Why do liberals have such a hatred for WalMart?

[Shaun @ Tru6]

I don't like Wal*Mart because of how they treat suppliers. If we wanted to get into WM, we'd make a pitch and instead of haggling on price, they'd say: we know that shirt costs you $5.50. We'll pay $4.75. if we couldn't come down to $3 by ripping our suppliers a new one for us to make it worthwhile, and they really liked the style, they'd just rip off the designs and do it themselves. Happened to Too Shy, a very well established pre-teen brand two years ago. FBI was involved.

I also like to buy to local. Why? Information and peace of mind. I could have bought my Miller 135 MIG at least $200 cheaper on eBay. But I bought local cause the store owner spent about an hour with me on welding technique, through in a pair of gloves and if I have any problems, I can take it back.

With Cinnamon Toast Crunch, WM is great because they've got volume and inventory management on their side. With anything important, I try to buy local.

Lastly, as a self-described "asset buyer," that is I will save for something of quality and and go without before I will buy something just to have it. WM carries lowest common denominator products, so not much a reason to buy there other than basic commodities.

[skipdup]

Originally posted by Drago
Maybe this is why liberals hate Walmart.

no work

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by aways
WalMart has been a lifesaver for many lower-middleclass folks who can't afford to shop in the trendy establishments patronized by the leftist elites. Since lefties are always purporting to champion the poor and down-trodden, it seems ironic that they want to drive WalMarts out of business. Please don't give me the excuse that WalMart doesn't pay employees enough, it goes deeper than that. After all, living in SoCal, I've never met a well-to-do liberal who had any qualms whatsoever about hiring an illegal housemaid at sub-minimum wage to tidy up their million dollar home.

Unions...plain and simple...They do not care if they provide cheap products to the poor, or employ many, or bring up depressed areas...it is all about union jobs and strongarming.

[legion]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
Unions...plain and simple...They do not care if they provide cheap products to the poor, or employ many, or bring up depressed areas...it is all about union jobs and strongarming.

Do a search on Wal-Marts efforts to build a store in Chicago...

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally posted by skipdup
I wonder if the difference between procurement price between local retailer & walmart could have anything to do selling price by the same?

- Skip

Uhhh, yeah! Consumers have choices: quality, location, prestige, store environment, customer service... the list goes on.

WM is all about efficient flow of inventory, lower quality goods and no-frills shopping environment.

Macy's is about efficient flow of inventory against season, good quality goods and a pleasant shopping environment

Your local boutique is about "what's hot now exclusivity," very high quality, and a refreshing cup of cucumber-lemon water as you enter the store where the owner has invited you down to get a first look of the new stuff in that she knows will fit your daughter.

Difference on price? Yeah. It's called capitalism, and it works.

[aways]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
Unions...plain and simple...They do not care if they provide cheap products to the poor, or employ many, or bring up depressed areas...it is all about union jobs and strongarming.

I think you're right. Unions would mean slightly higher wages for WM employees, but ultimately higher prices for consumers as WalMart passes along the increased cost of doing business, leading to an inflationary spiral that hurts the poor the most...

[skipdup]

I hate unions!

[techweenie]

Originally posted by aways
I think you're right. Unions would mean slightly higher wages for WM employees, but ultimately higher prices for consumers as WalMart passes along the increased cost of doing business, leading to an inflationary spiral that hurts the poor the most...

Store employees aren't the biggest cost.

And WalMart (and many others) skate around the political issues of Made in (insert third world country here) labels by going to places like Saipan where it's legal (thanks, Tom DeLay) to use a "Made in USA" label, but have working conditions that would horrify American consumers.

[RallyJon]

I'm not sure that Wal-mart could handle a union. Think how bad their customer service is now, then stack the usual "they can't fire me" union worker apathy on top of that. The checkout lines would be even longer, if that's possible...

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally posted by aways
I think you're right. Unions would mean slightly higher wages for WM employees, but ultimately higher prices for consumers as WalMart passes along the increased cost of doing business, leading to an inflationary spiral that hurts the poor the most...

Given scale, I think this is a myth. WM sales could absorb A LOT of increased costs. I give them kudos for the best example of data management known to man. I think, if they wanted to, they could give a little more to the average worker and the bottom line would only be increased with happier employees and more productivity.

it's a tough to strike this balance: happy employees who understand they have a stake in the welfare of the company vs. overpaid employees who are just sucking it dry. Complicated to be sure, and so much has to do with management, but at the core of low-cost shopping. I htink WM has overall done a good job with some exceptions. I think if they were magnamous iwht a healthy raise for all it first be well received and then later abused.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally posted by skipdup
I hate unions!

I'm not a big fan now either Skip. Very important in their day, now all we need is Management to be cognizant of everyday worker needs, and that includes $ and non-$ things.

Unions today are more about saving their own skins vs. getting anything done for their base.

[Superman]

Originally posted by aways
I don't particularly like to shop in WalMart either, but that's not my question. Why do liberal elites want to prevent people from shopping there if they want/need to? Answer: In reality they don't give a ***** about lower-income people, they just want their votes on election day.

