cable TV, video game, and fast food.

It sure is hard to see where things are going.

 

Back in the 60-70's's, an American S-F writer, MackReynolds, wrote a series of stories and novels about this, called the "Joe Mauser" series. He thought that American society would evolve into a caste system. If you can find it, "Sweet Dreams, Sweet Princes" describes the future Mack saw.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mack_Reynolds

[BlackHorse]

Interesting, and if the horribly bad conditions weren't there at all, what would their lives be like?

 

This is not intended as a "let them eat cake" question. I am merely asking that without such 'conditions', what would these peoples' lives be like? Do you honestly believe that their lives would be better?

 

If the choice is a bad job, or no job, I'll take the former. No one here is above anything if it means feeding a family; or more basic, staying alive.

 

I have to say that "Yes, I honestly believe their lives would be better."

 

Take a good look you naieve fool.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2TLl6Nj6Oo

 

I'm betting you wouldn't be willing to give your twelve year old child over to a factory where they will work for 12 to 16 hours a day, 7 days a week for months on end instead of going to school. All so some asshole in another county can make an ignorant comment about how their lives are actually better off. All so you can take your well educated and healthy kids down to Wal-Mart and buy them some cheap sneakers or the latest chinese made widget.

 

Take a good look at how great their lives are Ranger.

 

 

 

 

 

[xr7g428]

Do you understand what you are seeing?

 

The Chinese come from the country side to work in the factories. They usually work for a few years, save as much money as they possibly can, and then return to their homes. The dormitories are free, and they also get their meals included. The factories are constantly competing for new workers, and wages and living conditions are improving very rapidly.

 

This is not like America. These people are not trying to put down roots and go to work in the factory for life. They are just looking for a way to make some money and then return home where they invest the money in the farm, business, or what ever.

 

In order to supply WalMart, Best Buy, Circuit City and most of the other major retailers, factories must meet basic standards for safety and do not employ workers less than 16 years old. Check in to the facts, and I think you will find that the companies buying products from China are doing a lot to improve things there.

 

However you feel about it, it is not going to matter much longer. The one child policy has made China home of the fastest aging population in the world. Within a generation the population numbers there will be crashing, and there will be three elderly for every working person. The internal Chinese market will very soon be larger than the US or any other economy. They are already number three behind The US and Japan. Once the internal economy is large enough, export to the US will be low on the list of importance.

 

If you want to see the future, you should look to India, and then to Africa.

[BlackHorse]

Do you understand what you are seeing?

 

The Chinese come from the country side to work in the factories. They usually work for a few years, save as much money as they possibly can, and then return to their homes. The dormitories are free, and they also get their meals included. The factories are constantly competing for new workers, and wages and living conditions are improving very rapidly.

 

This is not like America. These people are not trying to put down roots and go to work in the factory for life. They are just looking for a way to make some money and then return home where they invest the money in the farm, business, or what ever.

 

In order to supply WalMart, Best Buy, Circuit City and most of the other major retailers, factories must meet basic standards for safety and do not employ workers less than 16 years old. Check in to the facts, and I think you will find that the companies buying products from China are doing a lot to improve things there.

 

However you feel about it, it is not going to matter much longer. The one child policy has made China home of the fastest aging population in the world. Within a generation the population numbers there will be crashing, and there will be three elderly for every working person. The internal Chinese market will very soon be larger than the US or any other economy. They are already number three behind The US and Japan. Once the internal economy is large enough, export to the US will be low on the list of importance.

 

If you want to see the future, you should look to India, and then to Africa.

 

 

RangerM

Interesting, and if the horribly bad conditions weren't there at all, what would their lives be like?

 

This is not intended as a "let them eat cake" question. I am merely asking that without such 'conditions', what would these peoples' lives be like? Do you honestly believe that their lives would be better?

 

If the choice is a bad job, or no job, I'll take the former. No one here is above anything if it means feeding a family; or more basic, staying alive.

 

 

You people are sick. I mean really sick. If this is the attitude of a so called "member of an enlighted modern society" than clearly we have failed. And if you are Americans then I'm ashamed to call myself one. Both of those comments are flat out disgusting and if you were worth a pile of sh** as a human being you'd be ashamed to have said those things.

