Walmart: Do You Love Them or Hate Them?
Our Patch Question of the Week is about Walmart, the super successful company that so many people love to hate. What do you think of the company's expansion in and around Atlanta?
Walmart is one of those companies that many people love to hate.
Just north of the Decatur city limits, Walmart and Selig Enterprises hope to demolish part of Suburban Plaza shopping center in the first half of 2013 to make way for a new Walmart Supercenter. The project has sparked angry protests from nearby residents and talk of a lawsuit to stop the project, but some people do support it.
In Sandy Springs, the city council quickly passed a moratorium on all big box stores, apparently after hearing rumors that Walmart wanted to come to town.
Walmart broke ground in the Westside Village in March despite complaints from some area residents that the company didn't do enough to design an attractive building, as it has in other locations. That store is expected to create 200 jobs and become a badly needed source of fresh groceries for the English Avenue and Vine City neighborhoods when it opens in early 2013.
And a Walmart neighborhood market _ the company's version of a neighborhood grocery store _ is reportedly moving into the Tucker Square shopping center. Because of their smaller size and focus on food, these stores haven't sparked the kind of anger that the supercenters often do.
So what do you think of Walmart? Do you see this store as serving an essential need? Is it just hip to hate Walmart? Tell us what you think in the comments area below.
dianne joy
7:38 am on Thursday, July 5, 2012
I have always thought Walmart at Surburban would be an improvement. It is a blighted strip mall and has been for way too long. If any of the ooponents would take the time to visit the walmart on p'tree ind in Chamblee, they will recognize that it has improved that area. It attracted upscale food franchises--5 guys/Firehouse subs and other stores. Seems the smaller, individually owned stores have done well too. I have not seen any empty store fronts. The parking lot is the only crowded area but the way the entrances were designed,feeder streets eliminate traffic quagmires. It think most people think it is trendy to hate walmart. If they ever have to buy baby furniture or have children, it is the only way many can afford quality clothes, equipment and toys. In the beginning, walmart moved into many small towns, virtually killing small business but that has changed and that is when the hate began. Now, walmart seems to be moving into intowN areas, stabilizing areas with no true focus. I hope the anti-walmarts will give it a chance. They should be pleased with the outcome.
Jo
8:20 am on Thursday, July 5, 2012
The problem isn't the Walmart itself, it's their location, as well as the propensity by both Selig and WM to tell falsehoods about the whole project. The 3-way intersection around Suburban plaza was a bad design when it was created, and it has gotten much worse. With a WM there, it will become a nightmare. WM has some very good locations to choose from just up and off Scott Blvd/L'ville Hwy-- a closed car dealership and dying strip malls where the street layout is much more suitable and residences are not so close. My own home value has already plunged, and is likely to fall more if WM comes. Who wants a WM within walking distance? I shop at WMs myself, but I have also seen quite a few who shop there who I wouldn't want walking through my neighborhood. Also, when I started hearing about this project, I was told (through our neighborhood assn zoning contact) the sad story of how Selig couldn't keep good paying tenants in the plaza, so they were glad WM was coming. Then I learned of at least one good nonprofit enterprise that approached Selig, rent at the ready, and was refused--they were told that Selig was holding the space open because they were trying to get WM interested. This was early, a couple of years ago! Then our assn was told all the promises that WM was making--for one thing, it would not be selling garden supplies that would compete with existing businesses nearby. Now the WM rep has reneged and actually denies he ever said that. Really, we can do better.
david
12:34 pm on Monday, July 9, 2012
Surprise: New Walmart Stores Boost Nearby Home Values!
A new study refutes the commonly held view that opening a Walmart store lowers property value — instead, it actually raises home values.
Research by Devin G. Pope of the University of Chicago and Jaren C. Pope of Brigham Young University, state: “Walmart often faces strong local opposition when trying to build a new store. Opponents often claim that Walmart lowers nearby housing prices.
“In this study we use over one million housing transactions located near 159 Walmarts that opened between 2000 and 2006 to test if the opening of a Walmart does indeed lower housing prices.”
The researchers found that a new Walmart store increases housing prices by between 2 and 3 percent for homes located within half a mile of the store and values of houses located between half a mile and one mile from the store rise 1 to 2 percent.
The increase in values was even more pronounced for those 86 cases in which the new store was a Walmart Supercenter. the opening of the Walmart store directly led to the rise in housing values.
Walmart employs almost 1.4 million people; 84 percent of American households shop at Walmart in a given year, 42 percent report they are regular Walmart shoppers.
“The benefits to easy access to the lower retail prices offered by Walmart” and to the stores that “naturally agglomerate nearby,” the authors conclude, “appear to matter more to households than other negative externalities.
Jo
11:05 pm on Monday, July 9, 2012
Who paid for the study, David?
Lynn
9:17 am on Thursday, July 5, 2012
I'm very excited the walmart is coming to suburban plaza. I'm a school teacher and I love to buy supplies there. It will be a much more convenient location for me. I also hope it will provide many people with new jobs.
Louis Myer
5:53 am on Saturday, July 7, 2012
Walmart is no longer an American-supporting company. If you have to pretend that you can't get America-Busting prices on STUFF you somehow can't live without, find a company that at least supports the local economic community. For the schoolteacher that says she has to shop at WM, have you looked at DollarTree? No, guess not. Have you considered that the kids you teach that now have parents that have to work at WM because the local small businesses CLOSED are on public assistance (almost 54% of WM employees receive government assistance - figure your taxes into your fake low prices). Another stat: for every WM job, almost 2 are lost; duh, no big secret. Great place to work? No, employee turnover is over 50% annually nationwide. Low prices? Nope, wrong again. Kroger and Target are competitive EVERY TIME. (oh by the way, almost ZERO Kroger and Target employees are living off your taxes!) And ALDI beats the S--T out of WM prices. And IKEA even beats "Sam's" store prices, while providing employee benefits that suooprt the local community.
The company that Sam Walton founded is GONE. The Umbrella Corp.(look it up) that WM has degenerated to is what we need to keep from infecting our country.
