The bottom line is that Wal-Mart isn't holding a gun to anyone's head, forcing him or her to work under onerous terms. Employment at Wal-Mart is voluntary. In January, 25,000 people applied for 325 available jobs at a store opening in the Chicago area, according to the company. Not everyone thinks it's such a bad place to work.
This paragraph comes to buttress her assertion that Wal-Mart gets a bad rap by Democrats, especially one of their likely yet-to-be-failed future 2008 Presidential candidates, Joe Biden.
She continues:
When Wal-Mart opens superstores in rural America, it brings jobs to the community. It provides goods as cheaply as possible to Americans who wouldn't otherwise have access to such a wide array of merchandise at rock-bottom prices. It even offers health-care plans for as little as $11 a month in some areas.
Apparently, Ms Baum would have us believe that we should be excited about a Wal-Mart moving into town because after relying on number provided by a large, independent, helper of ordinary people, Global Insight, she found that "Wal-Mart does not appear to be paying below market wages"
How reassuring! When I am sure of something and I want everyone to believe it, I say "this appears to be true."
Of those 25,000 people who applied for jobs at Wal-mart, how many of them really want to work there? I think it is incredibly irresponsible to assume that putting in an application at a minimum wage paying retailer on the edge of town means that one wants the job. People apply for work at Wal-mart perhaps because there are no other options--in fact that might be because Wal-mart chased out all the other retailers in the area.
This is certainly not true in every single Wal-marted community, but the facts have been well documented. For some enlightening references on the real effects on local communities when a Wal-mart moves into town, you need only check the references of Wal-mart's Wikipedia entry. If you are still not convinced, run some Google news searches to see what the newspapers are publishing about it.
I am not sure why Ms. Baum chose now to begin her crusade against those who think Wal-mart has a negative effect on local economies. I suspect that it may be to take a few swipes at Mr. Biden's looming presidential bid, (her hostility toward the Democratic party is not exactly thinly veiled), but I think it probably has far more to do with the fact that Wal-mart had a less than spectacular showing recently, and their PR people need to make sure its voice still comes in loud and clear.
In the end, I am willing to concede that health care is not Wal-mart's responsibility; I am even willing to agree that Wal-Mart takes a smaller chunk out the pocketbooks of consumers. My problem with Wal-mart is that they flourish by doing things that would land most real (not legal) people in jail. Sure, the prices are lower, but at cost?
No comments:
Post a Comment