Welcome to Wal-Mart

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

If we're talking corporate policies, Target is hardly an improvement over WalMart, merely not as monolithic.

 

If we're talking a higher-rent brand of consumer goods in both price and stylishness, Target kicks WalMart's ass. Though Kohl's has nice stuff as well - bit more staid image than Target and I don't think they're completely national yet either.

 

1317343[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I really like Kohl's.

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

So you're in favor of monopolies?

 

1317349[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I think in small town America there is indeed a threat of Wal-mart becoming a monopoly, sort of the old "company store", but in larger metropolitan areas there still isn't much of a threat of that.

[Perchoutofwater]

Yeah, been there many times. I don't have a problem with giving my business to Wal-mart. Pretty much agree with what you said. Sucks for the small businesses in small town America when Wal-mart comes in and wipes everyone out, but what are you going to do? That's capitalism.

 

1317327[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Kind of like the whip and buggy makers though I hear the whip maker where the Captains Wench lives is still doing fine There are actually more small businesses now then when walmart stared, it is just closing down the locally owned super markets, toy stores and the such. I figured that right after the first walmart hit town the local bycicle store would close down, but instead there are two more. Walmart didn't have anything to do with that, but the point is there are trends, and thanks to the health and outdoor trends, a niche' store like a bycicle shop can stay. Most of the small business owners know when they are coming to town and have plenty of time to sale off their merchandise and either retire or start a new business before it really starts impacting thier profits. It is only those that are selling the exact same products and the small business owner is too hard headed and tries to compete, that the little guy gets hurt.

[Perchoutofwater]

So you're in favor of monopolies?

 

1317349[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

No, but I'm in favor of largely unregulated capitalism as opposed to socialism or communism. If you want to talk about monopolies, how about the US postal service that is a real monopoly. Microsoft is a hell of a lot closer to a monopoly than walmart ever thought about being.

[Perchoutofwater]

I think in small town America there is indeed a threat of Wal-mart becoming a monopoly, sort of the old "company store", but in larger metropolitan areas there still isn't much of a threat of that.

 

1317356[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

In small town America Tractor Supply Co. is a monopoly. Of course unless you live in BFE Montana you can drive 30-35 miles to the nearest larger city. The city I grew up in had about 80,000 people 20 years ago, and while it had 5 grocery stores they were all owned by the same people. There was one of every type of store, but there was basically one. Now it is a city of 100,000 and it has more stores than you can shake a stick at. Point is, based on the population, most small towns have to deal with all sorts of monopolies even before walmart came to town.

[Chavez]

No, but I'm in favor of largely unregulated capitalism as opposed to socialism or communism.  If you want to talk about monopolies, how about the US postal service that is a real monopoly.  Microsoft is a hell of a lot closer to a monopoly than walmart ever thought about being.

 

1317359[/snapback]

 

 

 

The Postal Service is essentially a service put into place by the US government - if you want to complain about that, complain about how the Army is heavily subsidized.

 

MS IS very close to a monopoly; and Wal-Mart, as Grunge points out above, may have a de facto monopolistic presence in small towns. The main issue with both MS and WM is does their size/market share present a danger to the public interest? (when it comes to monopolies, I'm a TR man)

[Chavez]

I really like Kohl's.

 

1317350[/snapback]

 

 

 

Plus shopping at Kohl's a chunk of the profits go to empty suit D-Wis Sen Herb Kohl.

[Perchoutofwater]

The Postal Service is essentially a service put into place by the US government - if you want to complain about that, complain about how the Army is heavily subsidized.

 

MS IS very close to a monopoly; and Wal-Mart, as Grunge points out above, may have a de facto monopolistic presence in small towns. The main issue with both MS and WM is does their size/market share present a danger to the public interest? (when it comes to monopolies, I'm a TR man)

 

1317365[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

We are at a point where private courrier services could seriously compete with the US postal service if it were not for the subsidies. I don't think you can say the same thing about the military, nor would I want a private company having all the neat toys the military has.

