We’ve been talking about big business and monopolies for the past week and Wal-Mart has come up a few times. I found a very interesting video (from a liberal source) that does seek answers from both sides of the issue (Wal-Mart represents itself). You can read the transcript or stream the video. I’d suggest you watch the video to get the full picture. Is Wal-Mart a monopoly? What are the consequences if it is? I think looking at big business at the turn of the century is really important and it’s equally fascinating to contemplate this right now in the present moment. I’m eager to here your thoughts.
http://www.democracynow.org/2005/11/18/a_debate_does_wal_mart_work
p.s. thank you so much for all of your thoughtful comments on the last blog check-in. I was the last to respond.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
After watching the video, I'm gonna havta lean towards the anti-Walmart side. I do think that Walmart was/is, in a sense, a monopoly. They were essentially forcing their employees to receive government aid, even if they worked full time! I mean, that is a little ridiculous because it's not as if these people are not working. They are given an unfair ultimatum.
By definition, a monopoly is a group that has "exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices." In that aspect, I do not think Walmart is a monopoly. What about Target?? It is essentially the same type of store. I only think that Walmart is a monopoly in the medical benefits aspect. They just need to be better employers.
Also, you could tell that the Ron guy had a hard time defending Walmart. He was like a really bad lawyer trying to prove his guilty client's innocence, and it just wasn't working. The lady was owning him at mostly everything and it made him look bad.
I found myself kind of wavering between the two sides as I was watching the video... and I still kind of am. I agree with certain aspects of each side--at the end of the video, I found myself leaning a bit toward the pro-Walmart side despite the fact that the woman, who I extremely disliked, obviously had the better argument.
I don't know if I can exactly label Walmart as a monopoly, but I can say with much surety that this chain is closer than not. As we are learning now, Walmart's way of treating their employees and going about their business is perhaps immoral, but at times, we also have to look through a more realistic, objective view. Maybe we want a utopian world, maybe we want a perfectly moral and clean society in which businesses will treat their employees well and be sure to provide some sort of adequate health care so that they do not have to depend on governmental aid. We all know, at least to some degree, that such a clean-slate business world cannot ever be perfectly achieved. Yes, we can strive for it but to be extremely honest, that thought usually comes after dealing with the practical sides of business.
Having said that, Walmart collects 3% rev and seemingly employs people who are undocumented, illegal, poor, and generally just simply people who are underprivileged. 3% does not sound like a lot, however big the corporation may be--besides, the bigger the corporation, more money may come in, but proportionally there is that much more money going out to the government and distributed amongst themselves. Walmart's also employing people who can employed at... I honestly don't know where such disadvantaged pepole may find work as easily as they may at such a huge corporation. Yes, it's wrong that Walmart does not provide adequate health aid, but I do not see what they can do without totally disregarding the practical issues they must deal with first. I may just blindly be missing out on an important point made by the anti-Walmart side, but just to me, from my gut feeling, it feels as though Walmart is just trying to balance out practical and ideal, trying to give employment to people who may not find jobs at all while trying to take some profit of their own. It's hard to say Walmart should give up their own business goals at the expense of other people, or else why would the business exist at all? It's not as if Walmart aimed to become a non-profit organization...? I dont know.
O.K. so first and foremost, that girl was incredibly annoying. I don't know if she planned her responses in advance, if someone else was telling her what to say or if she naturally talks like a smiling computer.
Anyways, after getting that off my chest, I wanted to address the last point about manufacturing in China. Wal-Mart is using cheap labor; from a business standpoint, that is the most economical way to make money. And in this case, it's not that immoral. Why should they use labor from their own country. The video says they are using Chinese labor instead of American Labor. Why should they use American labor? The only reason would be to give jobs to the American working class as oppose to the Chinese. Wal-Mart is not here to save the world and get everyone a job. As if is did employ more, imagine how bad the insurance plan would be then...
I agree with Yoon Yoon; Wal-mart is no aimed to be a non-profit organization. Its goal is to make money. Just like every other company, it is going to make money however possible. Taking into account how many people are employed, if Wal-Mart (which is surprisingly hard to type) provided better insurance for each one of them, Wal-Mart would not be able to promise its everyday low prices. They would then make less money and have to fire the employees.
When America had small shops and businesses prior to and around 1885, the boss was right there with the employees working and talking. They sympathized with the employees because they spoke about their families and such.
By 1900, when monopolies arose, Rockefeller didn't hear about or think about the individual families he affected. He just worked for the money.
Here with Wally Wal, it employs so many people that it can't think about each individual. That is not to say that such blindness is good but it is inevitable with monopolies.
So, I do believe that Wal-Mart is a monopoly because it employs on such a massive scale that it is impersonal. However, like Neha said, Target is a competitor so Wal-MArt is not the only one giving great prices.
On the other other hand, Wal-Mart completely dominates the small businesses around it that can't compete with its low prices.
