COMMENTS: 27
Time to Target Wal-Mart
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.
Why Wal-Mart? For one thing, it's hard to avoid. It is the world's largest private corporation, employing more than 1.6 million "associates" worldwide -- more people than Ford, GM, GE and IBM combined. The company serves 138 million customers per week worldwide and has outstripped any competitor. In 2004, it pocketed $10.3 billion in profits, on sales of $285 billion, more business than Target, Sears, Kmart, J.C. Penney, Safeway and Kroger combined. There are upward of 3,800 Wal-Mart stores in the United States today, in addition to nearly 1,600 locations in countries from Mexico to China. Wal-Mart alone is China's eighth-largest trading partner. It accounts for over 10 percent of our annual trade deficit with China, with over 70 percent of its products made in China.
If Wal-Mart's size is a problem, its policies are a threat. Wal-Mart is the model "low-road" corporation in the global economy. Its efficiency is celebrated; but its exploitation is caustic. The average pay of a Wal-Mart employee is $8.23 per hour, or an average yearly income of $14,000 -- not enough to lift a family out of poverty. Wal-Mart is infamous for requiring workers to work overtime off the books. It's been cited for locking workers in plants overnight. The company has been hauled into court for discriminating against female employees. And it is viciously, rabidly anti-union, crushing any attempt by its workers to organize to gain a fair share of the profits they help generate.
But Wal-Mart doesn't merely follow the low road; it drives its suppliers and its competitors into the same race. When Wal-Mart comes to town, it purposefully wipes out small mom-and-pop stores, leaving small towns looking like they were hit by a neutron bomb -- buildings intact, but people gone. Wal-Mart also undercuts big competitors that have unions and pay decent wages and benefits. They must slash wages, cut back on benefits or hang it up.
Given its size in the United States, Wal-Mart is a major force in driving wages down and forcing cutbacks in benefits. It is a central reason why we have an economy in which CEO salaries are up, stocks are up, but wages are down.
In China, Wal-Mart pushes its suppliers to lower their costs, generating sweatshops in which young workers -- primarily women -- are forced to work grotesque hours at subsistence wages. According to The Washington Post, Wal-Mart even pressures its suppliers to pay less than the Chinese minimum wage.
Wal-Mart also exploits taxpayers, for it is what Ronald Reagan would denounce as the leading corporate welfare queen. It's estimated that Wal-Mart's government subsidies total a whopping $2.7 billion, or $2,100 per employee. An internal memo to the board leaked recently reported that "our [health care] coverage is expensive for low-income families, and Wal-Mart has a significant percentage of associates and their children on public assistance." In fact, nearly one-half of the children of Wal-Mart employees are either on Medicaid or have no insurance at all.
While Wal-Mart is driving down wages and driving up public health care costs, its CEO and its owners are making out like bandits. The Walton family is the richest in the world. And they use their private wealth to foster their low-road policies. The Waltons donate millions to politics. Most goes to Republicans who defend their low-wage sweatshop practices, while 20 percent goes to buy a few business Democrats and divide the opposition. They are leading contributors to the voucher movement seeking to privatize education, and staunch advocates of the free trade policies that have stymied efforts to link trade access to the right to organize, environmental protection or even a crackdown on sweatshops.
Across America, people are starting to realize the stark reality: Wal-Mart's triumph is the defeat of middle-class America. If Wal-Mart sets the pace, Americans will pay the price, in declining wages, rising health care costs, longer hours, worse workplace conditions and rising personal taxes to offset soaring corporate subsidies.
America as we know it can't afford Wal-Mart. We can't sustain a $200 billion annual trade deficit with China, but Wal-Mart drives that deficit. We can't afford to subsidize the health care costs of the largest employers in the country -- even as declining wages starve our public coffers. We can't afford to allow sweatshop labor access to the largest distribution network, without accelerating a global race to the bottom.
In the Gilded Age of the 19th century, America faced a similar problem: corporate behemoths, private fortunes amassed from exploiting workers, unions banned, politicians bought. It took a progressive movement to put new rules around the marketplace -- to break up monopolies, create the 40-hour work week, institute the minimum wage, the right to organize, environmental protection, and workplace health and safety laws.
Now a new progressive movement is beginning to emerge. Once more, its agenda is to ban sweatshops, lift wages, empower workers and curb corporate power.