Laura
6:37 am on Sunday, July 29, 2012
Excellent post Louis! I would like to also add that for every dollar Lynn spends at Walmart, a percentage goes to Walmart's charity endeavors. This could mean a small grant to help clothe or feed some poor students at Lynn's school. But Walmart saves the large grants for "education reform." So if Lynn is a public school teacher, then she may be buying herself out of a job. Walmart is one of the largest funders of charter schools. Last year, they donated 50 million to Teach for America. Lynn, if you are an older teacher in an urban or rural school, Walmart -- and its customers -- is making it possible for one of those young TFA heroines to take your job. But that's OK. If the local charters are all staffed with TFAs, you can work for Walmart someday and not even have to buy school supplies again. Hey, you love it! I understand the high cost of supplying a classroom because I also am a teacher. But I would rather sacrifice a few bucks and buy from locally owned teacher supply stores.
Trish Thompson
9:37 am on Thursday, July 5, 2012
The problem with Wal-mart is not just what it does to an individual community, it's what it does to our country...and it's effects globally. And to call Walmart's food fresh is an incorrect representation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jazb24Q2s94
GoAndie
5:12 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Totally agree with you on the freshness, especially on their meats. They have the worst meats. Don't buy Great Value meats, it's toxic!!
Miles Rich
9:55 am on Thursday, July 5, 2012
Trish Thompson:
While I share some of your views about Walmart, I don't understand what you are trying to say about their food stores. While their prepared foods are not anywhere close to the quality of Kroger or Publix, when it comes to packaged foods, they sell the same things at lower prices. The only goods in Walmart that don't seem to be made offshore are the food products. The way to stop the import of cheap goods is for the Congress to get tough on trade but that is not going to happen anytime soon. The Republican Party and their supporters have destroyed organized labor and continue to attack unions. What non union members do not understand or realize is that without organized labor, the very benefits they cherish in their non union jobs would not exist. Free Trade is a joke. All it does is cause American Jobs to be shipped overseas. This increases corporate profits and does benefit consumers with cheaper prices, but the problem it creates is simple. Consumers don't have the disposable income to buy as much or to buy more expensive goods. And the worst problem is that it hurts our economy. Obama has been criticized and is literally hated because people believe that his policies are responsible for the slow economic recovery. But historically, it has taken the nation longer and longer to recover from each successive downturn, because recoveries do not stimulate as much job growth because the jobs have gone overseas.
John McGrew
10:52 am on Thursday, July 5, 2012
So, if every employer is made to pay union wages, exactly how would it be that consumers would suddenly "have the disposable income to buy as much or to buy more expensive goods" after those wages are passed on to the same consumers?
Miles Rich
11:09 am on Thursday, July 5, 2012
Mr. McGrew: If employers had to pay a union wage, a living wage, then the amount of people below or near the poverty line would be many less. The problem with your supposition, is eventually, very few people will have the money to buy much of anything and then the businesses that are now surviving paying $10.00 per hour will no longer have any customers to sell their products to. What made "America Great" was the rise of the middle class, and the governmental policies that were in effect when the middle class was growing, were strong unions, and a very progressive tax system. All of you so called Conservatives harken back to the days of Ike. Well, in the 1950's, income over $100,000.00 per year was taxed at the rate of NINETY PERCENT; and union labor was about 33% of the total work force. That is what built the American Middle Class. The problem is the so called declining (white) Middle Class today votes against its own interests and votes Republican because these same people seem to think Abortion, prayer in school, gun rights, and race are more important than their own pocket book, while the special interests and the very wealthy exploit them. Call it class warfare if you want, but it's the truth. Mitt Romney doesn't give a tinkers damn about the average American worker unless he can make millions off of them.
John McGrew
11:20 am on Thursday, July 5, 2012
Mr Rich, likely not as there'd be far less people employed. The problem with your supposition is that economics is a zero-sum game. Union wages are great for those who get to retain their jobs, but not much fun for those who lose their jobs, or have to pay the higher prices for goods and services.
The middle class is what made America great, but monopolization of factors of production, which labor is a factor, is not one of them.
And yes, in the '50s income taxes were incredibly high. But at the same time, you could deduct practically every expense so the effective rate was no where near as high as Progressives like to say they were; so extreme, that it was possible to be a multi-millionaire and still pay near nothing. (This is how we got the AMT, which now, ironically enough, attacks the middle class)
Ginny Mauldin-Kinney
12:13 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
Everyone should read 'The Bully of Bentonville:
How the High Cost of Wal-Mart's Everyday Low Prices Is Hurting America' by Anthony Bianco to get a sense of how Wal-Mart affects 'Mom and Pop' businesses and the American economy at large. The largest company in the world by far, Wal-Mart takes in revenues in excess of $280 billion, employs 1.4 million American workers, and controls a large share of the business done by almost every U.S. consumer-product company. More than 138 million shoppers visit one of its 5,300 stores each week. But, as recent news stories show, Wal-Mart's "everyday low prices" come at a tremendous cost to workers, suppliers, competitors, and consumers." (from Random House Digital).
Linda
12:24 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
I don't like to shop at Walmart and avoid shopping there. I don't object to them putting a store at Suburban Plaza, but I think a Super Walmart is too much for that area. Just build a smaller format Walmart.
Fourth ward
12:24 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
If companies raised wages ,that doesn't automatically mean prices go up that's a myth. Prices have to stay at a certain level to stay competitive or they lose customers. What it would mean CEO's couldn't be paid 500x the avg worker.
John McGrew
12:39 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
Actually, it does, because Walmart has only 1 CEO, but over 2-million employees.
Rosannrosannadanna
12:25 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
Why is it that WM should become a referendum on national, presidential politics? Of course, there is some relationship, but then again anything can be related to economic development.
Furthermore, why is it that the question originally presented biases the response -"love" vs. "hate," each of the four choices in the survey are some form of approval or disapproval? Where is the option for "it doesn't matter because I can't predict the future and the chances are that I will continue to live happily or unhappily regardless of a store, or no store, a few miles away?"
In other words, does having an opinion about the specific Suburban WM, WM as an organization/cultural phenomenon overall, or even the macro economics of global labor policy benefit you in a tangible way? Or is this just talk.
Susan Hawk
12:25 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
Kudos, Ginny. Cofer Crossing, with its Wal-Mart anchor, have forever changed the look and feel of Tucker. Oh sure, that area at the curve of Lawrenceville Hwy at Lavista has boomed, but look at how Lawrenceville Hwy at Main Street (the TRUE downtown Tucker) has fallen. Those businesses are floundering, &I more lawn shops & not-quite nudey bars have popped up. Oh yeah -- that's a vast improvement (???). I miss Tucker. It was a great homrtown. I don't want to miss Decatur, too.
