What to do about Walmartization

[thomasf]

He goes after a different consumer - someone looking for a quality lawn mower as opposed to someone just looking for a lawn mower to mow their lawn with.

But isn’t this the heart of the matter, really? That as consumers, we have pushed the idea of buying the cheapest version possible of everything, instead of the best fit or the best quality item available? Isn’t that why Walmart is so popular, you can get cheap plastic **** from them?

The whole reason why we have the mom and pop or small stores vs big giant walmart issue is because people are shopping for the cheapest they can get. Walmart, because they are so big and use pressure tactics to get lower prices, will win every time. Why pay full price for anything when wally world sells them cheaper?

I see this in my business as well. People are always asking for a better price, other people in my business assume that they have to offer discounts and low prices just to get people’s $$. Problem is, not every business or service is like walmart and can afford to cut prices. I’ve got people in my business who don’t realize their costs and end up cutting prices so much they go under. Then blame the nature of the business instead of their own incompetence.

It’s all about supply and demand. You move up and down that graph and you’re either going to get too few sales, or people will be beating down your door to buy at your prices. And either side of that is dangerous. Too few sales, and you’re not making $$. Too many and you sacrifice quality and service (walmart) for volume, and if you’re not equipped to handle volume you’re going to lose $$ that way as well. Because Walmart is a giant, they can handle the volume. The problem is, their tactics are forcing everyone to move along that curve and do business according to their model.

The whole discount or affordable price theory is not something that can be applied across the board, and unfortunately consumers expect it to be.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

lifted from other post …

Originally Posted by vern humphrey
…Why not have free trade?

MojeIme1981:

Because free trade enables us to buy products which are made in inhuman conditions. (sweatshops).

Yes but free trade also alleviates the inhuman condition. I know that sounds tough and can be however many are in the condition first and free trade is their ticket out. Once their market is open they can trade labor/knowledge/local resources for a better life. Dictators fear free trade as it weakens their base. The biggest argument against free trade is it weakens patriotism, and thus truly frees people.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

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

That issue is sovereignty, if we do not own them who are we to capture their freedom first then tell them how to live?

…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:

allowed free trade they may chose that option, stricken from trade and they have no option

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!

yes however dictators do not want free trade because the empowered people are not as reliant on the dictator

indeed, i didn’t.
Maybe for such good producers (who are producing in countries where no labor laws exist) we could make up some additional regulations.

regulations reduce their freedom so be careful

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.

again are you preventing their decision by refusing trade, or empowering them to decide?

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!

I think you need to research this. Free trade may have dropped the price of coffee, however it also freed the people to do others jobs. the absence of other jobs may be your issue. So was the loss of coffee jobs good or bad? Good because of the reason the jobs let. The jobs left because the required more work than importing the coffee.

hope that helps

 

[rlg94086]

But isn’t this the heart of the matter, really? That as consumers, we have pushed the idea of buying the cheapest version possible of everything, instead of the best fit or the best quality item available? Isn’t that why Walmart is so popular, you can get cheap plastic **** from them?

The whole reason why we have the mom and pop or small stores vs big giant walmart issue is because people are shopping for the cheapest they can get. Walmart, because they are so big and use pressure tactics to get lower prices, will win every time. Why pay full price for anything when wally world sells them cheaper?

I see this in my business as well. People are always asking for a better price, other people in my business assume that they have to offer discounts and low prices just to get people’s $$. Problem is, not every business or service is like walmart and can afford to cut prices. I’ve got people in my business who don’t realize their costs and end up cutting prices so much they go under. Then blame the nature of the business instead of their own incompetence.

It’s all about supply and demand. You move up and down that graph and you’re either going to get too few sales, or people will be beating down your door to buy at your prices. And either side of that is dangerous. Too few sales, and you’re not making $$. Too many and you sacrifice quality and service (walmart) for volume, and if you’re not equipped to handle volume you’re going to lose $$ that way as well. Because Walmart is a giant, they can handle the volume. The problem is, their tactics are forcing everyone to move along that curve and do business according to their model.

The whole discount or affordable price theory is not something that can be applied across the board, and unfortunately consumers expect it to be.

Wal-Mart sounds like a clever business, but no one is forced to “move along that curve.” The article about Snapper shows that to be the case.

Let’s say you are right…what is your solution? More government regulation? Price fixing?