And surely Wal-Mart is and must be that movement's first target. The question isn't why Wal-Mart gets such bad press. The question is why Wal-Mart hasn't been confronted sooner.
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: eileenflmng on Nov 15, 2005 4:07 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So the right wing is up in arms becasue Walmart "is taking Christ out of Christmas."
As there is nothing Christian about capitalism and consumerism, this Christian finds their demonizing of Walmart as jumping on the bandwagon, not changing the wind.
Want to do something about Walmarts corporate greed?
Don't shop there.
www.wearewideawake.org
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I AGREE!!! Trying to Club the Offspring of the Beast is Fruitless!
Posted by: qrswave
Comments are closed-
Posted by: knitter on Nov 15, 2005 5:19 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Does anyone know of creative community solutions that are working to keep smaller businesses from being annihilated by the "neutron bomb" of Walmart blowing into town? I'm thinking that resale shops and sliding scale groceries might figure into that. I'm thinking of coupons for low income families, the saving of which would be paid for by better-off families voluntarily picking up the tab. This would allow the store to remain in business and give decent prices that afford for decent wages and yet be affordable to the citizens of the community.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Nov 15, 2005 5:47 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: WalMart the whipping boy
Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: WalMart the whipping boy
Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: WalMart the whipping boy
Posted by: Doubtom
Comments are closed-
Posted by: crusty on Nov 15, 2005 5:55 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Brucewxx on Nov 15, 2005 6:13 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SDres11 on Nov 15, 2005 6:22 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» Shop elsewhere.
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: How about targetting "Target" ?
Posted by: Colin
» RE: How about targetting "Target" ?
Posted by: LPB
» The pharmacists "job"...
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: How about targetting "Target" ?
Posted by: Colin
» If you can't stand the heat in the kitchen then ...
Posted by: jwg
» RE: How about targetting "Target" ?
Posted by: phatkhat
Comments are closed-
Posted by: knitter on Nov 15, 2005 6:33 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, it is the model capitalist company, and it shows the logical outcome of pure, unregulated market capitalism. Capitalism and its opposite, communism, are both economic models for understanding our world. Neither of them call forth the best of what is human. Either of them can be used as limited tools for helping to organize how we exchange our work for goods. If instead, they are regarded as the absolute organizing principle, that leads to the system abusing the society it is meant to serve.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Guy on Nov 15, 2005 8:58 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have always shopped locally. Preferring spending my money at places that will keep the money in the community whenever I can, even if it costs a few dollars more. We can start by all doing that. But beyond that, we need to have a plan. I see our local downtown shriveling up under the competition from the major chains. If we want our downtowns to full of vibrant local businesses that pays decent wages, then we need to put out money where our mouths are.
The author should make some suggests rather than just whining about Wal-Mart like everyone else.
Guy
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: monkeywrench on Nov 15, 2005 9:13 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If our government is as serious about curbing welfare in this country as it claims, it had better take Wal-Mart off the welfare rolls, and return some of that money to Wal-Mart's "associates" –– after all, THEY earned it, not the overpaid, overfat, uber-greedy Walton family.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Don't worship there
Posted by: knitter
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Meteshah on Nov 15, 2005 9:50 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Nov 15, 2005 12:46 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Caroll Fowler on Nov 15, 2005 11:26 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: To really deal with the Walmart issue, we need to get to the people who work and buy there
Posted by: Guy
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Global Fallujah on Nov 30, 2005 11:52 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Like most American liberals, they focus only on the symptoms of the problem and carefully try to cover up the more fundamental issues: namely, the American Empire and the capitalist system in general. Worst yet, I suspect their real agenda is a thinly disguised form of American economic nationalism, of the type pushed by the AFL-CIA and other US labor imperialists.
Wal-Mart is merely a by-product of Capitalist globalization, whereby American, Western, and First World corporations expand around the world in order to exploit Third World labor (such as in China or Mexico) and to penetrate local markets in other countries, thereby destroying indiginous businesses that cannot compete with American multinationals.
Capitalist globalization, however, is being driven, pushed, and enforced first and foremost by the American Empire. This is done both multilaterally through figleaf organizations such as the WTO, IMF, and World Bank which the USA uses to impose privatization policies on the Third World. America also pushes capitalist globalization unilaterally through the various free trade deals such as NAFTA, CAFTA, and the Free Trade Zone of the Americas.
