Subject:
|
The Hidden Costs (was Re: It's All About Control)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 26 Jun 2003 19:15:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
565 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
You are being nostalgic. Mom and Pop were inefficient. Walmart brought
more variety, more jobs, cheaper prices.
|
Wal-Mart Wars
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/06/26/ED186944.DTL&type=printable
WOULD YOU LIKE a Wal-Mart “supercenter” store to move into your community? Think
of the low prices and the convenience of one-stop shopping! You just park once
and get whatever you need -- groceries, drugs, plants, toys, dog food, even
eyeglasses.
Sounds great, doesn’t it? So why have nearly 200 communities refused to allow
such big-box stores to enter their lives? Do they know something we don’t?
To find out, I embedded myself in the Wal-Mart wars that have recently broken
out in Contra Costa County. What I learned, in a nutshell, is that Wal- Mart’s
nonunion, big-box stores drag down other workers’ salaries, destroy downtown
businesses, prevent smart-growth development and increase traffic congestion.
What really surprised me though is that we, the taxpayers, end up subsidizing
Wal-Mart stores by paying for the health and retirement needs of its workers.
snip
In making its decision, the board cited a study done by the San Diego County
Taxpayers Association (SDCTA), a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization. It found
that an influx of big-box stores into San Diego would result in an annual
decline in wages and benefits between $105 million and $221 million, and an
increase of $9 million in public health costs. SDCTA also estimated that the
region would lose pensions and retirement benefits valued between $89 million
and $170 million per year and that even increased sales and property tax
revenues would not cover the extra costs of necessary public services. “Good
jobs, good pay, and good benefits should be the goal of an economy,” SDCTA
concluded, “and supercenters are not consistent with that objective.”
The reality of Wal-Mart is even worse than what is discussed in the foregoing
article. Wal-Mart often refuses to provide workers with full-time jobs in order
to avoid providing the kinds of benefits full-time workers normally receive
(stuff like medical, dental, vacation, etc.). In order to get away with that
annoying tactic, Wal-Mart has to make certain full-time workers work even more
hours in order to maximize the profit of paying the benefits of that worker --
this often takes the form of forced overtime that is sometimes unpaid (google
the lawsuits brewing over unpaid OT). It just goes on and on like this when you
start digging even a little.
Here’s the life I imagine for the clueless, they have:
• a full-time job
• a retirement plan
• medical and dental
• a religious organization of which they are a member that provides at least
some fall back position when families fall on hard times (the Relief Society,
Deseret Industries -- LDS/Mormon examples because that’s what I know).
I ask the clueless: Do you have any idea how many americans do not have any of
those four things? Sure, sure -- they should rush right on out and get those
things immediately, yes? From whom? Wal-Mart?
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: It's All About Control (was: Re: Possession)
|
| (...) Disagree. They compete with each other (Although I do recognize that there are some industries that need to be regulated for the common good). (...) You are being nostalgic. Mom and Pop were inefficient. Walmart brought more variety, more (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
31 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
