Saturday, December 17, 2005
As I mentioned in the entry below, Jewish Fifth Graders Protest Wal-Mart, there's another side to the "Wal-Mart bad...grunt" debate. Here's an article that makes a few of the pro-Wal-Mart points:
Yet, other than perhaps Halliburton, it is the single business most despised by the American left.
The company in question is Wal-Mart, and a Nov. 28 report by New York University economist Jason Furman concludes that the mammoth retailer is getting a bad rap from his fellow liberals. Wal-Mart, argues Mr. Furman, is a "progressive success story"—a business with razor-thin profit margins that nonetheless brings high productivity, low prices, and coveted jobs to the masses.
He brings together several different studies to make his case, and the numbers he cites are staggering. Just considering food, Mr. Furman shows that big-box retailers like Wal-Mart save a typical family in the poorest fifth of U.S. incomes 25.8 percent on their grocery bills—or about 6.5 percent of their incomes. When all products are taken into account, Wal-Mart by itself saves American families about $263 billion, or about $895 per person and $2,329 per household. These savings mostly help poor and middle-class families, since the average Wal-Mart shopper earns about $35,000...
Much more at the link, of course.
I don't know what the bottom line on the net total effect in human terms of Wal-Mart is. I suspect it's not really knowable, frankly. I have a sneaking suspicion that economic statistics can be used to make them say whatever you want them to, and that's what's often done with Wal-Mart.
I know that Wal-Mart is often blamed for the demise of the American downtown. Sorry, but that process started with the introduction of strip-malls back in the 1950's. Then along came the indoor malls and it was all downhill at an accelerated pace after that. Wal-Mart is the "mall" in some areas. The downtown's days were numbered long before Wal-Mart.
Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Well, some of that is hard to quantify. I think there's something to be said for there being more owners and fewer employees in a community. The old days were better in that regard, but it'll never show up on a balance sheet.
Who's fault is it all? If Wal-Mart is a net "bad," is there anything we can do that won't make it worse? I doubt it. I'm reminded of the inter-chapter sections of The Grapes of Wrath -- it's just the system. In that regard, Wal-Mart is just reflecting a change that's already taken place. Society has changed and Wal-Mart has surfed the wave of that change effectively. George hasn't run down the streets, past the shops of Bedford Falls in a long time. Our Town is gone or fading.
Besides, taking action requires having answers that no one can settle on definitively, so take whatever side you want, but leave the kiddies out of it.
Update: Just who's fault is it, anyway? Food for thought at Peaktalk.