All of these predatory policies are inflicted by the American state using all the powers of the American Empire at its disposal. These powers even include the use of American spy agencies to destablize and overthrow any government that adopts policies which resist American capitalist penetration and colonization.
For a better and more truthful analysis of how capitalist globalization works, read John Perkins' book Confessions of an Economic Hitman where he exposes in uncensored terms America's "hidden fist" behind the reality of globalization.
John Perkins Interview
Economic Hitman
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Global Fallujah on Dec 1, 2005 1:28 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The answer is of course not. In fact, they tacitly support the US Empire and the profit system by trying to narrow the terms of debate to easy individual targets.
The issue that Borosage and Peters would rather not talk about is that their beloved American "well-being" has always been based upon the exploitation of the Third World. That's the basis of America's way of life since the first slaveowners put their bloody boot on this continent.
And behind their "progressive" mask, Borosage and Peters are not much different from the reactionary nationalists one finds in unions like the AFL-CIA, who specialize in chauvinist rants about "foreigners stealing our jobs" or foreign competition.
With respect to China, for example, Borosage and Peters state that Wal-Mart "accounts for over 10 percent of our annual trade deficit with China, with over 70 percent of its products made in China."
What they forget to mention is that many of the USA's "imports" from China are not even made by indiginous Chinese firms, but rather by the subsidiaries of American, Western, and other international corporations that set up production in China to exploit labor and ultimately export their products back to the US market. Those products may literally be "made in China," but they are often made by and for American and other multinational corporations who either own or have ownership shares in the factories. Guess who gets the most profits from this setup?
This is similar to the maquiladora system in Mexico where many US corporations relocate to exploit labor and then ship their manufactured products back to the US market for US consumers. They call that an import from Mexico, but it's glorified *intra-business trade* that reaps superprofits for USA capital.
The beneficiares of globalization are thus First World nations like America, whose corporations often own the factories in the Third World to begin with and make dollars for every penny spent on labor costs and whose consumers who pay less for products that would otherwise cost more.
Wal-Mart is symbolic of capitalist globalization, so why don't Borosage or Peters question capitalism itself? Because this system is ultimately the bedrock of the American way of life and well-being they champion.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: eileenflmng on Nov 15, 2005 4:07 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So the right wing is up in arms becasue Walmart "is taking Christ out of Christmas."
As there is nothing Christian about capitalism and consumerism, this Christian finds their demonizing of Walmart as jumping on the bandwagon, not changing the wind.
Want to do something about Walmarts corporate greed?
Don't shop there.
www.wearewideawake.org
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I AGREE!!! Trying to Club the Offspring of the Beast is Fruitless!
Posted by: qrswave
Comments are closed-
Posted by: knitter on Nov 15, 2005 5:19 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Does anyone know of creative community solutions that are working to keep smaller businesses from being annihilated by the "neutron bomb" of Walmart blowing into town? I'm thinking that resale shops and sliding scale groceries might figure into that. I'm thinking of coupons for low income families, the saving of which would be paid for by better-off families voluntarily picking up the tab. This would allow the store to remain in business and give decent prices that afford for decent wages and yet be affordable to the citizens of the community.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Nov 15, 2005 5:47 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: WalMart the whipping boy
Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: WalMart the whipping boy
Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: WalMart the whipping boy
Posted by: Doubtom
Comments are closed-
Posted by: crusty on Nov 15, 2005 5:55 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Brucewxx on Nov 15, 2005 6:13 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SDres11 on Nov 15, 2005 6:22 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» Shop elsewhere.
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: How about targetting "Target" ?
Posted by: Colin
» RE: How about targetting "Target" ?
Posted by: LPB
» The pharmacists "job"...
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: How about targetting "Target" ?
Posted by: Colin
» If you can't stand the heat in the kitchen then ...
Posted by: jwg
» RE: How about targetting "Target" ?
Posted by: phatkhat
Comments are closed-
Posted by: knitter on Nov 15, 2005 6:33 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, it is the model capitalist company, and it shows the logical outcome of pure, unregulated market capitalism. Capitalism and its opposite, communism, are both economic models for understanding our world. Neither of them call forth the best of what is human. Either of them can be used as limited tools for helping to organize how we exchange our work for goods. If instead, they are regarded as the absolute organizing principle, that leads to the system abusing the society it is meant to serve.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Guy on Nov 15, 2005 8:58 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have always shopped locally. Preferring spending my money at places that will keep the money in the community whenever I can, even if it costs a few dollars more. We can start by all doing that. But beyond that, we need to have a plan. I see our local downtown shriveling up under the competition from the major chains. If we want our downtowns to full of vibrant local businesses that pays decent wages, then we need to put out money where our mouths are.
