Beaker wrote:

 

Platt's puff piece on Walmart is interesting if rather one-sided.  I have to wonder how "undercover" Platt really was.

Platt admits that the inspiration for his stunt was Barbara Ehrenreichs' book Nickel and Dimed, in which she attempted to live on minimum wage jobs, including a weeks long stint at a Walmart store in Minnesota.  He suspects Ehrenreich of having a "preconceived agenda", and tags her book as a "denunciation of the free market".

Um, I'm not sure what book Platt read, but the main point Ehrenreich tried to make was how hard (practically impossible) it is for an adult in the US to live on a minimum wage job.  She actually tried to make ends meet while working at Walmart and doing other low wage jobs (like cleaning service jobs).  She also talked to her coworkers about their struggles to make ends meet working such low wage jobs.  I don't remember the book being a "denunciation of the free market", unless you consider any criticism of a well known retailer to constitute "denunciation" of capitalism.

Platt basically concedes Ehrenreich's point:  "My starting wage was so low (around $7 per hour), a modest increment still didn't leave me with enough to live on comfortably".  By "comfortably" he presumably means consuming at least 2500 calories a day and having a bed to sleep in with a roof over it, being able to own at least one set of clothes and shoes, etc.

I have to wonder how "undercover" Platt was, and how much effort he put into researching this article.  Did he talk to his coworkers like Ehrenreich did?  Did he seek independent sources for information about Walmart (like what their average wage is, actual overtime policies followed around the country, etc) or just use stufff spoonfed to him by Walmart's publicity dept.?

Here's an interesting email dialogue between Ehrenreich and an economist regarding low wage jobs, Walmart, and the US economy:

IS WALMART GOOD FOR THE AMERICAN WORKING CLASS?

BTW although Ehrenreich's book is still in print, you can't order it ONLINE at Walmart.com, nor can you find it in their stores.

manbirdexperiment wrote:



It might be only a very poor choice for a company name, but even then I'd take information from a source called "freebase" with a cow lick of salt!

I have to admit that having the blind luck of purchasing a few hundred shares of Wal-Mart back when it was a small regional chain has benefited me greatly. Even as a Wal-Mart shareholder, I have been against things like increased reliance on a hard-core Communist regime for the things that we buy. I've always maintained that the better-built product is also the less expensive one in the long run. And I'm all for a living wage.

What I don't see is the rationale about why this is (allegedly) all Wal-Mart's fault. Was Sam Walton along for the ride when Nixon made his historic visits to China? Is there any evidence that Wal-Mart lobbyists are solely responsible for the US trade policies that have abandoned the free Chinese people in Taiwan, and opened the door to a flood of lead-filled junk made by political prisoners and children? (Ironically the only place where the Communist Chinese skimp on lead is in their lead-acid batteries.) Or is Wal-Mart a convenient misdirection from the real bandits?

Like the saying goes: "it takes two to tango". The people who purchased Communist-made goods when there were alternatives available have an equal share of the blame. And Wal-Mart is hardly the only store in the US that's selling red flag products, or paying slave wages to their workers.

And when it comes to wages, the blame for that lies squarely on the shoulders of the constituents of the legislators who have failed to keep the minimum wage current over the years. Matters like that have always been a matter of public responsibility, from before the Industrial Revolution, through the Great Depression to present-day. If you never picked up a pen, licked a stamp and mailed a letter to your Representative and/or Senator, then you have not earned the right to point the finger of blame.

That's my 2¢. (That costs 5¢ to mint...)

Leslie wrote:



The nearest Walgreens by road is 30 miles from here. I think it's the only one on the north Olympic Peninsula.

Not a CVS to be seen. Anywhere.

But there are three Wal*marts within 30 miles by road. Wow.

JrzyTmata wrote:


OMG 100 stores showed up within my zip code area (they don't list distances, but it looks to be within a 50 miles radius of Antioch). Holy crap!

buzz wrote:


holy crap! 43.
I wonder how many CVSs?

JrzyTmata wrote:

There's 20 within 38 miles of my house!

 JrzyTmata wrote:

 
how many Walgreens?
thats whats going up where the Delrando was 

ScottFromWyoming wrote:




we're loaded with them.
I just did a search for how many we actually have within 20 miles of my zip code. I would have guessed about 6 or 7.
There's 20 of em.

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:



 

They follow the money.

Lots of people spending a little bit of money each.

Soon adds up. Ask Gus Gorman

manbirdexperiment wrote:



Yowza.

I had no idea they were so prevalent in New England, all up and down the eastern seaboard in fact. Thought it was Arkansas west to Texas and up from there.

Frightening Data

Watching the Growth of Walmart Across America