Fixing the Blame
Ramblings, Economics September 10th. 2007, 11:58amI don’t know how many times I’ve heard people complain about Wal-mart driving mom & pop stores out of business as if they share no burden of responsibility in making that happen. You see, in the pseudo-capatalistic society we live in here, it’s impossible for a retailer like Wal-mart to push a smaller company into bankruptcy by shear force of its own will or presence.
When all is said and done, Wal-mart still relies on the consumer to do that for them.
It’s pretty basic economics, but Wal-mart, somehow, gets all the blame. It’s as if these people are admitting their lemming-like status as consumers who will go wherever the lowest prices are, regardless of what consequences it may have for their neighbors.
And the reasoning behind blaming Wal-mart goes like this… Since Wal-mart knows that all these people are lemmings who can’t think for themselves about the long-term consequences of their actions, they are therefore responsible for the outcome of those actions. Backwards as it is, that’s the way people think about it.
Wal-mart knows that people will buy from them if they build a store in a small community in rural Missouri. Wal-mart knows that it will take customers away from the established small-businesses that are run by locals. And if they build a store while being aware of these things, then it’s their fault for coming in and being so appealing to the consumers.
But I could go on and on about how this relates to possible government intervention, freedom of the individual and choice, anti-trust laws, and Wal-mart-like employment practices.
But I won’t, because this is really about the sign above. A sign that fixes the blame, where it should be… on you.
Loading ...
September 10th, 2007 at 12:53 pm
Ah yes. Let’s blame poor people for trying to make it on what they can afford.
I know many folks that live:
1. Too far to walk to another store (there is virtually no public transportation).
2. Could (if they could make more money in an “at will” state) buy the same groceries for a higher price at another store by sacrificing somewhere else in their already tight budget.
Not everyone that shops at WM wants to!
September 10th, 2007 at 12:56 pm
You also forgot to mention that when WM moves in to a town, they can afford to LOSE money for the first six months in order to force local businesses out.
September 10th, 2007 at 7:37 pm
Soitgoes, there aren’t so many Walmarts around that they can claim to be the close to most people … meaning they are, generally, a farther walk.
I’m with Chris. Why is it that Walmart is demonized by bringing a good value to consumers (specifically more for less) … when no rational person would pay more for less value.
The reason that (sic) Mom and Pop shops go out of business is that consumers do view them as adding value above that offered by Walmart.
For what its worth, I do avoid Walmart. I find Walmart’s service and quality below my standards and am willing to pay more to get what I want.
I’d love it is more were like me … the increase in demand would drawn more suppliers.
September 10th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
Chris,
I often find myself in just such a discussion with my Mother. She likes to think she misses Mom and Pop shops, and while she likes to browse through them, she rarely buys anything.
Instead she detours to, and actually buys at Walmart.
All that would be fine with me, but she also spends an inordinate amount of time complaining about how corporate Walmart is putting the Mom and Pop shops she loves out of business … sigh …
I’m thinking of a word, but won’t be explicit since she might stumble by this blog sometime … Hi Mom! … you know I love you! (smooch)
In any event, wiith regards to the implication that some are forced against their desires to shop Walmart … my Mother and her click, of similar minded friends, are *very* well off, but being unable muster sufficient control over their fancy free spending they stretch their dollars as far as they can go … very rational if you ask me.
September 11th, 2007 at 9:36 am
I thought I made it clear that this was about the people who actually have a choice.
My problem isn’t with those who are compelled by their economic status to buy at the lowest price possible. My problem is with those who demonstrate a certain amount of hypocrisy - like Ben’s mother (if he won’t say it, I will; sorry Ben) - in their criticism of big box stores. Their words say that they value mom & pop stores more, but their actions say something different.
Certainly the ones who almost rely on the lowest price to survive aren’t the same people bitching about a store coming in and providing the goods at that price for them.
September 11th, 2007 at 10:34 am
Chris,
Thanks for clearing that up.
I happen to be one of those that don’t have much of a choice and can honestly say that I don’t buy anything but groceries at WM.
I just can’t see buying garbage (most of WM’s “durable goods”) made in China.
I’ve liked your other posts in the past and will come back again I’m sure.
Take care.
November 26th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
“exceptions” speeling aint wright on that mayours cine.
November 28th, 2007 at 10:03 am
I just wante to say, while your point is absolutely dead on in the hypocracy department, what people forget is the poor practices of WM. They are among (if not THE) worst violator of human rights on the planet. They are the only business I can think of that get a warning before the “random” search for illigal workers. They also have no quams with desicrating historic places (incan temples etc) for profit. Now it is the fault of stupid fucks, or even intelligent people in denial that they will buy it when WM comes to town. My only real point is that many people dont pay enough attention to the other things happening behind the scenes, the things that need to be stopped.
November 28th, 2007 at 10:44 am
Very true, Josh. I mentioned “Wal-mart-like employment practices” near then end, but didn’t want to dive into that for fear of inviting the finger-pointing that inevitably comes with such a discussion. I wanted to keep the focus on the fact that consumers share a large part of the responsibility. But very nice job of summarizing that part of the issue.