[Trimdingman]

You people are sick. I mean really sick. If this is the attitude of a so called "member of an enlighted modern society" than clearly we have failed. And if you are Americans then I'm ashamed to call myself one. Both of those comments are flat out disgusting and if you were worth a pile of sh** as a human being you'd be ashamed to have said those things.

 

 

Life can be tough. You can't compare your lifestyle with that of a different culture. People are proud of what they accomplish, even though in your eyes they seem to have nothing. How much money you earn is not a major thing in your life. Your health, your looks, your age, your lover, are more important. I would rather be a young stud with a beautiful hot babe, living in a bamboo hut on a couple of dollars a day plus what I could hunt than a multi-millionaire octogenarian in a castle with servants. If everybody would just worry about himself and his own family and friends instead of trying to save the world, we would be better off. Castro told the people of Cuba that he would help them. All he did was enslave them. People would rather be free to run their own lives than have someone look after them and be looked down upon as lesser people. In their own way, they are just as good as, and probably better than the ones who look down on them. I think that it is jealousy. You know that you would not be able to survive the way that they do. That makes them better than you are. You have to lord yourself over them.

[RangerM]

You people are sick. I mean really sick. If this is the attitude of a so called "member of an enlighted modern society" than clearly we have failed. And if you are Americans then I'm ashamed to call myself one. Both of those comments are flat out disgusting and if you were worth a pile of sh** as a human being you'd be ashamed to have said those things.

 

Ok, genius.

 

What would the childrens' lives be like if the "sweatshops" weren't there?

 

They would likely starve (as many do), sell their bodies to the (truly sick) foreign tourists (maybe you?), or live by subsistence farming or begging on the street. How is any of those better?

 

Maybe you can answer this question. What was life like in America around 100-150 years ago? Do you think that the lives of Americans then were just like the ones we live today? No. There were sweatshops. There was child labor. There was slavery. There was starvation.

 

We (as a society) worked our way up from there, as the Japanese did after WWII; and as the Indians (in Asia), the (South) Koreans, and the Chinese are doing right now. The Vietnamese will come after them.

 

You may not like it, but that is the way of things. Rather than wasting your time with me (given the fact that I don't own a sweatshop or force children to work), you could protest the foreign governments that allow such activities to thrive, but then that would require genuine effort. You also don't have to shop at Wal-Mart.

 

I am neither ashamed or proud when I acknowledge simple facts. Fact is, these people would be worse off without the access to work that they have. No one forces them to work there, and they themselves have determined that the lousy working conditions are their best option, given the alternatives. Why is that so hard for you to accept?

 

You could one day save the world from the "evils of Wal-Mart", but it won't be accomplished sitting on your ass, ranting at me and xr7g428 on an internet forum.

 

Since you are ashamed to call yourself American, you could emigrate and call yourself Mexican. Things must be better in that country, since there are so many moving there.

 

I may not be 'enlightened' (in your sense of the word), but I am educated and knowledgeable, apparently more than you.

Edited August 10, 2008 by RangerM

[RangerM]

Take a good look you naieve fool.

 

Here, they sell these at Wal-Mart. The special edition is bound by 6-year-old children.

 

[RangerM]

You have to lord yourself over them.

 

Well said.

[Trimdingman]

Here, they sell these at Wal-Mart. The special edition is bound by 6-year-old children.

 

 

 

When I was 6, nobody would give me a job. By the time I was 11, I was doing all kinds of odd jobs to earn pocket money. It didn't kill me. I enjoyed it. I did everything from carrying bags off the ferry, to selling scallop shells, to cutting cod tongues, to selling wild berries, to digging clams, setting up bowling pins, shovelling snow, chopping wood, selling scrap metal, selling bottles, and selling fish. It is good for kids to work so they will not grow up to be lazy.

[RangerM]

When I was 6, nobody would give me a job. By the time I was 11, I was doing all kinds of odd jobs to earn pocket money. It didn't kill me. I enjoyed it. I did everything from carrying bags off the ferry, to selling scallop shells, to cutting cod tongues, to selling wild berries, to digging clams, setting up bowling pins, shovelling snow, chopping wood, selling scrap metal, selling bottles, and selling fish. It is good for kids to work so they will not grow up to be lazy.

