Wal Mart The Virus

Status
Not open for further replies.
A beneficial virus In my humble opinion. I never understood the people who castigate Wal*Mart. The power has always remained in the hands of the consumer, not the retailer.
 
Boy, that Mighty Mississippi River sure seems to be the dividing line between the US doesn't it?
 
They had several good strategies (just in time ordering, being very disciplined in centering stores around distribution centers.) I have no trouble with their business model. I do have trouble with their source of cheap products.
 
I do have trouble with their source of cheap products.

A very interesting observation. A friend and I were talking about the jute netting I use for erosion control. If I can buy a thousand square feet for 35 dollars, the people who make it couldn't be making more than 50 cents per hour. But as he said, "they're probably glad for the work".

You know, seed companies have to have offices is the Southern hemisphere, so they can get in two crop cycles per year. When I was in South Africa I learned that one of the reasons many big seed companies weren't represented there was because SA workers got 4 dollars per day, and the companies figured why go to SA when you can pay 1 dollar per day somewhere else.

Still, a subject worthy of discussion, especially in light of less consumer spending.
 
I know as of a few years ago that their profits were considerably higher than Costco, yet their wages were lower and the percentage of their full-time employees with healthcare was much lower (something like 55% for Wal-Mart vs. 90% for Costco, see The World is Flat for the exact percentages). As a consumer I'd rather a company settle for lower profits if it means increased benefits for their employees, so I avoid Wal-Mart.
 
I called it a virus only because the map looks like it's showing the spread of one (lol). I am ok with Wal Mart and used to work for them.
 
I know as of a few years ago that their profits were considerably higher than Costco, yet their wages were lower and the percentage of their full-time employees with healthcare was much lower (something like 55% for Wal-Mart vs. 90% for Costco, see The World is Flat for the exact percentages). As a consumer I'd rather a company settle for lower profits if it means increased benefits for their employees, so I avoid Wal-Mart.

To be fair, one should compare the profits to Walmart's Sam's Club vs. Costco instead of comparing the entire Walmart empire to Costco. Last time I checked, the profit numbers were pretty even with Costco with the lead.

CT
 
I know as of a few years ago that their profits were considerably higher than Costco, yet their wages were lower and the percentage of their full-time employees with healthcare was much lower (something like 55% for Wal-Mart vs. 90% for Costco, see The World is Flat for the exact percentages). As a consumer I'd rather a company settle for lower profits if it means increased benefits for their employees, so I avoid Wal-Mart.

But as a consumer it doesn't matter what you'd druther, only the stock holders matter. WalMart isn't in the business of creating jobs or even selling products, it's in the business of making money for the shareholders and the owners.

People don't have to work at WalMart or even shop there, it's an individual choice. The trendy fad of protesting WalMart for this that and the other is just that, a trendy fad for those with too much time on their hands and a very weak knowledge of free markets and how the US economy works.
 
People don't have to work at WalMart or even shop there, it's an individual choice. The trendy fad of protesting WalMart for this that and the other is just that, a trendy fad for those with too much time on their hands and a very weak knowledge of free markets and how the US economy works.

A weak knowledge of free markets and how the US economy works! I wonder if Hank Paulsen is one of those people :confused:
 
I work for Wal-Mart in a distribution center. I have worked in the logistics industry for 15 years, five for WM and the other ten for a couple of other very large retail companies (Albertson's and Walgreen's).

I have to say that of those three companies WM has the best benefits and salary. The culture is very attractive as well. It would take quite a bit to get me to leave.

Peace,
DK
 
Yeah, and why should a company provide heathcare and all that stuff if they don't want to? It is a free market for employee's. This social consious junk that is forced on companies is wrong.

If a employee wants heath insurance, he should go work for a company that offers it. Some companies want the best people, so they offer that stuff. And get the best employees too! (I've even heard of companies that pay more for guys if they sign something that says they have a stay-at-home wife who takes care of the kids, because he doesn't call in, is more productive, and doesn't jump jobs. hmmm)

2nd rate employee's that think a job is adult day care shouldn't wine and complain.

Edit added - by the way, us poor people like Wal-Mart. They have good stuff. Just ignore the junk.
 
As a consumer I'd rather a company settle for lower profits if it means increased benefits for their employees, so I avoid Wal-Mart.

I run a business...and I would be utterly completely suprised if one of my customers decided to use my services based on the increased benefits I provide my employees.
Maybe that would be a good selling point to my customers "hey, I don't make any profit at all...I just give it all to my employees"


Hey, I avoid wal-mart too, but not because their profits are to high and thier employee benefits are to low!
Is there anyone that actually shops that way?
 
CT, you are right that it does change things to just compare Costco and Sam's Club, but I don't believe Wal-Mart breaks out those numbers anymore. When they did Costco was still favorable, but it wasn't as dramatic a difference.

I know as of a few years ago that their profits were considerably higher than Costco, yet their wages were lower and the percentage of their full-time employees with healthcare was much lower (something like 55% for Wal-Mart vs. 90% for Costco, see The World is Flat for the exact percentages). As a consumer I'd rather a company settle for lower profits if it means increased benefits for their employees, so I avoid Wal-Mart.

But as a consumer it doesn't matter what you'd druther, only the stock holders matter. WalMart isn't in the business of creating jobs or even selling products, it's in the business of making money for the shareholders and the owners.

People don't have to work at WalMart or even shop there, it's an individual choice. The trendy fad of protesting WalMart for this that and the other is just that, a trendy fad for those with too much time on their hands and a very weak knowledge of free markets and how the US economy works.

Well as a consumer I can choose not to shop there if I like. It's a free market like you say. I don't understand why you guys are only describing the free market from one side as if consumers should only make decisions based on price and quality. If enough consumers feel an issue is important the businesses will listen if they want to hold on to their market share. Share-holders will listen, too, because they stand to make a profit. You can see this happening with the "green" marketing even if you think it's stupid.

I think most here don't want socialized medicine. So why wouldn't you want to encourage businesses to provide healthcare to their employees? Wouldn't shrinking the numbers of the uninsured make socialized medicine less appealing to people?
 
No, getting government out of health care all together will make medicine better. Don't forget, this HMO mess was begun by Congress in the 1970s and Ted Kennedy wrote the legislation. Government interference got us in and MORE government won't get us out.

The less the gubmint regulates the health care industry the lower the prices will be. Maybe not back to the days I remember when an office visit to good old Doc Wright down in town only cost $20.00 (not an insurance co-pay, that was the entire cost), but it will go far to get the trial lawyers and insurance fraud costs out of the equation.
 
Those of you who hate Walmart should consider moving to Alaska since, according to that interesting map, it appears to be a Walmart-free zone.
 
I work for Walmart. I'm an assistant manager apparently on the way to being a co-manager. I started at Walmart four years ago with no retail experience. Walmart's been good to me.

The insurance I have through Walmart is good at far less than $40 per paycheck and that's for my wife and me.

Shop at Walmart or don't.

Through God's providence I've been blessed by working at Walmart.
 
Now forgive me, the only Walmart I went to was on the edge of the Tibetan plateau where you couldn't find much anyway - but I wanted a toy horse and they didn't have one :lol:
 

Walmart Rocks for Fishing Lures!


062508_20151.jpg
 
My husband has both worked for Walmart and worked along US companies that have contracted with Walmart. Thankfully, the company he worked for at the time (juice) did not contract with Walmart. Come to find out that Walmart has a habit of contracting with come US companies (small ones), then drive them into the ground and puts them out of business. This is the issue I have with Walmart. Unfortunately, Walmart is closer to me than Target, but I try to get to Target when I can.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top