Sally
2:57 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
You obviously have not been to downtown Tucker in quite awhile.
Ms.
11:12 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
Tucker main has an excellent new bakery that just opened (amazing cupcakes), 2 new sit-down restaurants, and a weekly weekend farmers market. Main has been repaved and everything looks great.
Eddie E.
1:23 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
Of course, let us not forget, walmart is what passes for a Grocery Store in Chamblee!
Is it that 'the best choice is no choice'?
Fourth ward
1:52 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
tThese people making close to nothing makes them eligible for gov programs. So we pay for walmart paying their people close min wage.
But the Walmart family are worth billions and the CEO makes 34 million.
http://cincinnati.com/blogs/letters/2010/06/30/walmart-costs-public-more-than-employee-pensions/
Compared to public employees, who actually pay a percentage of their salary into their pension fund, a Walmart employee costs federal taxpayers around $3,000 in the form of federal public assistance programs. With approximately 1.5 million US employees and growing, this amounts to a total of over $2.8 billion a year or $90 every second, costing taxpayers over $22 billion the past five years.
John McGrew
1:59 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
So if Walmart's CEO's pay were to get cut to zero, each employee could get a 1-cent-an-hour raise. Hardly going to change anyone's life I suspect.
Louis Myer
5:45 am on Saturday, July 7, 2012
So, John,(and Scott) there are 3.4 BILLION Walmart employees?!! (More men, women, and infants than live in the US.) And so they lose and retrain 1,700,000,000 employees EVERY YEAR due to extra low pay and abusive practices?
That is YOUR math (1 cent over $34 Million). Wallyworld is big, but not THAT big. Check your math! (for those of you that the nuimbers are just SO BIG, John means that EVERY WORKER/TAXPAYER IN AMERICA GOES TO WORK FOR WALMART AND QUITS THEN REJOINS WALMART ALMOST 6 TIMES EVERY SINGLE YEAR!!!!!) If you subtract those that don't and never have worked for Wallyworld, YOUR MATH indicates that quit and "rejoin" EVEY WEEK. How abusive must working for Walmart be if that could be the case???? How bad for the community would that be????
John, (and Scott) you are delirious to think that this can in any way be good for America??
John McGrew
9:27 pm on Sunday, July 8, 2012
No Louis, there are 2.2 million. Divide the CEO's pay between all those employees comes out to roughly a penny and hour. I'm not defending silly CEO pay; Just pointing out how absurd an argument it is that if he wasn't making that money that somehow the employees would be making that much more.
Steve Tolle
2:46 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
John:
You're absolutely right and that's why the Walton family's billions should ALSO be taken from them.
John McGrew
4:13 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
And Steve, as long as we're a country where a large percentage of people believe that it's the governments job to take the property of those who are politically unpopular, we'll continue to underperform our past.
Michael de Give
3:08 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
Walmart has caused Americans to lose millions of jobs over the past few decades. Their economic model forces suppliers to find the cheapest way to produce their products. This means sending jobs over seas to countries with little or no protection for their workers or the environment. Walmart keeps their prices low by paying their workers wages amounting to $20,000 per year with no health benefits. They produce jobs but these jobs are not enough to support a family. They destroy local competition and take away those jobs. They cut every corner that they can to sell their goods at a cheaper price. The meat that they sell is produced on huge factory farms where animals are caged in horrible conditions and given all kinds of antibiotics and hormones. They claim that they are going green when in fact little if anything has been done in that direction. They have spawned a society that is sucked in by a huge selection of goods that are so inexpensive that people don't think twice about throwing away something rather that getting it repaired. These goods are filling our landfills to over capacity. Our homes are filled with cheap electronics and other junk that is sapping the power grid to over capacity. Walmart is bad for the USA. Please educate yourselves about Walmart. Its all out there for you to read.
Alice Jonsson
4:01 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
I am really uncomfortable with how large and powerful they are so I avoid them. I also can't imagine that I'm really going to save money on organic produce there. I got a large container of organic strawberries at DFM for two bucks this week, among other great deals. Organic milk is becoming so popular the price is dropping pretty much everywhere I buy it. I have also seen many products at Walmart that are actually more expensive. Not impressed.
http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Latest-News-Wires/2012/0423/Wal-Mart-shares-drop-on-New-York-Times-bribery-allegations
http://www.aft.org/newspubs/periodicals/ae/spring2007/wilson.cfm
Fourth ward
7:04 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
"John McGrew
2 hours ago
And Steve, as long as we're a country where a large percentage of people believe that it's the governments job to take the property of those who are politically unpopular, we'll continue to underperform our past."
Its funny the boom years of this country and the greatest growth of the middle class. The highest tax bracket was 90 percent and unions were a third of the work force.
Also you dont seem to understand Walmart pays so little to their employees,they go on gov programs you pay for , while the company makes a fortune.
John McGrew
8:16 pm on Thursday, July 5, 2012
Fourth: Apparently you missed my response above, but back when tax rates were as high as 90%, deductions were incredibly generous; so much so that it was possible to make millions, and yet still pay next to no income tax. By the late '60s, the situation had become so absurd that Congress actually created a parallel tax system for those who made so much and yet paid so little, the "Alternative Minimum Tax".
It's truly ironic that this ill-conceived system now entraps people who are middle class, instead of the mega-wealthy it was designed to capture.
Not to say that I'm a fan of the tax system we have today either, where literally half of all workers pay no income tax at all. It's easy to cheer for the expanse of government when you're not paying much for it.
David D
12:28 pm on Saturday, July 7, 2012
JM - You make the common mistake of confusing taxation with only income tax. The truth (not just a convenient platitude like saying they pay no taxes) is that the working poor pay VERY high taxes, period. They pay around 14% FICA taxes on all of their earnings, as well as sales taxes. That's about 20% off the top. They don't get tax deductions common to the middle classes. Having said that, I think it is despicable that companies like Wal-Mart don't pay living wages. What I also think is despicable is that a lot of the so-called "mom and pop" businesses so glorified by some of the Wal-Mart haters, don't pay much better and don't provide health care or even vacation and/or sick leave. The real problem with the Suburban Plaza Wal-Mart issue is that the dialogue has been hijacked by persons who want to look like social activists by using misleading labels like 'good growth' but are willing to destroy good neighborhood community to show themselves out.
