We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Samizdata quote of the day “I think that maybe – just maybe – anti-Wal Mart sentiment has more to do with an aversion to the white, rural ethnology the store sometimes represents than its labor practices. We can’t have our Ethiopian restaurants and esoteric bookstores blighted by NASCAR culture.”
– The always good American blogger Radley Balko, telling it like it is.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Too true.
Btw, check out this TCS piece on the huge productivity gains brought about by box stores like Walmart.
http://www.techcentralstation.com/061705A.html
Great stuff! This book is corroborating evidence for why confiscatory tax rates in Africa are the primary reason the continent is a cesspool. Especially relevant is this excerpt from the interview:
“But then you say: well, the rich countries today have high taxes and big government. So why doesn’t that matter? Well the reason it doesn’t matter today is that everybody is formal. Informality fades out because as you go, the only way you get high productivity operations throughout the whole economy is to have it dominated by big firms of scale where there is substantial division of labor and high productivity and so on and so forth. And so that means that all firms pay these taxes so that the playing field is again equal because everybody pays the same fraction of taxes.”
Needless to say, an economy will never reach the “formality stage” with confiscatory tax rates in place.
Machine Ghost
Speaking as someone who knows several people who are part of the nascar culture, the chief objection amongst them is that Walmart has destroyed the ability of many smaller stores to survive.
Certainly it’s not a view I share but as usual, the picture is more complex than a soundbite can express.
Rich
Richard,
Your NASCAR buddies might moan that Walmart has destroyed the ability of many smaller stores to survive, but I’ll bet none of them ever supported the small shops when they were still around (that’s why they all closed). You can also guarantee that these starry eyed romantics would be moaning a lot more if Walmart closed and the small, high priced shops returned.
Class and regional bias certainly pay a big part in Walmart bashing. Saying somebody, “looks like they shop at Walmart,” is an often heard code phrase for poor and uneducated.
I got to see the effects of Walmart moving into my rural hometown with a population of 16,000. First, Walmart didn’t displace locally owned small businesses but instead the regional chain stores like TG&Y, Gibsons and national chains like K-mart, Sears and Montgomery Wards.
Second, over a period of about 5 years around the time Walmart opened a superstore in the town, a lot of business came and went (due I think in main to other factors) but now the business community is quite vibrant. Local businesses shifted away from trying to compete with Walmart et al in providing commodity goods and instead began to provide specialized and localized services. (There are a large number of locally owned franchises of national chains as well.)
I think Walmart eventually enriches the small communities it moves into. The money people that local people save at Walmart is money they can spend at local businesses. Walmart gets grief because it large and highly visible. If ten regional chain stores all divided up Walmart’s business, the effect on the local communities would be the same but nobody would notice.
Actually, what gets in my eye is that Wal-Mart could have revitalized the small-town downtowns, simply with more tasteful architecture and a little respect.
Instead, they went with the “Fuck You” school of architecture, placed their box stores outside the town limits, and went with a series of lies posing as commercials.
“Always the lowest price. Always” became “Always the low price” became “Always.”
And when you cater to a market for whom price is everything, of course you’re going to get merchandise from the lowest-cost supplier.
In years to come, when people wonder how China became so wealthy, and yet still remained a communist state, Wal-Mart will be one of the major reasons.
And please don’t give me the “market forces” lecture, either — I’m fully aware of the supply/demand thing, thank you.
You can make money, and lots of it, without stepping all over people and ruining their lives. Wal-Mart chose the other way, and hid it all behind a phoney folksiness which is just nauseating.
The hell with them. I’ll never shop there, ever.
Kim du Toit at June 19, 2005 05:59 PM
Sure doesn’t sound like you understand that supply and demand thing.
If Walmart had shown the “respect” that you allude to (which, btw is a totally flexible term and could mean anything to anyone) then another Walmart would have popped up doing exactly what the first Walmart is doing now.
Kim du Toit : that’s quite a scary post you’ve submitted there.
Seems you’re defending the indefensible, from a free-marketeer’s point of view.
“Actually, what gets in my eye is that Wal-Mart could have revitalized the small-town downtowns, simply with more tasteful architecture and a little respect.”
Most downtowns of small towns are very old, usually pre-automobile. The store spaces are small and parking non-existant. Trying to fit a bulk distribution center into a cramped downtown would mean leveling half of it. Walmart builds on the outskirts of towns on cheap land with easy access and plenty of parking. The downtown areas, like downtowns of larger cities convert to office space or low traffic speciality stores.
In my hometown, the move of stores away from downtown began in the late 60’s when a large strip mall was built on the edge of town anchored by a regional department store. Around 1980 they built a mall on the other side of town anchored by a K-mart and JC Penny. Downtown was well underway to transition to office space by the time Walmart showed up in the late 80’s.