Paulina
After watching this video i definetly feel more anti-Walmart than i had before. With the massive amount of income walmart recieves, not being able to pay their workers even slightly reasonable wages or benefits is unacceptable. However, i dont believe that they can be considered a "monopoly", as they don't necessarily control and set prices for these kinds of stores nor do i believe there is no competition. as Neha said, Target is a great example. both stores have many identical aspects and Target is extremely popular, probably as well known as Walmart. Although Walmart is a company thats perhaps "walking a thin line" and is one to watch over carefully, i believe there are more controlling monopolies out there that deserve more scrutiny, as i dont believe Walmart is a complete powerhouse over their particular market.
At this point, after watching the video, I am in between sides. There were good points made by both sides of the argument however, I do not believe Walmart quite falls under being categorized as a monopoly. On the pro-walmart side, I believe it benefits many employees for it opens the availability of simply getting a job. Yes, it may not be the best paying job, but consider not having a job at all. They would not even have the ability to buy their family food and what not. And yes, Walmart may have wiped out many small stores; however, I don't believe the smaller stores combined employed nearly as many people. Also, as stated by Yoon and Paulina, Walmart isn't a non-profit organization. It's goal is to make money. They will do what's necessary, such as using cheap labor from China. You also have to take into consideration the taxes they must pay. The more income you earn, the more taxes you pay. On the flip side of things, I do feel that Walmart should pay their employees a little more. It is almost ridiculous that full-time workers still have to rely on the government for aid and it saddens me that the lounge during lunch time is just filled with workers sitting...not eating. I feel that they should be making at least enough money to have lunch..yes? So yea..I really don't know. They provide plenty with jobs, but not enough benefits.
Walmart is not a monopoly. Though Walmart has acquired a vast market share, the emergence of other all-in-one competitors do not give it a “monopoly” status. Its dominance has not yet impeded free market. There are still many alternatives to the service Walmart provides. It’s size and dominance is not here to stay. Any other competitor can match Walmart’s aggressive cost cutting and wide inventory. Its “rock-bottom” pricing strategy is nothing special. Over the internet, there are plenty of other sellers that use aggressive cost cutting to beat out competitors.
With hundreds of billions of dollars in revenues each year, Walmart is the world’s largest company. Walmart is sprawled everywhere across the states and is spreading into the international market. I don’t think its dominance is here to stay.
Do you think low-wages are against capitalism?
I am always one to defend human rights, so I definitely have a biased against Wal-Mart and monopolies in general. I can understand the argument that people in low-income areas need cheap goods, and Wal-Marts do provide a lot of jobs. But, I also believe that the Wal-Mart corporation could definitely afford to provide better health-care plans for their employees without drastically raising prices. They don't necessarily have to raise wages.
I don't like the idea of total monopolies, though the world does need big business to support the economy. If we eliminated Wal-Marts and other large chain stores, prices would skyrocket, and we would lose a lot of jobs. I think we need to have a better system of checks and balances on these large corporations. I'm not an ecomomist, so I don't know how that would be accomplished, but I do think it is possible to pass legislation that requires large companies to provide good health-care planse for their employees.
I recommend Michael Moore's "The Big One". You don't have to agree with everything he says, but it might show you a different perspective on these issues.
Initially I tried to stay open-minded to both sides of the argument but during the video I found myself leaning towards the anti-Walmart side. I definitely do think that Walmart could be considered a monoply(not by the definition that Neha gave) but by how little money it's employees receive for health care. A lot of the people who work at Walmart work there because of the lack of other opportunities and it seems like the employers who they interviewed take their jobs seriously but also really need more benefits.
I agree with Neha about Target, I'm having trouble seeing the difference between the two stores. Do they pay differently or give better benefits? When you go into each store the overall feeling is the same ...
I also think that the woman had a somewhat better argument than the man did. I would really like to see the picture she was talking about with the arrows pointing to everything that was/is made in China.
Even though I'm on the anti-Walmart side I do agree with Yoonkee -- there's no way that a "clean-slate business world" can ever be achieved. I can see why it would be difficult for a company as large as Walmart to create exceptional benefits for its employees, but I don't see any harm in trying.
- Rebecca
I agree with Neha and Adam in that Walmart is not a monopoly by definition. It has too many competitors and doesn't not have enough of an effect on the economy to be considered one. However, Walmart treats its employees as if it has a monopoly on employment. Despite the fact that it is an extremely successful and enormous corporation, Walmart needs to show some morality in dealing with its employees. As a business, I understand that Walmart's ultimate goal is to generate income, but it should not ignore its employees' well-being. After all, Walmart's success depends on the people who work for it. As a prosperous chain store, Walmart can afford to raise wages or provide healthcare for its employees. Although I am not aware of all the financial details of this corporation, I think that it could still thrive if it took better care of its employees.