If I post information related to the substance of your question, it will be for the benefit of others. You my friend, are using some stereotypes that betray your information sources, and your lack of historical perspective. Until very recently, "liberal elites" was an oxymoron and it has been sheer marketing genius that has contrived this perception that libs are the rich folks, and cons are the working poor. For eighty years this country knew that the opposite was true and still is. The largest and most expensive vehicles I see are the ones with the Bush/Cheney stickers still on, and the Subaru Legacy Wagons are where I find the liberal bumper stickers. The party of business is the Republican party, and the "social" party is the Democratic party.

So, whether I post some information about why Wal-Mart stores are avoided by communities (libs and cons alike) because of the damage they do, I don't think you are in a position to assess the information objectively anyway.

Your question....."Why do liberal elites hate it when poor people have a place to go shopping?" is similar to "When did you stop beating your wife?" It's worse, in fact.

[deathpunk dan]

the 'liberals' that have responded thus far have absolutely owned the topic starter.

I could not even begin to address the Problems with Wal-mart in a forum such as this.

Kudos to those that are able to summarize more quickly coherently than I'd be able to.

[dhoward]

Originally posted by Shaun 84 Targa
....
Lastly, as a self-described "asset buyer," that is I will save for something of quality and and go without before I will buy something just to have it. WM carries lowest common denominator products, so not much a reason to buy there other than basic commodities.

and the problem with that is they end up pushing the higher-end and specialty stores out. Same way with Lowes and Home Depot. You WILL use their product selections or shop forever looking for what you really want. Chinese tools, warped lumber, crap. Try to find anyone who knows anything other than possibly what isle something is in. I can find anything I want on the internet, cheaper too, it just takes a week to get it.
I really miss real hardware stores....

[skipdup]

Supe- Are you claiming there is not a sub-section of liberals who are rich/elite? Like, ohhh I don't know, Hollywood?

Which liberals do we hear from? The poor wons who are starving? Or, John Kerry and his catsup lady?

Come on man... He didn't say the liberals, all who are elite.

- Skip

[Mulhollanddose]

Originally posted by aways
I think you're right. Unions would mean slightly higher wages for WM employees, but ultimately higher prices for consumers as WalMart passes along the increased cost of doing business, leading to an inflationary spiral that hurts the poor the most...

no aways, I am absolutely right...there is no question about it...The very reason our cars are crap, our union manufactured goods are too expensive and crap, and jobs are driven out of the country. If you do not play by the union's playbook then they will badmouth you and attempt to destroy your business. Democrats are in the unions back pocket and, therefore, have to bad-mouth corporations and support whatever the union cause (they scratch eachother's backs).

[legion]

Originally posted by dhoward
I really miss real hardware stores....

We still have one in town. I was looking for new handles for my shower. Turns out my shower has valves that are not made anymore (Milwaukee/Universal Rundle). I had to take off work early to go to the hardware store (hours 9:00 - 5:00, M-F). When I got there, I got ignored because I was not a "regular". After waiting for 45 minutes to be acknowledged, I was told that they did not carry what I was looking for. Haven't been back since.

[skipdup]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
no aways, I am absolutely right...there is no question about it...The very reason our cars are crap, our union manufactured goods are too expensive and crap, and jobs are driven out of the country. If you do not play by the union's playbook then they will badmouth you and attempt to destroy your business. Democrats are in the unions back pocket and, therefore, have to bad-mouth corporations and support whatever the union cause (they scratch eachother's backs).

they're thugs & crooks.

[Superman]

Originally posted by Mulhollanddose
Unions...plain and simple...They do not care if they provide cheap products to the poor, or employ many, or bring up depressed areas...it is all about union jobs and strongarming.

You are correct for a change. It is about strongarming. When a large business gets to bargain with each worker separately, the business hold all the cards and has all the clout. Wal-Mart strongarms both its suppliers and its workers. Unionization would give the workers a single voice. Unionism, pure and simple, is about workers pooling their clout so that discussions of wages and working conditions is a fair fight. Yes, unions sometimes misbehave. So do businesses. But if a business is allowed, like Wal-Mart has been allowed, to completely avoid and evade dealing with workers' representatives, then it maintains the upper hand.

Frankly, American commercial interests should be a bit negative on Wal-Mart for this reason. There has been a constant weakening of the NLRA, or at least there has been a more and more business-friendly NLRB lately, and Wal-Mart is illustrating why the NLRB should go back to its original mandate which is to make businesses recognize workers' representatives where the workers have properly elected that representative. In other words, Wal-Mart is likely to remind the Board of its mission, which will tip the balance back toward working men and women. That's got to be a little scary for business barons who see the Big Picture.

[legion]

The thing that bothers me most about unions is that it is a one-time decision. The workers vote to unionize and which union will represent them and it is done and set in stone. From that day on, the workers no longer have any power over the union, and can not de-unionize even if they wanted to.

Imagine if presidential elections worked this way. Back when the country was founded, you would vote for a party, and all future leaders would come from that party...