Robert Pendley
2:02 pm on Saturday, July 7, 2012
Well David I feel that if they pay only 20%, which I would dispute, they are the lucky ones. The tax need to be the fair tax. Yes a sales tax. Everyone needs to pay the same rate, no matter their status in life. They enjoy everything that is avaliable to everyone. If the rate is 23% then everyone pays that, why should some get a free ride when others have to carry them. The left keeps yelling about "fair share" well I think fair share is EQUAL RATES. That would be the right thing.
John McGrew
9:34 pm on Sunday, July 8, 2012
David D, I've already refuted your assumption here. You are the one making "the common mistake". FICA taxes are not considered "taxes" but "contributions" to a semi-defined benefits plan; Supposedly, you are supposed to get that money back when you retire. (not that I believe that either)
But I do agree with you that the debate has been hijacked by the political activists that aren't so much against the location, but Walmart in general. (I don't love Walmart, but I don't hate it either) Whether Walmart is compatible at Suburban Plaza is a legitimate debate. But what these mini-fascists really want to do is dictate what people are paid and where you can shop. That is what I disagree with.
Michael de Give
8:00 am on Friday, July 6, 2012
Tax rates have never been 90%. 39% for corporations is more like it. Workers that pay no income tax are probably below the poverty line. They do pay other taxes such as when they purchase gasoline to drive to their low paying jobs at Walmart.
John McGrew
8:19 am on Friday, July 6, 2012
Simple wrong Michael; for top-earners, rates were well over 90%:
http://taxfoundation.org/article/us-federal-individual-income-tax-rates-history-1913-2011-nominal-and-inflation-adjusted-brackets
But like I said, almost nobody actually paid those rates because deductions were so generous.
And most people who pay no income tax are not "below the poverty line". Low rates and generous deductions for the lower 50% in addition to the Earned Income Tax Credit see to it half of workers have no income tax liability. (In fact, the EITC sees to it that those who are well above the "poverty line" actually get more money refunded back than they pay in)
Fourth ward
8:28 am on Friday, July 6, 2012
But they still paid more in income taxes then they do now. And you had things like free public college.
John McGrew
8:40 am on Friday, July 6, 2012
Again, not true. They might be paying a lower statutory rate, but they pay a far higher amount and percentage of taxes.
http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-individual-income-tax-data-0
Fourth ward
8:31 am on Friday, July 6, 2012
As far as the most dont pay income tax myth.
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3505
"These figures cover only the federal income tax and ignore the substantial amounts of other federal taxes — especially the payroll tax — that many of these households pay. As a result, these figures greatly overstate the share of households that do not pay federal taxes. Tax Policy Center data show that only about 17 percent of households did not pay any federal income tax or payroll tax in 2009, despite the high unemployment and temporary tax cuts that marked that year.[5] In 2007, a more typical year, the figure was 14 percent. This percentage would be even lower if it reflected other federal taxes that households pay, including excise taxes on gasoline and other items."
John McGrew
8:49 am on Friday, July 6, 2012
Payroll taxes (mainly for Social Security and Medicare) are considered "contributions" into the Social Security and Medicare funds and are not part of the "general fund". (even though they really are, which is a different topic altogether) Theoretically, that is money that will be paid back to you in your later years. And even then, those funds are woefully under-funded and destined for insolvency.
But I will go along with you and argue that they are taxes as they are taken from me and the funds they support will be bankrupt long before I will be old enough to collect; I'll likely never see that money ever again.
Clark Lemons
9:56 am on Friday, July 6, 2012
The low prices at Walmart aren't the whole story. Those low prices have a cost.
1. Will those who travel near Suburban Plaza spend more time--and gas--to get around? Will they be safer? Will pedestrians be safer?
2. Will those who own homes see their values go down due to delivery trucks, noise, congestion?
3. Will smaller, more local and established stores nearby--where we may even know the owner--decline and then close?
4. Once Walmart is built, if they decide to leave (as they have in many instances), what happens to the property? Does the building sit empty for years as many closed Walmarts have?
5. Will Walmart employees get the health benefits they need and the income to survive without local and state government aid which is financed by the taxpayer?
Walmart would clearly financially benefit that large corporation and the developers of that property, Selig, but we ought to think about the costs those low prices create.
Clemons
david
12:35 pm on Monday, July 9, 2012
Surprise: New Walmart Stores Boost Nearby Home Values!
A new study refutes the commonly held view that opening a Walmart store lowers property value — instead, it actually raises home values.
Research by Devin G. Pope of the University of Chicago and Jaren C. Pope of Brigham Young University, state: “Walmart often faces strong local opposition when trying to build a new store. Opponents often claim that Walmart lowers nearby housing prices.
“In this study we use over one million housing transactions located near 159 Walmarts that opened between 2000 and 2006 to test if the opening of a Walmart does indeed lower housing prices.”
The researchers found that a new Walmart store increases housing prices by between 2 and 3 percent for homes located within half a mile of the store and values of houses located between half a mile and one mile from the store rise 1 to 2 percent.
The increase in values was even more pronounced for those 86 cases in which the new store was a Walmart Supercenter. the opening of the Walmart store directly led to the rise in housing values.
Walmart employs almost 1.4 million people; 84 percent of American households shop at Walmart in a given year, 42 percent report they are regular Walmart shoppers.
“The benefits to easy access to the lower retail prices offered by Walmart” and to the stores that “naturally agglomerate nearby,” the authors conclude, “appear to matter more to households than other negative externalities.
Gritz Dummy
9:57 am on Friday, July 6, 2012
What Wal-Mart pays it's employees doesn't concern me,if they don't like the wages they need to find another job.Do people actually expect to make a living doing monkey work? Wal-Mart is like a fast food resturant,the jobs are for teenagers,oh I forgot,teenagers are to busy playing video games and shooting each other to work.I love the low,low prices and I buy everything I can at Wal-Mart.As far as Wal-Mart killing main street is concerned,if main street didn't charge an arm and a leg for things,I would shop there.I don't hear anyone complaining about internet shopping killing main street.Bottom line,people like to complain about Wal-Mart because they think it's the cool thing to do.
Gritz Dummy
10:04 am on Friday, July 6, 2012
Unions are a good thing to a certain point,then they elect criminals to run the unions and they suck the life blood out of a company.Jimmy Hoffa was a gangster,he came up missing,killed by his criminal buddies,and who's running the teamsters now,his son,another criminal gangster.People start and run businesses to make money,not to kiss the butts of a bunch of non skilled,non educated monkeys.If you don't like how a company treats you,start your own,nobody's stopping you but yourself.
david
12:20 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
This location is fantastic for us to have a WalMart! Currently this 'Plaza' is a blight.