 

I admit I wasn't trying to work at 6, but certainly by 10 I was cutting grass. By 13 I was passing newspapers and doing other odd jobs. At 15 I was a busboy, and at 17 I worked in a movie theater. I learned at a young age that an education would be my key to success.

 

Hard work at a young age taught me that I'd rather be paid more to use my brain.

 

If many young people worked at Wal-Mart from 13 until HS graduation, I wonder how many would learn the same lesson of the value of a good education. Perhaps stocking shelves next to the person who just graduated with a B.A. in English would provide a double-lesson.

 

The biggest change in the middle class is that the "middle" (or our concept of middle) has moved, and many simply haven't kept up with it.

Edited August 10, 2008 by RangerM

[mlhm5]

From Slate, written by Jason Furman

 

This is not a Wal-Mart slam, but a reasonably fair look on big-box retailing's effect on the US. Boldface my emphasis.

"Together with a few sister "big box" stores (Target, Best Buy, and Home Depot),

Wal-Mart accounts for roughly 50% of America's much vaunted productivity growth edge over Europe during the last decade

. Fifty percent! Similar advances in wholesaling supply chains account for another 25%! The notion that Americans have gotten better at everything while other rich countries have stood still is thus wildly misleading. The US productivity miracle and the emergence of Wal-Mart-style retailing are virtually synonymous"

http://www.slate.com/id/2144517/entry/2144521/

 

Fascinating. He has a PDF report that is also well worth reading, with more detail and citations.

 

http://homepages.nyu.edu/~jf1264/walmart.pdf

 

The point is, good or bad, the Big Box is the way it is, and probably isn't going to disappear anytime soon, and these are the effects of this change in society. Read and reflect. 50%. Yikes.

 

Never shop at Walmart. Never will. Get everything I need at Costco, thank you.

[Trimdingman]

Never shop at Walmart. Never will. Get everything I need at Costco, thank you.

 

Your attempts at stopping progress will be in vain. I will shop wherever I please. I will not go to Cuba, but other Canadians have the right to if they choose. The Cuban dictator will continue to prosper despite my mini-protest.

[mettech]

I am the VP of my C-type Corporation. We ask a lot our employees, and we give a lot as well. THE LOWEST PAID EMPLOYEE MADE OVER $40K LAST YEAR, not including their benefits. That is a decent living in Raleigh, NC.

 

We provide Full Medical (for the employee AND family) benefits. We provide 1 day per month of paid vacation AND paid sick leave, which increases over time. We also provide the legal maximum per diem allowances, that most don't spend and therefore put in their pockets TAX FREE.

 

You only prove that you believe in a stereotype. What you may not realize is that you prove a stereotype yourself.

 

Most corporations don't act as robber barons. If you haven't been successful because of a perceived unfairness, perhaps you should look within.

 

+1

 

Good post.

 

 

A few questions for everyone:

 

How much money and benefits should jobs pay?

 

And, who should establish the pay scale? The government, the employee or the employer/owner?

 

Should a skilled factory worker make more than a High School teacher or Nurse?

 

Should a High School diploma Union worker make more than the local area Police officer?

[Trimdingman]

+1

 

Good post.

 

 

A few questions for everyone:

 

How much money and benefits should jobs pay?

 

And, who should establish the pay scale? The government, the employee or the employer/owner?

 

Should a skilled factory worker make more than a High School teacher or Nurse?

 

Should a High School diploma Union worker make more than the local area Police officer?

 

An employer will pay the minimum that an employee will work for, whether it is a $20,000,000 a year baseball player or a $12,000 a year cashier. Since the government started getting involved by enforcing a minimum wage, the incomes of the lower paid workers has dropped tremendously. The minimum wage to-day has only 1/2 the buying power that it did when first implemented. Government interference had made things worse for low wage earners.