Historic downtowns are fading because are built around horses and buggies and foot traffic. Usually, they are to small to serve the needs of contemporary communities even if everybody tried to shop there. They just work better as information centers than distribution centers.
I reiterate, Walmart is merely the most visible manifestation of trend that started in at least in the 60’s. If it wasn’t Walmart it would be other box stores.
Funny, that’s what the whiney European chattering class said about the MacDonalds facade, neglecting to comprehend why the very same facade was so ubiquitous in the first place.
I don’t quite get Kim’s rage about Walmart, since a lot of his points pretty much undermine the case for any big company. I am seriously baffled.
I don’t like them because I have gotten some VERY crappy items there that should have lasted years. Such as a coffee perculator for use on a campfire that broke before it was used the first time…that caffeine-free morning in the woods I swore off buying anything that’s supposed to be ‘durable’ there ever again.
Johnathon, Kim’s attitude is perfectly in tune with marketplace issues… he doesn’t like some of their practices so he doesn’t shop there, there’s nothing wrong with that – its part of how the market works : If you like a product or company you buy it from them- If you don’t like the company you don’t have to buy it- Kim doesn’t like so Kim doesn’t buy.
If Walmart want Kim’s trade its up to them to look at how they operate and change to accomodate those of a like mind to Kim.
We all operate like Kim to one extent or another.
The first Wal-Mart to open inside of Milwaukee did so at the site of an early shopping mall which had turned into a ghost town because nobody shopped at any of the small local specialty stores which had been in it.
The most significant development regarding Wal-Mart’s impact on the retail economy here is the fact that Big Lot’s, a retailer more focused on low price than Wal-Mart is, just opened their newest Milwaukee store, deliberately located across the street from one of the locations of the above-mentioned competitor.
Balko’s absolutely right, but I’m not sure why he sees such aversion as a negative — are we supposed to regard “white, rural ethnology” as a paragon of human culture? I was raised in it, and I sure as hell don’t want to go back.
Also from the item:
[T]hey should be shopping at more tasteful stores, anyway.
Wal-Mart seems to agree.
Small stores that gave good service and had lots of loyalty survive. Walmart showing up does not mean the death of small town businesses it just means they have to adapt. The whole small-town centre death is myth spread by anti-corporate types.
Speaking of free-market NASCAR realised quite a while ago that if they did not adapt and make themselves attractive to families, non-Southern-rednecks and women they would stagnate. Hence why there is NASCAR at NH Motorspeedway and in other places north of the Mason-Dixon line. NASCAR’s of “road-racing” for a few races led to an expansion of their viewer base as well.
One other point about NASCAR. In today’s NASCAR race at Michigan International Speedway, all 43 cars that qualified, they all started the race and competed. NASCAR-culture indeed.
The relentless negativity of some to Walmart is based on the same hatred once shown toward Standard Oil, or the Union Pacific, or General Motors, and now commonly seen in any conversation about Microsoft.
Walmart is too big, too aggressive, too succesful. Nohing else really matters. Just like Microsoft. Some people get a very perverse pleasure out of hating and despising anyone who is successful.
And, heaven forbid, if that entity is inconsiderately competitive, even aggressively profit seeking, well, after all, could there be anything more crass, more unsophisticated, more—redneck rural Nascarry.
I could care less about Walmart. I routinely patronize a midwestern competitor. But the disdainful fury of the anti-walmartists is an interesting phenomenon.
I save my indignation for other things.
Wal-Mart has co-opted the gun of the law by begging the government to exercise its power of eminent domain to seize private property. That is wrong. Everything else they do can be excused, as far as I can see.
Tim: Even “white trash” are human beings. I have no problem calling stupid stupid, and evil evil. But as I grow older, I choose to make an active effort to try not to hate people for merely being ignorant, and reserve my hatred for those who are actually evil. My grandmother calls this “Christian”. Call it what you will.
Author John Ross has an interesting take on the Wal-Mart versus Mom & Pop saga as it relates to gun sales.
(Link)
I suspect Kim Du Toit is simply torqued over “some” Wal Mart stores decisions to stop carrying firearms and
associated supplies.
My experience with Walmart parallels Shannon Love’s in every detail. A Super Center moved into the small Texas town where I grew up some years ago, so I have a pretty good background on what Walmart means.
I am utterly baffled by Kim du Toit’s little rant. Still, its his money. If he wants to pay inflated prices for the commoditized stuff Walmart sells, its no skin off my nose.
* Over 600,000 Wal-Mart employees lack healthcare. An estimated 1 in 5 of the children of Wal-Mart employees is on federal or state healthcare plans.
* Wal-Mart is China’s 8th largest trading partner (ahead of Russia and Germany) and has exported jobs from the U.S. to over 5000 individual suppliers in China.
* Wal-Mart currently represents 8% of total retail sales in the US (non-auto).