The amount of commuters passing by pay nothing to Dekalb county. However, many would stop to shop at a WalMart, thus the County gets the taxes. This location is a revenue making machine.
It offers many jobs to our uneducated and unemployed, getting them off SSI or public assistance.
We get good deals on many items without having to drive far (wasting our expensive foreign petrol).
It seems to me that the negatives are only politically motivated against some imagined evil monster. The real monster is an out of control government that steals our money that we've worked very hard to earn.
Louis Myer
4:49 am on Saturday, July 7, 2012
Have you considered that people that have to work at WM because the local small businesses CLOSED are on public assistance (almost 54% of WM employees receive government assistance - figure your taxes into your fake low prices). Another stat: for every WM job, almost 2 are lost; duh, no big secret. Great place to work? No, employee turnover is over 50% annually nationwide. Low prices? Nope, wrong again. Kroger and Target are competitive EVERY TIME. (oh by the way, almost ZERO Kroger and Target employees ARE living off your taxes!) And ALDI beats the S--T out of WM prices. And IKEA even beats "Sam's" store prices, while providing employee benefits that suooprt the local community. By the way, you folkes that think Suburban is "blighted", have you checked whether Selig WANTS it to be great without the BIG PAYOUT from WM? Have you asked the successful local and "mom & pop" businesses that are in Suburban for 40 years what they will do? Have you bothered to notice that Suburban has fewer empty storefronts in this recession than most large strips? Nope, guess not. And on the Fourth of July, did you ever stop to consider that what YOU do in your everyday life is important to the future of America? Like NOT shopping at Walmart? There is NO reason to have a WM at Suburban Plaza.
mark
11:18 am on Saturday, July 7, 2012
Good points!
David D
12:37 pm on Saturday, July 7, 2012
LM - there is ONE good reason to have Wal-Mart at Suburban Plaza. Selig owns the property and wants the store there. As long as Wal-Mart and Selig's business models continue in agreement, it will happen since there are no DeKalb County ordinances that will stop it. It will take much longer for the surrounding communities to recover from the negative impact of GGD than it will to build the store and develop the rest of Suburban Plaza.
Joanne
12:42 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
I'm against a Walmart at Suburban Plaza and will never shop there if it is built. It's a bad location for a store that size and will attract crime, as do ALL the other Walmarts in and around Atlanta. This is poor planning (or no planning) on DeKalb County's part and Jeff Rader and Kathy Gannon should be held accountable for their disinterest of and dismissiveness to real concerns raised by their constituents. Jeff Rader in particular should be voted out next year. A Walmart supercenter the size of three football fields is going to bring more blight than the current conditions. This is a company with a horrible track record, not some unknown entity. It's sad to think that this would never survive in communities that have more money and more educated people, period.
Rosannrosannadanna
4:01 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
Thats awesome, thanks. Now I can add yours (it "will attract crime, as do ALL the other Walmarts") to previous ones from the walmart hating crowd. The list already includes that Walmart makes people obese and that people will die in ambulances because traffic will be so bad.
JayMan
3:17 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
why is everyone complaining about how much money people at walmart earn??
How much money should a cashier make??
Fourth ward
3:57 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
Gritz Dummy
Do you see teenagers at walmart working no its all older people for the most part and thats all thats out there for alot of them.
The reason you got so many jobs now that pay crap and workers are treated like garbage is because the union's represent less than 12 percent of the whole workforce. 40 hour work week, benefits and so many other things,people take for granted came from unions. http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/05/311831/american-middle-class-organized-labor/
JayMan
4:20 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
Fourth Ward,
Please provide an example of Walmart forcing a job applicant to walk into one of their stores, fill out an application, interview for a job, and then forcing them to accept the job! Ill be waiting...
Robert Pendley
4:38 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
Well gritz is right. I have a couple of family members who are union members and one who is a leader. You should hear them talk, how dumb the owners of businesses are, how can we get more out of them. It really is sad, I would lay dime to dollars that no one who is a union fan knows how they started. You would say the coal minds, that they were protecting workers rights. They have never and never will be for their members, they are for themselves. It is so sad that you can't see that, last night the story was how they went to a high priced meeting, on the unions dime, all of it, if they want to go pay for it yourself. Now back to pay off the bet. They were formed in the 1890's to keep blacks and asians from gettng jobs at factories. The whites were very unproductive like leaving work early, breaking equipment to stop work and even not showing up to work. The sad this that they couldn't replace them because no one would take their job, the friend thing. But the blacks and asians would. So the unions were formed. And a great thing to their start, burning factories and killing and beating the new workers and the owners. Want to fix 75% of our problems. End the unions, all unions.
Michael de Give
4:45 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
Saying that Walmart is politically unpopular is such a cop out. We would never stand for the kind of conditions that Walmart's suppliers subject their workers to in other countries. We get cheap goods from Walmart's suppliers because they cut every corner imaginable. How would you like a factory belching filthy fumes next to your home. This is the case for millions in China. Also, since Walmart has caused so many jobs to go to China, people are desperate for work here and they will take anything. Even a low paying job at Walmart. This kind of debate would be squashed in China. Anyone speaking against Walmart in China would be thrown in prison. It happens all the time. Your cheap purchases at Walmart come at the expense of many that are much less fortunate than you. If you can live with that, then keep supporting them. If you have a moral compass, then you will speak out against the injustice.
John McGrew
8:30 am on Saturday, July 7, 2012
Not that I wish to endorse poor working conditions in China, but do consider this: If that job making cheap stuff for Walmart in China did not exist, what would that worker in China be doing instead?
Yes, working conditions elsewhere in the world are deplorable. But us not buying stuff from them doesn't make their plight any better at all.
JayMan
4:50 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
saying that people are left with no option other than walmart for employment, is such a cop out.
RD
4:53 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
Why do similar mega-stores, like Target, get a free pass from criticism?
Miles Rich
5:51 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
Jayman, they are complaining about WalMart's employment practices because they make sure their hourly employees work less than 30 hours per week so they do not qualify for benefits like health insurance or retirement, and then WalMart has the chutzpah to assist their employees in applying for government assistance.
JayMan
6:14 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
Are the employees free to search for employment elsewhere?? Kmart, target, Kroger, publix, costco, homedepot, lowes, etc?