 

[MojeIme1981]

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…

from the experience of my friends I can tell you this about the middle class in Croatia (we will become a part of the EU in a year or two). In financial and engineering sector the wages are twice the average. While for normally skilled people, who have to earn their bread on simple workplaces the wages are the half of avarage. The gap is big. Unskilled people cannot find a decent job. (long working hours, no vacations, working Sundays…). Its a problem.

 

[MojeIme1981]

I know that sounds tough and can be however many are in the condition first and free trade is their ticket out.

But before we can help them, lets first help us. I think it’s wise to clean up our own backyard first. Then we can see how to help the others… In this moment, in the developed countries the rich-poor gap is rising. In front of us are set challenges: how to be competitive on the rule-less market… This costs as a lot of mental energy… look what is happening with our families… I think it’s connected

 

[MojeIme1981]

regulations reduce their freedom

But do you know who rules when there are no regulations?: Exactly: the stronger one. In our case the stronger ones are the multinational companies, like Walmart.

so be careful again are you preventing their decision by refusing trade, or empowering them to decide?

I’m not against trade. I am against rule-less trading and competing.

Competition is ok if all are doing it fairly. China is supressing human rights, working conditions are poor, wages are low, few thousand miners die in cole mines every year. No one cares about environment, or people’s health.

Why do we have to compete with price of work with some sort of slave labor? Why is selling work force for too low acceptable, but selling goods too low is bad?

And lets get back to the basics. Outsourcing IS a problem. Question: Do we want to cope with it? If yes, then we have to introduce some new mechanisms to prevent outsourcing. As a result the prices will get higher in developed countries! The only question is, which mechanism we should use! My proposal is to introduce tariffs for countries where no labor and environment consideration are made? Does anybody have a better proposal?

 

[Texas_Roofer]

But before we can help them, lets first help us. I think it’s wise to clean up our own backyard first. Then we can see how to help the others… In this moment, in the developed countries the rich-poor gap is rising. In front of us are set challenges: how to be competitive on the rule-less market… This costs as a lot of mental energy… look what is happening with our families… I think it’s connected

Trade improves us and them it equalizes all playing fields. Trade decreases the power of the rich. Cleaning our self has nothing to do with trade

But do you know who rules when there are no regulations?: Exactly: the stronger one. In our case the stronger ones are the multinational companies, like Walmart.

So are you the rule maker, should you be the all powerful one? Trade does not make the companies stronger, it makes them more competitive, people who restrict trade make the companies powerful. This is because the trade restriction makes weak those under the restriction

I’m not against trade. I am against rule-less trading and competing.

again who is the all powerful rule maker?

Competition is ok if all are doing it fairly. China is suppressing human rights, working conditions are poor, wages are low, few thousand miners die in coal mines every year. No one cares about environment, or people’s health.

Why do we have to compete with price of work with some sort of slave labor? Why is selling work force for too low acceptable, but selling goods too low is bad?

we have always competed with them and everybody else. They suffer from years of trade restrictions. Under the restrictions their rulers were more powerful. Now their rulers are weaker daily. Have you heard anybody bad mouth Bush lately? it would seem in our freer market no one is afraid of our President, not the same in other countries

And lets get back to the basics. Outsourcing IS a problem. Question: Do we want to cope with it? If yes, then we have to introduce some new mechanisms to prevent outsourcing. As a result the prices will get higher in developed countries! The only question is, which mechanism we should use! My proposal is to introduce tariffs for countries where no labor and environment consideration are made? Does anybody have a better proposal?

Outsourcing benefits the US, that is the only reason it is done. It reduces the power of some (as unions) to demand a janitor make a wage higher than a college graduate. Check the pay scale for UAW janitors vs college graduates over the last 50 years. How to handle it is outsource lower productivity jobs and develop higher productivity jobs. Bye Bye horse shoe maker hello wireless engineer.

Who could develop wireless systems if everybody is making horse shoes?

 

[bankerdavid]

The solution is quite simple. The international community has to bring up trade barriers for those countries which don’t have labor and environment protecting laws. Under labor protection I see some very simple but important points:
-limitation of maximal working hours per week. (40 is reasonable),
-granted vacation (3-4 weeks yearly is reasonable)
-granted minimal wage (always in relative to the average wage of the given country) (50% is reasonable)

All of these are primary reasons why labor is so expensive in this country. I’m not against any of them (3-4 weeks vacation is excessive, by our standards!), imposing them on overseas companies will only cause prices to rise and unemployment to increase. Especially the minimum wage requirement. Imposing #1 and #3 will force companies to have quotas which , at some point, tends to decrease quality (a la US auto manufacturers). Also, if you force a minimum wage, you tend to limit what a company is willing to pay. If you want a guaranteed wage, the best way to pay is per unit of work, i.e. $1 per item of clothing. This allows the worker to decide how well he gets paid. If he produces 100 shirts, he makes $100.00 (after a quality check).