Candace
During the video, like Yoonkee, I also felt that I could not choose whether I was pro-Walmart or anti-Walmart because I agreed with arguments from both sides. It does seem that Walmart does cut corners in order to make a larger profit, but on the other hand, Walmart does some good for example hire people who would otherwise not be able to get a job. The recommendations mentioned at the beginning of the video shocked me because it said that Walmart should hire more part time employees and discourage unhealthy people to apply for jobs. Both the part time jobs and healthy people make it easier for Walmart to deny healthcare and turn their employees to government aid. I do think that Walmart should provide healthcare for their employees. Also, compared to retail stores, Walmart's healthcare benefits are much better meaning that their workers are in fact receiving more benefits than many other workers. I agree with the guy that says "If the government is giving health coverage away for free, how can Walmart compete with that?" I am very confused as to which side I am on because I agree with both arguments. I do agree that Walmart, as a billion dollar corporation, should be able to offer a better healthcare package but on the other hand, they are the employers of hundreds of people who would in other cases not be able to find a job. If i worked at Walmart, I would definitely be complaining about my healthcare services. I can not say, however, that if i was in charge of Walmart, that I would run the company any differently. These are some of the disadvantages that we have with big business. As a competitor in big business, Walmart is doing everything it can to survive in a dog eat dog world. On a more personal note, I would love it if Walmart concentrated on its workers more. They must find some sort of compromise!!
Also, I agree with Neha when she says that Walmart isn't exactly a monopoly. I feel that this video, for me, didn't exactly answer the question of whether or not Walmart is a monopoly.This video concentrated on the impact of Walmart on its employers, not its competitors.
So I'm definitely going to be on the Anti-Walmart side. The story about the workers having an hour lunch break but just sitting there not eating and people not being able to offer them money is just terrible/devastating. I'm still not so sure/I don't really understand the whole healthcare/medicare program and how it is connected to companies. However although I am glad that Walmart employs illegal and poor people they should treat them right instead of taking total advantage of them. But then again they are a business so they can act as they please even though sometimes they can be wrong/immoral. Walmart in a way is a monopoly just because it has such a large control over the market but it does not have total control. there stll are a lot of other very successful stores like walmart. BUtttt Walmart is so strong that it has the ability to manipulate the system of wages and medicare while still having tons of employees. Not sure how it all works.
-Brittany
I don't think that WalMart can be considered a monopoly. However, that does not mean that I like the store and how it treats its employees at all. In fact, I find myself on the anti-WalMart side. To not be able to pay your employees when you have that much money coming in, is awful. WalMart is forcing its employees into a hard place. On one hand they do have a job where they are earning some kind of an income. On the other hand, there are definitely other jobs that they could find where their employer treats them better.
After watching the movie I find myself leaning more towards the anti walmart side just because of how badly the workers are treated with healthcare benefits. Also the mans arguement was pretty weak when trying to defend walmart. I dont believe that walmart is a monopoly yet but I feel that it could happen one day if the competition falls behind. But at the same time I agree with Yoonkie because it is hard to get ahead in the bussiness without losing some of your morals.
-Sayumi
I must say, after seeing this video, that I agree with Tracy Sefl about Walmart and it's inability to support its employees. I caught that Walmart makes 240 billion dollars in sales, well even though it seems pretty cool to be a billionaire, the owner of Walmart can try to settle with maybe 240 million dollars and give health care to his employees. It kind of disgusts me that someone making 240 billion dollars can't even give a small fraction of their money to help others in dire need. When I saw that Walmart employees had to choose between health care and feeding their family, I was shocked. I honestly had absolutely no idea that this was going on in Walmarts all around the country.
I understand that Walmart is doing a service to 1.3 million "unskilled" employees and even undocumented employees as well, and giving that to these 1.3 million people must help their lives so much. But obviously not enough. Nobody with the determination to get a job should be filing for bankruptcy. They're working!
Also, the Walmart owner and the 138 million people who buy Walmart's goods need to consider its competitors. Although buyers do save money on the products sold at Walmart, we need to think about the workers in that video and try to make a sacrifice. I think we can pay a little more for our products to support these underpaid employees. If Walmart doesn't do well enough in its business, maybe it'll raise its prices and realize its treatment of its workers will no longer be tolerated.
I remember reading an article about Walmart in eighth grade when we had to read the newspaper for current event quizzes. The same issue was being discussed in 2004. And my family stopped shopping at Walmart. We go to our local grocery store right down the street or go to Costco (I LOVE COSTCO!), but we have not been shopping at Walmart for about 4 years now.
I agree with Neha and Andrea. I wish the videos had talked more about its competitors and how Walmart is affecting them. I'm sure that is a huge issue as well in of itself.
Walmart may not be a monopoly in the exact sense of the word, but still oppresses smaller businesses and frequently forces them to shut down. However, Walmart's worst aspect is clearly the way that they treat their employees. I was appalled by how the workers seemed to be faced with a choice between medical care and feeding themselves. While Walmart may operate within the boundaries of the law, it still seems to abuse the system in the way that it exploits government benefits. I think that if they have the resources to provide proper healthcare for their employees, then they should do it instead of relying on the government to take care of them. I also think that while it's great that Walmart gives jobs to unskilled employees, it still drives people out of jobs who may have spent their entire lives building. It's a lot cheaper to buy things at Walmart than it is at a traditional mom and pop store simply because Walmart has twisted the system to their favor so much. They ruthlessly disrupt the fabrics of so many lives, and I don't think there's much they can do to justify that.
Post a Comment