Josh
7:40 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
Wal-Mart employees have non-compete clauses in their terms of employment. They are not free to search for employment elsewhere in violation of those clauses.
JayMan
7:45 pm on Friday, July 6, 2012
That's only written into the 5-year contracts though
Louis Myer
4:00 am on Saturday, July 7, 2012
Walmart is no longer an American-supporting company. If you have to pretend that you can't get America-Busting prices on STUFF you somehow can't live without, find a company that at least supports the local economic community. For the schoolteacher that says she has to shop at WM, have you looked at DollarTree? No, guess not. Have you considered that the kids you teach that now have parents that have to work at WM because the local small businesses CLOSED are on public assistance (almost 54% of WM employees receive government assistance - figure your taxes into your fake low prices). Another stat: for every WM job, almost 2 are lost; duh, no big secret. Great place to work? No, employee turnover is over 50% annually nationwide. Low prices? Nope, wrong again. Kroger and Target are competitive EVERY TIME. (oh by the way, almost ZERO Kroger and Target employees ARE NOT living off your taxes!) And ALDI beats the S--T out of WM prices. And IKEA even beats "Sam's" store prices, while providing employee benefits that suooprt the local community.
The company that Sam Walton founded is GONE. The Umbrella Corp.(look it up) that WM has degenerated to is what we need to keep from infecting our country.
Every Single Purchase YOU make at a WM drives a nail in America's coffin. It really is that simple. Walmart is WRONG for America and thereby also wrong for Suburban Plaza.
Louis Myer
4:05 am on Saturday, July 7, 2012
Every Single Purchase YOU make at a WM drives a nail in America's coffin. It really is that simple. Walmart is WRONG for America and thereby also wrong for Suburban Plaza. By the way, you folkes that think Suburban is "blighted", have you checked whether Selig WANTS it to be great without the BIG PAYOUT from WM? Have you asked the successful local and "mom & pop" businesses that are in Suburban for 40 years what they will do? Have you bothered to notice that Suburban has fewer empty storefronts in this recession than most large strips? Nope, guess not. And on the Fourth of July, did you ever stop to consider that what YOU do in your everyday life is important to the future of America? Like NOT shopping at Walmart? There is NO reason to have a WM at Suburban Plaza.
Louis Myer
4:12 am on Saturday, July 7, 2012
Walmart is WRONG for America and thereby also wrong for Suburban Plaza. By the way, you folkes that think Suburban is "blighted", have you checked whether Selig WANTS it to be great without the BIG PAYOUT from WM? Have you asked the successful local and "mom & pop" businesses that are in Suburban for 40 years what they will do? Have you bothered to notice that Suburban has fewer empty storefronts in this recession than most large strips? Nope, guess not. And on the Fourth of July, did you ever stop to consider that what YOU do in your everyday life is important to the future of America? Like NOT shopping at Walmart? There is NO reason to have a WM at Suburban Plaza.
Louis Myer
4:37 am on Saturday, July 7, 2012
Hi, Scott. So you're the person paid by Wallyworld to monitor this blog and write responces. At least we know who you are.
As far as the amount paid to the Waltons, you understate the problem; four of the WM Waltons now make so much off of the sweat of the "associates", that they would still be ANNUAL BILLIONAIRES even if they provided full minimum wage to all their employees AND supplied health care for them all, getting them off of most of their public assistance. Would that be so bad? You can whine about the anti-Robin Hood pay being SO unfair to the richest people in the world, but as an American, I just Do Not see it.
Oh by the way, SEARS has a better price match policy than Wallyworld, and treats & pays their employees better! It is also an American company, where "Buy American" still means something.
Robert Pendley
10:40 am on Saturday, July 7, 2012
You know what is so funny, I believe it is like our friend William said, I think they protest to much! All. Those who are crying about walmart Are trying to convince themselves about walmart. What they seam to forget. Is that this is still to some small part a free country. Walmart can offer their employes any amount of hours and pay to work there. No one is holding them hostage and they can say no at any hour of the day. If you don't Like walmart then don't shop there, and as far as whose land and who they sell It to remember there is always something worse that can go into there.
JayMan
12:34 pm on Saturday, July 7, 2012
What is a "living wage"??? How much should someone who scans my deodorant and hands me a receipt make?
Enough with the entitlement mentality!! If you don't want to be a cashier, go aquire more marketable job skills.
David D
12:41 pm on Saturday, July 7, 2012
Entitlement mentality? You must live in a different world than the majority of Americans.
Robert Pendley
2:11 pm on Saturday, July 7, 2012
Jayman is so right. What gets me is that everyone who is talking about "living wage" would be the first to talk about the prices when that deodorant goes from $2.50 to $3.50 or higher. Stay in school and get an education and be on the board of walmart or target or what ever. It is sad that the left wants us to pay for others poor decisions. Drop out of school, let others pay my way. Quit a job because you don't like your boss,let others pay my way. Don't take that job that is offered because its not just what I want, force others to pay more to make me happy. If you don't like walmart don't shop there. Its that easy.
JayMan
12:46 pm on Saturday, July 7, 2012
David, how much would money would you force Walmart to pay a cashier?? I'm confused! What is a living wage? Should all private companies be required to pay this figure?
Robert Pendley
2:13 pm on Saturday, July 7, 2012
Well if they are socalist then they think they can force the amount they want them to pay. Oh wait the facisim, I thought we did away that in WW2.
JayMan
12:48 pm on Saturday, July 7, 2012
How much money are these employees "entitled" to?
David D
1:12 pm on Saturday, July 7, 2012
You are the one who used "entitlement". I believe that no person is entitled to any more than any other. I also believe that those at the bottom of the economic ladder ARE entitled to respect and fair pay when they perform their jobs well. Treating cashiers as disposable goods, just because they are cashiers instead of managers, is unconscionable.
Robert Pendley
2:18 pm on Saturday, July 7, 2012
Once again you are right Jay. Being a past business owner there has to be people who are the managers and they get the respect of being a manager and cashiers who get the respect they are entiltied to as cashiers. The pay is also on they level too. Why is there one manager and twenty cashiers, a manager is more important, and the manager can do the cashiers job and not one of the cashiers can do the managers job, that is why there is a pay difference.
JayMan
1:17 pm on Saturday, July 7, 2012
Actually you used the term "living wage" and have yet to define what that means!
Also, those at the bottom of the economic ladder are not condensed to Walmart!