 

With regard to the monopolies, like I said in a previous post there have always been monopoloies in small towns. It has just not always been someone with Walmart's purchasing power so even with a Walmart monopoly the could still run the same margin that the previous monopoly ran and it would still cost consumers less. Go to a truely small town, and you will only see one grocery store, one hardware store, and maybe two clothing stores. Those are monopolies, but they aren't named walmart so the libs don't get their panties in a wad. If you think

Walmart is really threating to become a monopoly my advice would be to buy as much of their stock as you can.

[Chavez]

We are at a point where private courrier services could seriously compete with the US postal service if it were not for the subsidies.  I don't think you can say the same thing about the military, nor would I want a private company having all the neat toys the military has.

 

As far as I know, under Reagan, the USPS was mandated to become self-sufficient. Even with subsidies, I'd say FedEx and UPS are doing just fine with their niche; I'd hazard that your average 39 cent letter is the flu virus of courier services - just isn't the profit there for any privately owned courier to try to horn in on the USPS' gig.

 

With regard to the monopolies, like I said in a previous post there have always been monopoloies in small towns.  It has just not always been someone with Walmart's purchasing power so even with a Walmart monopoly the could still run the same margin that the previous monopoly ran and it would still cost consumers less.  Go to a truely small town, and you will only see one grocery store, one hardware store, and maybe two clothing stores.  Those are monopolies, but they aren't named walmart so the libs don't get their panties in a wad.

 

1317377[/snapback]

 

 

 

That's not a bad point - though I think it's fair to point out that the one local grocery/hardware/clothing store was most likely locally owned, keeping the profits earned in the community as opposed to sending them off to wherever the Walton Central is located now - some small island in the South Pacific, maybe?

 

(though there's nothing saying that the owners of these small stores weren't utterly miserly dickwads who gave nothing back)

[Chavez]

  If you think Walmart is really threating to become a monopoly my advice would be to buy as much of their stock as you can.

 

1317377[/snapback]

 

 

 

I've already got my toe in the pool as a soulless corporate minion of Citigroup. I prefer to sell my soul off in parts, so it'll be a few years before I invest heavily in Wal*Mart.

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

Tons of good info here in this thread on all sides.

[Perchoutofwater]

As far as I know, under Reagan, the USPS was mandated to become self-sufficient. Even with subsidies, I'd say FedEx and UPS are doing just fine with their niche; I'd hazard that your average 39 cent letter is the flu virus of courier services - just isn't the profit there for any privately owned courier to try to horn in on the USPS' gig.

1317389[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

You may be right, it would make sense as the out lay to get enough vehicles to try to compete would be huge. Though I'm not sure if the subsidies stopped or not. It still pisses me off to see them advertise when they do have a monopoly. I'm thinking the head of the advertising company must be married to the post master gereral or something. The advertisments are ridiculous.

[Perchoutofwater]

That's not a bad point - though I think it's fair to point out that the one local grocery/hardware/clothing store was most likely locally owned, keeping the profits earned in the community as opposed to sending them off to wherever the Walton Central is located now - some small island in the South Pacific, maybe?

 

(though there's nothing saying that the owners of these small stores weren't utterly miserly dickwads who gave nothing back)

 

1317389[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Walmart is actually pretty good in the community. They give donations to the local schools, let the girl scouts sell their cookies in the parking lot, if I'm not mistaken I think they have helped sponser the local Cohmen Cancer Walk. The employees are still spending in the community, the profits are just going elsewhere. I can't say that they are giving more back to the community than a small business owner, but on the other hand I can't say that they aren't either. It's probably pretty close to a wash. Besides, haven't you heard Paul Harvey say how great Walmart is, if he says it's great, it has to be great, and that my friends is the rest of the story.

