What to do about Walmartization

[rlg94086]

Yes indeed, the consequence would be: Less hurry, less stress. I don’t know for you, but I would like it.

Your consequence doesn’t follow the actions I was talking about. Adding tariffs to imports from a given country doesn’t lead to “less hurry, less stress.”

 

[Maxply]

ONe thing that’s not been mentioned has been Wal-Mart’s regular business practice of demanding rebates from past sales. Here’s how it works:

Wal-Mart: “You know those yellow widgets we bought from you eight months ago?”

Businessman: “Yes.”

Wal-Mart: “We didn’t perform so well in the third quarter, so we want your company to give us back part of our payment for that order.”

So much for free market libertarian principles!

I suppose I should tell my computer manufacturer that I’ve had a bad quarter and want $800 back from my computer purchases. . .There will be people in line to support ANY business practice, no matter how onerous or unethical. I consider these folks cheerleaders.

 

[MojeIme1981]

Your consequence doesn’t follow the actions I was talking about. Adding tariffs to imports from a given country doesn’t lead to “less hurry, less stress.”

Yes it does lead to “less stress and hurry” because you don’t have to compete anymore with sweatshop labor. I hope you realize that in the long run, the only way to effectively compete with sweatshop labor is to become a sweatshop by yourself. And that actually is happening, across whole western Europe labor right are cut down. Europeans are working more and more, but are having less and less rights and vacations.

Now for shareholder of these sweatshops it is of course a different perspective.

By sweatshop I mean any work process where the 3 simple principles from my first post do not apply.

 

[rlg94086]

ONe thing that’s not been mentioned has been Wal-Mart’s regular business practice of demanding rebates from past sales. Here’s how it works:

Wal-Mart: “You know those yellow widgets we bought from you eight months ago?”

Businessman: “Yes.”

Wal-Mart: “We didn’t perform so well in the third quarter, so we want your company to give us back part of our payment for that order.”

So much for free market libertarian principles!

I suppose I should tell my computer manufacturer that I’ve had a bad quarter and want $800 back from my computer purchases. . .There will be people in line to support ANY business practice, no matter how onerous or unethical. I consider these folks cheerleaders.

Can you give some confirmation of this? There is a little thing called a “contract” between businesses. If the supplier signed on to the possiblities of rebates, that is their mistake. If Wal-Mart demands them even though they aren’t in the contract, the vendor does not need to comply.

 

[MojeIme1981]

The consequence might also be spending more time and gasoline driving around to buy things at many different stores at higher prices. The entire distribution system is built on economies of scale and that is a major factor in keeping prices low. Your economic model would raise prices, spread out goods to different stores and cost consumers greater money, time and fuel.

Somehow I don’t think people would like that. I also think it would increase stress on many people who would spend more time shopping and less time with their families.

With the trade barriers which I proposed prices would rise up, I do not question that. But if you want to slow down outsourcing - what is the alternative to higher prices? - there is no other.
So if you keep outsourcing your production - you have cheap prices, but as consequence also many people will get poorer and poorer (those who worked in these outsourced factories). The gap between rich and poor will rise. It’s simple math.

 

[melensdad]

With the trade barriers which I proposed prices would rise up, I do not question that. But if you want to slow down outsourcing - what is the alternative to higher prices? - there is no other.
So if you keep outsourcing your production - you have cheap prices, but as consequence also many people will get poorer and poorer (those who worked in these outsourced factories). The gap between rich and poor will rise. It’s simple math.

I don’t disagree with your point, but you will have an IMPOSSIBLE time getting the world to agree on leveling the playing field with environmental regulations, labor policies, tariffs, etc. Heck we can’t even get the world to agree that the Jews were exterminated by Hitler in WWII or that the destruction of the World Trade Center in New York was a terrorist action. How the heck can you think you’d get the world to unite under one set of pollution laws? Or labor laws? Etc?

If you did, all of the 3rd world nations would be even more impoverished, production would shift back to the developed nations, and there would be greater strife than there already is. What we see as factories move around the globe is a trending of increased wealth and development in underdeveloped nations and a decreased level of wealth in some of the formerly very rich nations (like the USA). Doing what you propose would shift production right back to the US, which would help the US, but hurt the world.

If the world did as you propose, developed nations like Japan, the US and much of western Europe would stop exporting jobs and would in fact reimport them. This would stop development and human rights advances in much of the world.

 

[TotaTua]

Can you give some confirmation of this? There is a little thing called a “contract” between businesses. If the supplier signed on to the possiblities of rebates, that is their mistake. If Wal-Mart demands them even though they aren’t in the contract, the vendor does not need to comply.

No the vendor doesn’t NEED to comply, but if they want the business they will comply. It is common business practice (more than a contract) that if one has a product not selling well, it can be returned or a discount given. it often happens that what a company or a buyer thinks will sell is not greeted with the same enthusiasm by the consumer.