Rosannrosannadanna
3:37 pm on Saturday, July 7, 2012
I think it's time to say the word everyone is longing to hear - FIRE!
David D
10:02 pm on Sunday, July 8, 2012
JG - you didn't succeed with your taxation argument. Sorry. The point is the impact of taxes. Besides, Social Security contributions have been used to offset government spending since the 1970s, so they are completely tied into the issues. HOWEVER - my point about wages has more to do with the base attitude some people have (not necessarily you) that the value of persons is defined by their jobs or by their education. I am a manager who recognizes that the work done by a front-line person in retail often is more important to the success of the business than some higher paid employees in management. And - I think we both share sentiments about Wal-Mart. I'm neither against it nor in favor of it. Selig owns the property, DeKalb has no restrictions that could stop Wal-Mart, therefore Selig has the right to develop the property as it sees fit. I think the GGD anti-Wal-Mart approach is destructive rather than useful and has harmed the neighborhood communities beyone measure.
Ms.
11:14 pm on Sunday, July 8, 2012
I'd also like to know what is considered a living wage in this economy for low income workers, as I just keep seeing this mentioned over and over.
Think about how much you pay a housekeeper. Is it enough for her to buy a medical plan for her and her entire family, and contribute to a private 401k?
We have to stop looking at things, like all employees are equal in their skill-set. They are not. No college, and high school dropouts, are most of the time not going to work the type of jobs many people posting here have.
I think many are not living in reality when it comes to what is available in this economy right now. I realize it's hard to comprehend, but for those that want and NEED to work, any job inside, air conditioned, and not manual labor is considered better than no job.
John McGrew
9:33 am on Monday, July 9, 2012
I don't know how a family in most urban areas today can survive on less than $100k. (that includes health care, retirement planning, college for the kids, and everything else good Progressives think we should all have) So if the mimumum wage has no detrimental economic effects (as the Progressives always argue) I don't know why we don't raise the minimum wage to $100k.
There. Problem solved. And no more Walmart.
David D
1:04 pm on Monday, July 9, 2012
Ms. - John McG's hyperbole about needing about $100K is ridiculous, at best. Most economists define a living wage as the minimum income necessary for a worker to meet basic needs (it's usually expressed as a hourly wage). These basic needs include shelter (housing) and other incidentals such as clothing and nutrition. Living wages do not include items like retirement planning, health insurance, vacations, or many of the other things some people consider normal expenses. We're talking survival here - and survival of people who didn't get sent to college by mommy and daddy or have their first cars bought for them. Right now that per hour living wage is estimated to be about $12.50 for an individual (not even talking family income). That amounts to about $26,000 for an adult a year BEFORE more than 20% FICA and sales taxes. Unfortunately, many low-skilled retail workers earn closer to the $7.25 per hour minimum wage. The minimum wage comes out to a little over $15,000 per year, before approximately 20% FICA and sales taxes.
The impact on the individual consumer would be minimal if Wal-Mart paid $12.50 per hour (see the link at end).
Remember - approximately 64% of Americans don't even have an extra $1000 for an emergency. Phooey on needing $100K. That's a figure only the mean-spirited would believe.
http://www.alternet.org/economy/150685/if_walmart_paid_its_1.4_million_u.s._workers_a_living_wage,_it_would_result_in_almost_no_pain_for_the_average_customer/
John McGrew
6:40 pm on Monday, July 9, 2012
Of course it was ridiculous. But at least I intended it to be. It's no more so than your assertion that "most economists define a living wage". They don't. What they do is provide intellectual cover for politicians to define a "living wage", which is completely subjective. What one person may consider $10-an-hour another might suggest $20, and so on.
Either way, it's non-sequitur as far as Walmart is concerned. Walmart pays what they think they need to. And since hundreds to thousands line up for those jobs every time a new Walmart opens, clearly there's something to it. The unfortunate reality is that Walmart is probably the last and only choice for low-to-no-skilled labor in many locations. The problem is the economy, not Walmart. Eliminating Walmart jobs doesn't help anybody.
david
12:38 pm on Monday, July 9, 2012
Surprise: New Walmart Stores Boost Nearby Home Values!
A new study refutes the commonly held view that opening a Walmart store lowers property value — instead, it actually raises home values.
Research by Devin G. Pope of the University of Chicago and Jaren C. Pope of Brigham Young University, state: “Walmart often faces strong local opposition when trying to build a new store. Opponents often claim that Walmart lowers nearby housing prices.
“In this study we use over one million housing transactions located near 159 Walmarts that opened between 2000 and 2006 to test if the opening of a Walmart does indeed lower housing prices.”
The researchers found that a new Walmart store increases housing prices by between 2 and 3 percent for homes located within half a mile of the store and values of houses located between half a mile and one mile from the store rise 1 to 2 percent.
The increase in values was even more pronounced for those 86 cases in which the new store was a Walmart Supercenter. the opening of the Walmart store directly led to the rise in housing values.
Walmart employs almost 1.4 million people; 84 percent of American households shop at Walmart in a given year, 42 percent report they are regular Walmart shoppers.
“The benefits to easy access to the lower retail prices offered by Walmart” and to the stores that “naturally agglomerate nearby,” the authors conclude, “appear to matter more to households than other negative externalities.
Jo
9:03 pm on Monday, July 9, 2012
Really, for those of you who think this is a good thing and that you would shop at this WM--you need to drive N Decatur Rd in rush hour. It's just poor planning...Suburban Plaza is not the spot for a WM. We need to PLAN our spaces and our roads, not just let the big buck businesses decide for us and then leave us to try to retrofit the streets, services, and housing around them.
Rebekke Huber
2:12 am on Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Hate. No redeeming values. Tear it all down. Recompensate the exploited workers. Keep that pestilence out of my neighborhood.
Miles Rich
3:06 am on Tuesday, July 10, 2012
I really get a kick out of the talking points that conservatives use. It's as if they truly believe if they repeat a lie enough times, it will sometimes be true. For example, the statement that no one paid the 90% tax rate, it was actually 92%, because deductions were more generous is so misleading. Because rates have always been progressive, it is true that no one pays an effective rate on all their income at the top rate. This is true today also. Today, the top marginal rate for federal income taxes is 35%, and if the Bush tax cuts expire, it will increase to 39.6 percent as it was during Bill Clinton's presidency. But no one pays 35% today on their total income, they may it on their marginal income of a certain level. But in 1955, they paid 92% on income over $100,000.00. That is why people were not able to amass great wealth. Yes, there were more deductions, but those deductions were for consumer interest, and sales tax, and there was no AMT. Therefore, you could use more things to reduce income, but still, if your taxable income was over $100,000.00, you paid the top rate on all income over that. No a certain amount of dividends were exempt, and long term capital gains were not taxed at that rate either, corporations didn't pay $400,000.00 salaries either because if they did more than half of it would have been taxed at 90%.