[Chavez]

You may be right, it would make sense as the out lay to get enough vehicles to try to compete would be huge.  Though I'm not sure if the subsidies stopped or not.  It still pisses me off to see them advertise when they do have a monopoly.  I'm thinking the head of the advertising company must be married to the post master gereral or something.  The advertisments are ridiculous.

 

1317394[/snapback]

 

 

 

The US Postal Service is self-sufficient (at least according to the National Association of Letter Carriers webpage); subisidies were phased out from 1971 (when they covered 23% of costs) to 1983.

 

The USPS has been mandated to break even for 20+ years now.

[Perchoutofwater]

The US Postal Service is self-sufficient (at least according to the National Association of Letter Carriers webpage); subisidies were phased out from 1971 (when they covered 23% of costs) to 1983.

 

The USPS has been mandated to break even for 20+ years now.

 

1317407[/snapback]

 

 

 

I stand corrected. I still say the guy at the ad agency is porking the Post Master Generals daughter. Why the hell do they need to advertise?

[Chavez]

I can't say that they are giving more back to the community than a small business owner, but on the other hand I can't say that they aren't either.  It's probably pretty close to a wash.

My argument has the same problem. I'd lean towards a slight advantage to money staying in the community with local ownership, but then again, due to economy of scale, more people probably have money in their pockets due to the lower Wal*Mart prices.

 

 

Besides, haven't you heard Paul Harvey say how great Walmart is, if he says it's great, it has to be great, and that my friends is the rest of the story.

 

1317398[/snapback]

 

 

 

Paul Harvey seems to be a more folksy, less pompous version of yer boy Rush these days.

[Chavez]

I stand corrected.  I still say the guy at the ad agency is porking the Post Master Generals daughter.  Why the hell do they need to advertise?

 

1317409[/snapback]

 

 

 

Beats me.

 

Of course, in America, milk advertises. Beef advertises. Pork advertises. Not brand names, just generic "drink milk, eat meat" campaigns. Which, in that case, would beg the question - why SHOULDN'T the USPS follow suit?

[Perchoutofwater]

Beats me.

 

Of course, in America, milk advertises. Beef advertises. Pork advertises. Not brand names, just generic "drink milk, eat meat" campaigns. Which, in that case, would beg the question - why SHOULDN'T the USPS follow suit?

 

1317413[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

The difference is their are competing products. With all the nutritional information that has come out in the last 20 years, and a good deal of it being crappy, people are eating less beef, less pork, and more chicken. You have people drinking soy milk in lieu of dairy. So the farmers and ranchers are advertising their product to try to get back some of the tofu eating soy milk drinking, berkenstock wearing hippies.

 

What product does USPS compete with? They really can't compete with UPS and FedEx in regard to packaging.

[Perchoutofwater]

My argument has the same problem. I'd lean towards a slight advantage to money staying in the community with local ownership, but then again, due to economy of scale, more people probably have money in their pockets due to the lower Wal*Mart prices.

 

 

Paul Harvey seems to be a more folksy, less pompous version of yer boy Rush these days.

 

1317410[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I haven't listened to him in a since I got XM a few years ago, but even when I did it was only for "the rest of the story", not the news.

[Chavez]

What product does USPS compete with?  They really can't compete with UPS and FedEx in regard to packaging.

 

1317418[/snapback]

 

 

 

Well - and again, proceeding from the assumption that bulk mail is the least profitable of parcel delivery services - perhaps the margins on overnight and packages are attractive enough that taking some of that market share from FedEx and UPS justifies the expense of the advertising.

 

This is about the only time I wish we had a postal worker as a Huddle regular...

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

The difference is their are competing products.  With all the nutritional information that has come out in the last 20 years, and a good deal of it being crappy, people are eating less beef, less pork, and more chicken.  You have people drinking soy milk in lieu of dairy.  So the farmers and ranchers are advertising their product to try to get back some of the tofu eating soy milk drinking, berkenstock wearing hippies.

 

What product does USPS compete with?  They really can't compete with UPS and FedEx in regard to packaging.