For countries which don’t exercise such laws the international community has to bring up trade barriers in form of import taxes, quotas, etc…

The most important thing here to see is that we MAY compete in every business aspect, but MAY NOT compete with worker rights. (and environment rights). These measures surely would slow down outsourcing.

The primary field involved in outsourcing now is customer service representatives. Go ahead, call Microsoft for service on your Windows operating system.
Sure, clothing manufacturing is heavily outsourced, and it doesn’t matter if you buy at Walmart or the Old Navy store-look at the label-made in Indonesia, China, Vietnam. Go to the Nike store-made in Asia.

One thing I know-if you buy something cheap, you usually get something cheap. I’ve owned 4 barbecue grills in the last 20 years. The first 3 I bought because the price was right-$150 or less. I bought a new one every two years because something broke and wasn’t fixable. I wised up and bought a Weber gas barbecue for $800. 10 years ago. I maintain it by replacing some components every couple of years, but I haven’t spent more than $300 to maintain it. And I’ll have it for another 5 years, at least.

 

[MojeIme1981]

Trade improves us and them it equalizes all playing fields. Trade decreases the power of the rich. Cleaning our self has nothing to do with trade

Cleaning ourself has to do with free trade because free-trade is so often presented as an mechanism to help the poor. Therefore I said that before we help the poor, we should clean up our backyard first. In reality free trade has nothing to do with helping the poor. It doesn’t help the middle class either. Because in the long run the middle class will be forced to work as slave labor too. (And that actually is happening, across whole Europe labor rights are cut down). The only winners will be company owners.

So are you the rule maker, should you be the all powerful one?

No. The rule maker should be the state with it’s institutions. Have faith into the state! Not into free-trade.

Trade does not make the companies stronger

we can regularly read how big companies are merging and centralizing their power. (Adidas-Reebok, Compaq-HP, Renault-Nissan) And now you say that it doesn’t make the companies stronger!?

, it makes them more competitive,

Yea right, it makes them more competitive after they outsource their production to slave labor countries. You call this more competitive?

people who restrict trade make the companies powerful. This is because the trade restriction makes weak those under the restriction

the trade restriction left today are the only mechanisms which prevent free trade to show its real ugly face.

again who is the all powerful rule maker?

again, the state with it’s institutions should be the rule maker. And not the big companies.

we have always competed with them and everybody else.

No. Before free trade you did not compete with them. Today when we do compete with them things happen like explained in the original post.

They suffer from years of trade restrictions. Under the restrictions their rulers were more powerful. Now their rulers are weaker daily. Have you heard anybody bad mouth Bush lately? it would seem in our freer market no one is afraid of our President, not the same in other countries

So obviously too much restrictions (like in socialism) and too less restrictions (like in todays neo-liberalism) are equally bad. There just has to a fair level of rules, imposed by the state.

Outsourcing benefits the US, that is the only reason it is done

Well, if it’s the question of benefits, I think that US lived better before free trade? so? Germany (a country where I spent number of years) surely did live better before free trade took momentum.

 

[MojeIme1981]

All of these are primary reasons why labor is so expensive in this country.(…)

so why do you compete then with countries which don’t impose such laws? why do you compete with someone who is not in your league?

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Cleaning ourself has to do with free trade because free-trade is so often presented as an mechanism to help the poor. Therefore I said that before we help the poor, we should clean up our backyard first. In reality free trade has nothing to do with helping the poor. It doesn’t help the middle class either. Because in the long run the middle class will be forced to work as slave labor too. (And that actually is happening, across whole Europe labor rights are cut down). The only winners will be company owners.

No. The rule maker should be the state with it’s institutions. Have faith into the state! Not into free-trade.

we can regularly read how big companies are merging and centralizing their power. (Adidas-Reebok, Compaq-HP, Renault-Nissan) And now you say that it doesn’t make the companies stronger!?

Yea right, it makes them more competitive after they outsource their production to slave labor countries. You call this more competitive?

the trade restriction left today are the only mechanisms which prevent free trade to show its real ugly face.

again, the state with it’s institutions should be the rule maker. And not the big companies.