 

[MojeIme1981]

Who are we to judge what someone “needs” or does “not need” in their life?

There is no ban on any product with my proposed trade barriers. It’s just that the prices would rise to a fair level.

You make things seem so very simple.

They indeed are pretty simple.

And what if the good is deemed by you to be “not needed” but still made with great consideration to both labor and the environment?

There are no such goods as “not needed”. The only question is, are they coming from a country where labor and environment considorations are protected? If not, then this company should outsource to a country where they are protected! simple logic!

For example “Fair Trade” coffee from Columbia is certainly not needed by anyone. It is, however grown in an environmentally friendly way and labor rates are higher than other coffee growing methods, often from small family owned farms. It also costs up to TWICE as much as other coffee.

Of course Columbian coffee is not needed because free trade enables us to import goods from other countries where such labor and environment consideration are not made - and their coffee is cheaper. Trade barriers (taxes, tolls,…) for countries who do not have such considerations would immediately make Columbian coffee competitive.

 

[rlg94086]

Yes it does lead to “less stress and hurry” because you don’t have to compete anymore with sweatshop labor. I hope you realize that in the long run, the only way to effectively compete with sweatshop labor is to become a sweatshop by yourself. And that actually is happening, across whole western Europe labor right are cut down. Europeans are working more and more, but are having less and less rights and vacations.

Now for shareholder of these sweatshops it is of course a different perspective.

By sweatshop I mean any work process where the 3 simple principles from my first post do not apply.

I’m sorry, but you are oversimplifying and making a big leap from imposing a tariff on imports to an idealic world that doesn’t exist. If you impose a tariff on a country’s goods, they are likely to do the same on your goods, which will effect the demand for products from your country. Other countries would benefit, and no doubt thank you for your stupidity.

We don’t live in a closed system. If you could arrange for your country/region to only buy goods internally and that was enough to sustain all of your businesses, than you would be fine. But, then you would need to step back from international business.

I know your answer is to have an international body level the playing field and force countries into international labor rules, but this would also be a disaster IMO.

 

[rlg94086]

No the vendor doesn’t NEED to comply, but if they want the business they will comply. It is common business practice (more than a contract) that if one has a product not selling well, it can be returned or a discount given. it often happens that what a company or a buyer thinks will sell is not greeted with the same enthusiasm by the consumer.

Right. So it is the vendor’s choice. But, that means Wal-Mart is not the bad guy, if they are doing something that is “common business practice.”

 

[melensdad]

Of course Columbian coffee is not needed because free trade enables us to import goods from other countries where such labor and environment consideration are not made - and their coffee is cheaper. Trade barriers (taxes, tolls,…) for countries who do not have such considerations would immediately make Columbian coffee competitive.

I don’t believe you understood my post.

“Fair Trade” coffee from Columbia is NOT like regular coffee from Columbia. It is specially grown on sustainable land and charges a higher prices to sustain the land, trees and pay the workers higher than average wages. It is, essentially the “ideal” that you are trying to legislate or mandate through government action. It is also expensive, and it must be expensive because everyone in the cycle is paid more.

The effects of what you propose will raise prices, alter the sources of production back to the consumer nations and tilt the world back to a world where only developed nations have viable economies. Underdeveloped nations will suffer.

 

[MojeIme1981]

I’m sorry, but you are oversimplifying and making a big leap from imposing a tariff on imports to an idealic world that doesn’t exist. If you impose a tariff on a country’s goods, they are likely to do the same on your goods, which will effect the demand for products from your country. Other countries would benefit, and no doubt thank you for your stupidity.

At present the same big countries are fighting for FREE-trade, they could also fight for labor and environment rights. This would be the right way to go.

We don’t live in a closed system. If you could arrange for your country/region to only buy goods internally and that was enough to sustain all of your businesses, than you would be fine. But, then you would need to step back from international business.

If the cost for a fairer world is to step back from international business then I would think about it twice.

I know your answer is to have an international body level the playing field and force countries into international labor rules, but this would also be a disaster IMO.

In a better world surely something could be done.

 

[MojeIme1981]

If you did, all of the 3rd world nations would be even more impoverished

I don’t think so. They would live exactly with the living standard which suits their culture and way of thinking

If the world did as you propose, developed nations like Japan, the US and much of western Europe would stop exporting jobs and would in fact reimport them.

so what if the 3rd world countries don’t develop into consumer societies like in the west?? As long as they can produce their own food (or pay for it) , we don’t have to help them. I’m sure they will meet their ambition perfectly, of course IF human right are reasonably protected. So as you mentioned:

This would stop development and human rights advances in much of the world.

Human rights advancement is of course a problem which would be harder to cope with in a more isolated world (as I propose), but I’m sure when big countries come to agreement that labor and environment rights are things to seriously take care off,…when we come to that point I’m sure we’ll find other ways to promote human rights!

 

[MojeIme1981]

I don’t believe you understood my post.

indeed, i didn’t.