 

1317418[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Ever heard of a little invention devised by Al Gore?

[Chavez]

The difference is their are competing products.  With all the nutritional information that has come out in the last 20 years, and a good deal of it being crappy, people are eating less beef, less pork, and more chicken.  You have people drinking soy milk in lieu of dairy.  So the farmers and ranchers are advertising their product to try to get back some of the tofu eating soy milk drinking, berkenstock wearing hippies.

 

1317418[/snapback]

 

 

 

With the skyrocketing obesity rates and market saturation of fast food outlets, I find it difficult to believe Americans are eating LESS of anything these days. Maybe veggies.

[Ursa Majoris]

What product does USPS compete with?  They really can't compete with UPS and FedEx in regard to packaging.

 

1317418[/snapback]

 

 

 

They compete with FedEx and UPS directly in the parcel service. Both those companies suck hughly, BTW, as anyone who's ever seen a $12,000 server dropped off the back of a truck then had to the idiot who still tried to deliver it and denied all knowledge of the damage would be able to tell you.

[cre8tiff]

And if it's employees don't feel like they are being paid fairly they don't have to work there.  No one is holding a gun to their head and saying that they have to work there.  I'm paying laborers quite a bit more than walmart pays it's stockers and checkers, but I have yet to see a bunch of people coming from Walmart looking for a job.  Maybe they are being paid what they are worth based upon how hard they want to work.  They could be paid more working for me as a laborer, but it is too dirty and to hot, so they decided to work in the nice airconditioned walmart that I believe offers stock to it's employees at a discounted rate, or at least it did a few years ago when one the the guys my wife works with was working there in the summers.

 

1317324[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

The point is, where are they going to work? If Wal-Mart has driven the small businesses out of business, what choices do these people have? It is a bully pulpit. The working poor don't have many choices here.

 

Also, just how many laborers can you employ? Additionally, what would happen to you if Wal-Mart got into your trade (I don't know what you do, but in some areas Wal-Mart is beginning to offer siding installation), and was able to complete the projects you work on at half the cost, because they pay thier people less, and can get cheaper materials?

[cre8tiff]

Walmart is actually pretty good in the community.  They give donations to the local schools, let the girl scouts sell their cookies in the parking lot, if I'm not mistaken I think they have helped sponser the local Cohmen Cancer Walk.  The employees are still spending in the community, the profits are just going elsewhere.  I can't say that they are giving more back to the community than a small business owner, but on the other hand I can't say that they aren't either.  It's probably pretty close to a wash.  Besides, haven't you heard Paul Harvey say how great Walmart is, if he says it's great, it has to be great, and that my friends is the rest of the story.

 

1317398[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

They can certainly afford to give a little, since they already cost the community in lower wages:

 

When an employer pays low wages to its employees, the employees have less money to spend on goods and services in the community, which in turn reduces the income and spending of others in the community. In other words a reduction in wages has a multiplier impact in the surrounding area.

For instance, in 1999, Southern California municipalities estimated that for every dollar decrease in wages in the southern California economy, $2.08 in spending was lost-- the $1 decrease plus another $1.08 in indirect multiplier impacts. [“The Impact of Big Box Grocers in Southern California” Dr. Marlon Boarnet and Dr. Randall Crane.]

 

Come on Perch, pull up some facts to match your opinion.

 

And as for the profit, well, Wal-Mart isn't the only one getting rich off your dollars:

 

Wal-Mart reports that it purchased $18 billion of goods from China in 2004.

Wal-Mart is responsible for about 1/10th of the U.S. trade deficit with China.

[“U.S. Stock Investors Wary of Analyst `Yuan Plays': Taking Stock, Bloomberg, 7/1/05]

If Wal-Mart were an individual economy, it would rank as China’s eight-biggest trading partner, ahead of Russia, Australia and Canada.

[China Business Weekly, 12/02/2004]

 

 

As fiercely pro-American as Mr. Harvey is, you would think those statistics alone would give him pause.