* The State of California already spends over $89 million dollars subsidizing Wal-Mart’s underpaid employees in the state because they don’t offer a living wage.
* Walmart is agressively (using tactics of questionable legality) against its employees organizing to level the playing field in discussions of wages and working conditions.
* Costco — a direct competitor of Walmart offers good products at bargain prices without abusing the desperation of retail workers.
http://www.WalmartWatch.com
If California weren’t imposing a tax burden worthy of the Ninth Circle of Hell, I bet Wal-Mart wages would be a living wage.
Wages are supposed to be based on the type and quality of work, not on “livability.”
Combined federal, state and local total burdens equal $15,605 per working taxpayer, or 35.5% of personal income.
This is roughly the same as income tax rates around the world. On the other hand, most international jurisdictions also have value added (sales) taxes of 10 -20 %.
Stop whining — you get what you pay for and tax rates are not an excuse for paying people less than a living wage.
If you work a full day, you should be able to house, clothe and feed yourself without resorting to public assistance. Public assistance and public health insurance is a subsidy to Wal-Mart. Why can’t they internalize the costs of their business.
From your taxes to Wal-Mart’s owners. Why not just shut Wal-Mart down and guarantee profits for the Waltons directly from the taxpayer
Randomizer’s says that Costco offers goods as cheap as Walmart but without exploiting low-wage labour. So why don’t all those oppressed proletarians at Walmart apply for a job at Costco, then? Sounds like a no-brainer to me.
On the “liveability” issue, Randomizer says that the the taxpayer has to support Walmart staff to a certain extent so they can have a living wage (undefined). The wonky thing about this argument though is that Walmart staff are among those same taxpayers. Why not take a simpler line and just remove all low-paid people from income tax, period?
The website you link to is full of the usual mercantilist claptrap that we have become wearily familiar with over the past few years. We are not buying it.
Every Walmart employee is free to apply for a job at Costco.
So? How does the system not work?
How much have American consumers benefited due to the cheap consumer goods offered thanks to Chinese labour?
Good for them! I’m sure the huge number of Americans with pension plans holding Wal-Mart stock are delighted.
All the other points have been dealt with above.
There are so many reasons why the virtual monopolist Wal-mart bad for America it is difficult to know where to start.
WM is leading the race to the bottom in America:
Ever-cheaper prices have consequences. Says Steve Dobbins, president of thread maker Carolina Mills: “We want clean air, clear water, good living conditions, the best health care in the world–yet we aren’t willing to pay for anything manufactured under those restrictions.”
http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/77/walmart.html
Wal-Mart was the only one of the top 10 drug chains to refuse to stock Preven when Gynetics Inc. introduced the morning-after contraceptive in 1999. Roderick L. Mackenzie, Gynetics’ founder and nonexecutive chairman, says senior Wal-Mart executives told his employees that they did not want their pharmacists grappling with the “moral dilemma” of abortion.
…
Wal-Mart’s cultural gatekeeping has served to narrow the mainstream for entertainment offerings while imparting to it a rightward tilt.
…
everyday low prices come at a cost…. failure of hundreds of stores will cost their owners dearly and put thousands out of work, only some of whom will find jobs at Wal-Mart, most likely at lower pay.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_40/b3852001_mz001.htm
Suppliers are pushed to the margins of profitability and then, frequently, abandoned for house brands or foreign suppliers.
Union-busting is illegal (but not when the Adminstrations cops look the other way).
….. anyway — I’m done here — love them if you will — I’ll never shop there and will convince as many people as I can to do likewise.
Randomizer – Don’t shop there. Not many here give a toss one way or the other.
And your flaky method of arguing your case – make some silly claim then post a moonbat URL – is deeply unconvincing.
I’m glad you’re done here. You’re lowering the tone of the debate.
“Over 600,000 Wal-Mart employees lack healthcare. An estimated 1 in 5 of the children of Wal-Mart employees is on federal or state healthcare plans.”
It’s Wal-Mart’s fault that Federal and state governments give away free healthcare to low-income people? I don’t remember Wal-Mart being in on those decisions, or even existing when they were made.
“The State of California already spends over $89 million dollars subsidizing Wal-Mart’s underpaid employees in the state because they don’t offer a living wage.”
Take it up with the idiots in California giving away public money. Wal-Mart, again, had no part of that decision.
“If you work a full day, you should be able to house, clothe and feed yourself without resorting to public assistance.”
Not if your work doesn’t accomplish the economic equivalent of housing, clothing, and feeding someone else. And while we’re at it, minimum wage would be plenty to house, clothe, and feed someone if the cost of housing weren’t being pushed up by building restrictions and other laws.
“Public assistance and public health insurance is a subsidy to Wal-Mart.”
No, it’s a subsidy for people who can’t get jobs better than those on offer from Wal-Mart.