The author should make some suggests rather than just whining about Wal-Mart like everyone else.
Guy
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: monkeywrench on Nov 15, 2005 9:13 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If our government is as serious about curbing welfare in this country as it claims, it had better take Wal-Mart off the welfare rolls, and return some of that money to Wal-Mart's "associates" –– after all, THEY earned it, not the overpaid, overfat, uber-greedy Walton family.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Don't worship there
Posted by: knitter
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Meteshah on Nov 15, 2005 9:50 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Nov 15, 2005 12:46 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Caroll Fowler on Nov 15, 2005 11:26 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: To really deal with the Walmart issue, we need to get to the people who work and buy there
Posted by: Guy
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Global Fallujah on Nov 30, 2005 11:52 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Like most American liberals, they focus only on the symptoms of the problem and carefully try to cover up the more fundamental issues: namely, the American Empire and the capitalist system in general. Worst yet, I suspect their real agenda is a thinly disguised form of American economic nationalism, of the type pushed by the AFL-CIA and other US labor imperialists.
Wal-Mart is merely a by-product of Capitalist globalization, whereby American, Western, and First World corporations expand around the world in order to exploit Third World labor (such as in China or Mexico) and to penetrate local markets in other countries, thereby destroying indiginous businesses that cannot compete with American multinationals.
Capitalist globalization, however, is being driven, pushed, and enforced first and foremost by the American Empire. This is done both multilaterally through figleaf organizations such as the WTO, IMF, and World Bank which the USA uses to impose privatization policies on the Third World. America also pushes capitalist globalization unilaterally through the various free trade deals such as NAFTA, CAFTA, and the Free Trade Zone of the Americas.
All of these predatory policies are inflicted by the American state using all the powers of the American Empire at its disposal. These powers even include the use of American spy agencies to destablize and overthrow any government that adopts policies which resist American capitalist penetration and colonization.
For a better and more truthful analysis of how capitalist globalization works, read John Perkins' book Confessions of an Economic Hitman where he exposes in uncensored terms America's "hidden fist" behind the reality of globalization.
John Perkins Interview
Economic Hitman
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Global Fallujah on Dec 1, 2005 1:28 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The answer is of course not. In fact, they tacitly support the US Empire and the profit system by trying to narrow the terms of debate to easy individual targets.
The issue that Borosage and Peters would rather not talk about is that their beloved American "well-being" has always been based upon the exploitation of the Third World. That's the basis of America's way of life since the first slaveowners put their bloody boot on this continent.
And behind their "progressive" mask, Borosage and Peters are not much different from the reactionary nationalists one finds in unions like the AFL-CIA, who specialize in chauvinist rants about "foreigners stealing our jobs" or foreign competition.
With respect to China, for example, Borosage and Peters state that Wal-Mart "accounts for over 10 percent of our annual trade deficit with China, with over 70 percent of its products made in China."
What they forget to mention is that many of the USA's "imports" from China are not even made by indiginous Chinese firms, but rather by the subsidiaries of American, Western, and other international corporations that set up production in China to exploit labor and ultimately export their products back to the US market. Those products may literally be "made in China," but they are often made by and for American and other multinational corporations who either own or have ownership shares in the factories. Guess who gets the most profits from this setup?
This is similar to the maquiladora system in Mexico where many US corporations relocate to exploit labor and then ship their manufactured products back to the US market for US consumers. They call that an import from Mexico, but it's glorified *intra-business trade* that reaps superprofits for USA capital.
The beneficiares of globalization are thus First World nations like America, whose corporations often own the factories in the Third World to begin with and make dollars for every penny spent on labor costs and whose consumers who pay less for products that would otherwise cost more.
Wal-Mart is symbolic of capitalist globalization, so why don't Borosage or Peters question capitalism itself? Because this system is ultimately the bedrock of the American way of life and well-being they champion.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Vancouver's Games Will Be the Gayest Olympics Ever
Trial Begins for Activist Who Fought to Protect Federal Lands from Drilling -- Join the Protest
Starbucks' Cop-Out to Gun Nuts: Customers Served Coffee While Strapped