No. Before free trade you did not compete with them. Today when we do compete with them things happen like explained in the original post.

So obviously too much restrictions (like in socialism) and too less restrictions (like in todays neo-liberalism) are equally bad. There just has to a fair level of rules, imposed by the state.

Well, if it’s the question of benefits, I think that US lived better before free trade? so? Germany (a country where I spent number of years) surely did live better before free trade took momentum.

If you study Nations with high standards of living you would find they are Free-Trade. If you look at the slave Nations you will find they are Restricted Trade. This is not accidental, given free trade the slave state will be disolved.

 

[MojeIme1981]

If you study Nations with high standards of living you would find they are Free-Trade. If you look at the slave Nations you will find they are Restricted Trade. This is not accidental, given free trade the slave state will be disolved.

Actually the foundations for world wide free trade as we know it today were established not before 1986. link.
Before that free-trade were basically tariff cuts between countries which by their economic efficiency already were in a similar state of development (‘they were in the same league’) - and this is not something what I am against at. I am against free trade between countries which are not in the same league!

I will remind you now again that USA and Germany lived well also before 1986. From my personal experience I can confirm you this for Germany. (I lived there 5 years, and still today have many relations with them)

Please for my reference, I would like your explicit answer on one question: In your opinion, do you think that further world-trade liberation is good for the American nation, or not?

In advance I will answer you my opinion for my country Croatia. I think that further world-trade liberation is not good for us. We are used here on vacation, 4 weeks minimum a year. I emphasize this because I saw here in replies opinions that 4 weeks is exaggerated. Well, this used to be a minimum here, but thanks to trade liberation, and slave-labor competition from Asia, slowly but steadily this 4 weeks are becoming an exception, not a rule. But either way, we are a too small country to make a difference in the world. When a critical mass in USA, or joined EU would recognize the problems as I see them, then this could make a difference.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Free trade predates governments in all forms. The Greek Empire was built on trade ( ~3,000-4,000 yrs ago) as was the Roman Empire (~2,000) and the Spanish, later the British. In fact the measure of a country’s strength has always followed its trade. This is not accidental as the trade is what transferred the power. A few years ago ~1975-1987 the Japanese were the strongest nation. There strength was based on others wanting Japanese cars and electronic so we (free traders) transferred some of our wealth to them for these goods. The collection of that wealth is how they became strong. Other Empires gained their wealth through transferring goods as say whisky to the Islands and sugar cane to the whisky producers. The trader simply marked up both sides. The Free Marketers chose to pay that mark up.

• In your opinion, do you think that further world-trade liberation is good for the American nation, or not?* Answer : yes, absolutely, it benefits every American even the ones who lose jobs occassionally because of out sourcing

Concerning 4 weeks of vacation in the US we call that Government employment and it does exist. Additionally many American are off 4 weeks or more as school teachers, many construction trades, and many other specialty trades as HVAC, or lawn care. If that is what you wan it is not an issue. The key is being productive enough in the other weeks to make a good living.

 

[MojeIme1981]

Answer : yes, absolutely, it benefits every American even the ones who lose jobs occassionally because of out sourcing

OK Texas Roofer, this stance is in majority among main-stream economists too - so we’ll be able to see how developed countries like USA and Germany will progress in the future. As you could see, I am absolutely against rule-less free-trade. And I hope I could give some useful arguments to those who share my fears like the author of original post. Bye.

 

[didymus]

And why is the solution always to use force?

Why not have free trade?

Well, I would not leave it to the mythical “international community” I expect national governments to act to protect the best interests of their own citizens.

And the force of law has already been used to “open” our country to free trade which carries huge costs. By allowing unlimited imports from countries with no labor laws, no environmental laws, &c our own gov’t has, in effect, imposed tariffs on our products and given corporations huge incentives for outsourcing jobs. One can hardly blame them for doing so.