“Fair Trade” coffee from Columbia is NOT like regular coffee from Columbia. It is specially grown on sustainable land and charges a higher prices to sustain the land, trees and pay the workers higher than average wages. It is, essentially the “ideal” that you are trying to legislate or mandate through government action. It is also expensive, and it must be expensive because everyone in the cycle is paid more.

Maybe for such good producers (who are producing in countries where no labor laws exist) we could make up some additional regulations.

The effects of what you propose will raise prices, alter the sources of production back to the consumer nations and tilt the world back to a world where only developed nations have viable economies. Underdeveloped nations will suffer.

If they can produce enough food for themselves, they do not suffer. If they cant produce the food, then developed countries could help them. But this time really help, and not just to exploit their poorness, as we do now. As you know hunger in our present world is not fading, in spite of all the free trade processes.

 

[melensdad]

As you know hunger in our present world is not fading, in spite of all the free trade processes.

Yes, but I don’t think it is the fault of the free trade agreements, the biggest problems with hunger seem to occur in areas where there is no free trade allowed. The same exists with human rights. Think of Darfur, Sudan. Think of many other regions where the economy has not developed due to dictatorship and meddlesome governments who stand in the way of aid. Many even prevent the United Nations* (a basically worthless and gutless organization in my opinion) *from sending in aid.

 

[MojeIme1981]

Yes, but I don’t think it is the fault of the free trade agreements, the biggest problems with hunger seem to occur in areas where there is no free trade allowed. The same exists with human rights. Think of Darfur, Sudan. Think of many other regions where the economy has not developed due to dictatorship and meddlesome governments who stand in the way of aid. Many even prevent the United Nations* (a basically worthless and gutless organization in my opinion) *from sending in aid.

Actually free trade makes a good portion of the problems in these African countries. (Debt makes another good portion). European and American subsidied agriculture products are freely traded on the African continent, and because of theses subsidies, the domestic farmers in Africa (who of course don’t enjoy subsidies), have troubles to sell their goods on domestic markets. This is one example. Also there are examples how big food companies (which freely trade all over the world) depreciated the prizes of world coffee prices - and led so Ethiopian farmers to starvation. Coffee was their most important export, and it worked fabulous for centuries before free trade came!

 

[Yerusalyim]

So if you keep outsourcing your production - you have cheap prices, but as consequence also many people will get poorer and poorer (those who worked in these outsourced factories). The gap between rich and poor will rise. It’s simple math.

Actually, we see a growing middle class in most nations…hmmm.

Look, the simple solution is for each individual to follow their conscience. If you feel better about not buying products from Wal-Mart, more power to you. I quit using one company that outsourced it’s customer service department to India, buy the more expensive coffee if it helps you “sleep” at night.

However, from an economic point of view tarrifs have, in the long run, hurt the US. They could be especially harmful now since the dollar is so low against the Euro and other currencies that US goods abroad are becoming cheaper to buy and the cost of doing business for the outsourcers is going up.

I concur that the the same arguements used about Wal-Mart have been used against other businesses as well. Supermarkets were from the devil himself putting the mom and pop grocer out of business, etc.

 

[MojeIme1981]

Actually, we see a growing middle class in most nations…hmmm.

why do you look to the middle class of other nations? look to the US themselves! As I read (I dont live there) the middle class is fading away there. Same happens here in my country Croatia, and in close countries like Germany, plus people work more and more and thus have less and less time for family - I dont think that is good.

Look, the simple solution is for each individual to follow their conscience.

yep, maybe a good solution, but can we better?

 

[Holly3278]

What can person like me do? I live on a limited budget and therefore I shop at Wal-Mart because they do have the lowest prices and everything is all in one store. I could shop elsewhere but I’d have to pay higher prices and I can’t really afford that. Many other people are in the same situation as me. Its not a problem with an easy solution.

 

[Yerusalyim]

why do you look to the middle class of other nations? look to the US themselves! As I read (I dont live there) the middle class is fading away there. Same happens here in my country Croatia, and in close countries like Germany, plus people work more and more and thus have less and less time for family - I dont think that is good.

I currently live in Germany as a US Soldier and have visited many of the countries surrounding Germany. Czech, Slovakia, and many of the nations coming out from under the Iron Curtain are booming economically and have a growing middle class.

The middle class would grow in Germany if it corrected some of it’s tax laws which are slowly crippling the economy here (not just my opinion, but those of many of the locals I associate with). True, part of the problem in Germany is the Reunification…but if you look purely at the standard of living of the residents of the former East Germany, it’s much improved. I can speak to croatia, though I would imagine that little war a few years back isn’t helping there much.

Then on to the US, if you look at the standard of living of the vast majority of our “poor” it’s higher than it was for the “poor” 40 years ago in the US, and greatly higher than it is for the poor in most other nations in the world. The middle class in the US is not “fading away” by any stretch of the imagination.