 

It doesn't matter what job that you do as far as compensation is concerned. A good worm picker can make as much as an average lawyer. Working on an automotive assembly line is a lot harder than sitting in a police cruiser, and at least as dangerous. If you compare output, the assembler builds 2 cars a week. The cop will not give enough tickets to pay for his salary plus wear and tear on his vehicle. Apprehended offenders will further drain the coiffers and after a couple of years at crow bar college, they will become even more skilled and give employment to more police.

[RangerM]

An employer will pay the minimum that an employee will work for, whether it is a $20,000,000 a year baseball player or a $12,000 a year cashier.

 

That statement is correct, but only when unemployment favors employers.

 

Speaking as someone running a business, in an area with less than 5.0% unemployment, it is hard to find anyone. Most persons who don't already have jobs are effectively unemployable.

 

An employer can only pay what the market will bear. Just like housing, sometimes it's a "buyers market" (the employers) and you can lower starting wages, and other times it's a "sellers market" (the employees) where employers must compete with higher wages/benefits.

 

The minimum wage only upsets this balance and has a negative employment impact on those with few qualifications, although for the most part, regular people rarely work for the minimum wage. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics in 2007, a total of 1.0% of all full-time (40 hours or more per week) workers made minimum wage. Including part-time employees, the total increases to 2.3% (half of whom were between 16 and 24).

Edited August 12, 2008 by RangerM

[Trimdingman]

That statement is correct, but only when unemployment favors employers.

 

Speaking as someone running a business, in an area with less than 5.0% unemployment, it is hard to find anyone. Most persons who don't already have jobs are effectively unemployable.

 

An employer can only pay what the market will bear. Just like housing, sometimes it's a "buyers market" (the employers) and you can lower starting wages, and other times it's a "sellers market" (the employees) where employers must compete with higher wages/benefits.

 

The minimum wage only upsets this balance and has a negative employment impact on those with few qualifications, although for the most part, regular people rarely work for the minimum wage. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics in 2007, a total of 1.0% of all full-time (40 hours or more per week) workers made minimum wage. Including part-time employees, the total increases to 2.3% (half of whom were between 16 and 24).

 

There are some people who are unemployable in prosperous areas. The rest have jobs, or are rich and don't have to work. If you want to get them to work for you, you have to pay them enough to pry them away from their lifestyle of leisure or the job that they already have. If you want to keep them working for you, then you have to pay them enough that they will not jump ship.

 

Some people are like sheep. They listen to the government, and then they follow. The government says that it is ok to work for peanuts, so they do it. The employer is not a cheapskate because he has the government's blessing. People should be allowed to work for any amount that they want. There should be no minimum wage laws. Nobody is forcing anyone to work for cheap wages. If someone offers jobs at $7 an hour, and there is no minimum wage, he would get laughed at as a low life cheapskate, and nobody would work for him because of the peer pressure. Before minimum wage laws, casual labor was paid a dollar an hour. That would be over $15 an hour in to-day's money. Minimum wage sets a standard against which all wages are based. It lowers all wages. Any time the government brings out a law supposedly to help the poor, it ends up working against them. The rich will always find a way to turn things in their favor. It is better if the government stays out of it.

Edited August 12, 2008 by Trimdingman

[Edstock]

The government says that it is ok to work for peanuts

That's your opinion. Please provide concrete examples. Otherwise, this is a brain-fart.

 

Minimum wage sets a standard against which all wages are based. It lowers all wages.

So you say. No facts. Prove it.

[Trimdingman]

That's your opinion. Please provide concrete examples. Otherwise, this is a brain-fart.

 

 

So you say. No facts. Prove it.

 

The government implemented the minimum wage, so companies offer to pay it. Some people will work for minimum wage because the government says that it is ok to pay that amount. If the law didn't exist, then people would want a fair wage, not minimum wage.

 

If minimum wage is $8.00 an hour, and you are getting $16 an hour, wow, you are getting double the minimum wage. Actually you would be getting what the minimum wage is supposed to be based on what it used to be, adjusting for inflation. A good wage would be $25 an hour. How many places pay that? The government wage standard is way too low. Everybody who works for an hourly wage would be better off to-day if the government had kept its nose out.

 

Minimum wage will buy you a pack of smokes for an hours work. That is ridiculous. People who work that cheap are retarded brainwashed fools, and it is the government's doing.