 

[louie1041st]

I have read all of the different replys and find it facinating how many of us are missing the point. Wal Mart was started with the idea of selling at the lowest prices and protecting employees. Unfortunately half is only true. When Wal-Mart went public it had a responsibility to their stock holders and by going overseas to purchase and open factories it forgot all about there employees. Wal-Mart right now has many law suits against them for treating employees unfairly. It has just begun giving employees medical benefits thanks to a law suit. It was also sued for making employees work overtime and not paying overtime pay. It has factories overseas ( China ) paying chinese employees the great wage of 10 cents an hour for 10 to 12 hour a days. They have sweat shops that are hidden from inspectors and have another shop as a front to impress the inspectors on there visits.
You also have to remember that Wal-Mart also has stores in other countries. I am sure a product that sells for $10.00 here will sell at a different price in Mexico or some other country for the very same thing.
I belive that it is very wrong of Wal-Mart and companies such as them to treat human beings in such a manner. They have to answer to stock holders and will do anything in there power to abuse the human rights of others. As Christians we need to think of protecting the workers. I have not been in a Wal-Mart in years and don’t miss it. I am sure God is also watching.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

I have read all of the different replys and find it facinating how many of us are missing the point. Wal Mart was started with the idea of selling at the lowest prices and protecting employees. Unfortunately half is only true. When Wal-Mart went public it had a responsibility to their stock holders and by going overseas to purchase and open factories it forgot all about there employees.

? Why would stockholders have that as their objective?

Wal-Mart right now has many law suits against them for treating employees unfairly.

as does every major firm

It has just begun giving employees medical benefits thanks to a law suit.

please explain this, there is no legal requirement for such

It was also sued for making employees work overtime and not paying overtime pay. It has factories overseas ( China ) paying chinese employees the great wage of 10 cents an hour for 10 to 12 hour a days. They have sweat shops that are hidden from inspectors and have another shop as a front to impress the inspectors on there visits.

I’ll bet they do not have sweat shops or or front shops either.

You also have to remember that Wal-Mart also has stores in other countries. I am sure a product that sells for $10.00 here will sell at a different price in Mexico or some other country for the very same thing.

is it their obligation only to price as you would allow?

I belive that it is very wrong of Wal-Mart and companies such as them to treat human beings in such a manner. They have to answer to stock holders and will do anything in there power to abuse the human rights of others. As Christians we need to think of protecting the workers. I have not been in a Wal-Mart in years and don’t miss it. I am sure God is also watching.

As christians we need to follow “thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor”

 

[louie1041st]

As to why would stock holders have that as their objective? Simple, Fill your pockets with as much money as possible. I belive it is also called greed. Don’t forget the president and CEO of Wal-mart are also stock holders.
Other major firms are also being sued but very few make the news as does Wal-Mart. I guess it is good that they make the news, they probably consider it free advertising.
Perhaps medical insurance is not a requirment ( as you say ) but if a family wishes to exist they need this insurance to offset their cost of every day living. Should the govt. pay these expenses? If so then you enjoy paying higher taxes. A billion dollar company like Wal-Mart needs to do what is correct for their employees and not take advantage. If it is legal to not pay insurance, why did Wal-Mart decide to get insurance after the law suit?
I learned about the sweat shops on a PBS documentary that showed how employees were treated. It was an eye opener.
By producing goods at the least possible price, creates a vast market for competion in other markets.
What is written by others that work to so hard to try to protrect the rights of others globally is not bearing false witness. It is a sin to deny a man help after being struck by a car and say. I never saw it happen.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

As to why would stock holders have that as their objective? Simple, Fill your pockets with as much money as possible. I belive it is also called greed.

'um is this what you wrote last time

Don’t forget the president and CEO of Wal-mart are also stock holders.

should the company be run by people afraid to own its stock?

Other major firms are also being sued but very few make the news as does Wal-Mart. I guess it is good that they make the news, they probably consider it free advertising.
Perhaps medical insurance is not a requirment ( as you say ) but if a family wishes to exist they need this insurance to offset their cost of every day living. Should the govt. pay these expenses?

Why should Walmart pay for your medical care?

If so then you enjoy paying higher taxes. A billion dollar company like Wal-Mart needs to do what is correct for their employees and not take advantage.

the “employees” agreed to the current arrangement it is you who are taking away their right to choose. By The Way why do you have the right to turn the employees in to unemployed people?

If it is legal to not pay insurance, why did Wal-Mart decide to get insurance after the law suit?

Who said they did? was that you?

I learned about the sweat shops on a PBS documentary that showed how employees were treated. It was an eye opener.
By producing goods at the least possible price, creates a vast market for competion in other markets.

I am still betting WalMart owns no sweat shops

What is written by others that work to so hard to try to protrect the rights of others globally is not bearing false witness. It is a sin to deny a man help after being struck by a car and say. I never saw it happen.

Is that a way to say the earlier comments are not exactly accurate?