Then there is the claim that lower marginal rates create jobs. There is no evidence this is so, yet it is repeated over and over.
John McGrew
8:07 am on Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Ironic, because that entire post read just like Democratic talking points.
There is plenty of evidence that lower marginal rates create jobs. (There was an entire decade 30 years ago where this happened) Are you going to argue that higher rates will do even better?
But I will agree with one thing: Come January 1st, pretty much everybody will wish that we were back at Clinton-era rates.
JayMan
7:52 am on Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Jo - They are not YOUR "spaces". You dont own the plaza
Rebekke - please explain how walmart workers are "exploited"?
Fourth ward
9:27 am on Tuesday, July 10, 2012
It used to be an american ideal someone makes a living wage can raise a family and put kids to school, working at a factory. Their family working up the ladder. Now its a liberal talking point. God the right has you so played and they screw you over and over and you defend them like Uncle Tom
John McGrew
9:36 am on Tuesday, July 10, 2012
So ironic then, Fourth, that it was union excess that drove those jobs overseas, thus destroying your "american ideal".
JayMan
9:38 am on Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Some jobs are not meant to raise a family on...
Fourth ward
10:27 am on Tuesday, July 10, 2012
No John not unions, that's the talking point you have been taught. Its CEO's that wanted to make 500x the avg worker and if profits arent up every quarter Wall st has a problem. But it comes back to what the American dream is being coming, I got mine screw you and that's not how our economy functions. The middle class is shrinking,wages have been flat for forever if it wasnt for cheap credit, people would of been aware alot sooner. Without a thriving middle class, we become some third world nation. Now tell me the talking point how the jobs creators taxes how to stay low so that can happen lol.
Yep Jayman keep making the talking points,the rich men tell you to say. lol
John McGrew
5:57 pm on Tuesday, July 10, 2012
JayMan, that's what Progressives do when they know they are counter to the facts and reality. Since they can't defend their position rhetorically, they just go the ad hominem route and accuse everyone else of being slaves to some ideological boogie man or "talking points".
I already trashed Fourth's math well above; Nearly every Fortune 500 CEO in America could be working for free without making a visible dent upon employee pay. We could even seize all the wealth of Bill Gates & Warren Buffett in the name of balancing the budget, and it would be all spent by the end of the weekend.
Meanwhile, why doesn't Fourth plot the growth in the size of our government against the shrinking of the middle class? Talk about an inconvenient truth!
Fourth ward
10:29 am on Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Another FYI back when things were booming the 50's and 60's union membership was one third of the workers.
John McGrew
5:59 pm on Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Also during that period, America had no competition in production, and a planet full of consumers with no where else to buy. It had little to do with unions.
Timothy Darnell
6:14 am on Wednesday, July 11, 2012
A reminder that comments violating Patch's terms of service will not be tolerated.
bulldogger
9:00 am on Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Folks, be wary, very wary of the Walmart Neighborhood Markets.....I'm sure what they have in mind in building these, is they want to take over the food supply in this country......they have the marketing skills, and most important they have the money, lots and lots and lots of MONEY. They will begin building these everywhere to compete with and destroy Kroger and Publix. It's coming and remember "You heard it here first". Remember to vote on November 6, 2012. It's the most important election in any of our lives......this election will decide the future direction of our country.
JayMan
4:05 pm on Wednesday, July 11, 2012
so why should we "be wary"?
If the product is inferior to Kroger or Publix, then the Walmart Neighborhood Markets wont thrive, correct?
If it is better, then Kroger and Publix will have to.....gasp....compete for business!!
John McGrew
8:09 pm on Wednesday, July 11, 2012
About 7 or 8 years ago, Consumer Reports magazine did a study of what people in different urban areas paid for groceries. In Atlanta, we were paying 33% more than most other cities. This was due to the oligopoly between Kroger & Publix. The WalMart opening in Chamblee changed that. Even if you've never stepped foot on their property, you've benefited from them being there.
So no, I'm not afraid of their neighborhood market. And clearly, they haven't destroyed Kroger or Publix either, as the success of the new Publix a mile down the road at Town Brookhaven clearly demonstrates.
GoAndie
5:43 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
How can we stop WalMart or WalMonster?
How can we control the shoppers spending money there?
I don't want them to eat up all their competition (becoming a monopoly) over our food. They produce the GreatValue brand and it's a poor inferior quality of food.
They have the Worst meats and I don't trust their motives in trying to dominate the marketplace, even matching their competitors prices; they will not be undersold.
Poorer people will have to buy their cheap food, which can led to an earlier death via health problems, which will led to population control of the poor. Is this their goal?
John McGrew
9:08 am on Wednesday, August 29, 2012
@GoAndie, can you not hear yourself?
"How can we control the shoppers spending money there?"
Who made you god?
Tim
9:25 am on Wednesday, July 11, 2012
According to CNNMoney, “Some studies show for example, that Walmart’s low prices often raise the household wealth of poor, and particularly, minority families considerably. Other studies show that new Walmart stores lower average wages and reduce the number of retail jobs in an area.”
Lets agree there are at least two sides to each story.
RD
3:22 pm on Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Lies, damned lies and statistics!
Sandra
1:40 am on Monday, July 30, 2012
As a Walmart cashier I am privileged to work with some of the most wonderful people, in the world, like minded socially oriented volunteer type people. I have however been trying to work full time for over a year. I am fluent in English, Spanish and Portuguese. I have the equivalent to an associates degree, qualify financially for public assistance but refuse to apply for it because I think it should be for those less physically & mentally able. Unfortunately our store can only have one full time cashier in East Cobb.
GoAndie
5:51 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
They believe in hiring only part time people. They know part time workers can't live a full-time life off their wages; thereby making their workers their number one customers(with the 20% employee discount). Most of what they pay out to their workers comes right back to them!! It's by design that you can't afford to shop anywhere else but WalMart if you work for them.
Sandra
1:47 am on Monday, July 30, 2012
Or at least I have been told there can only be one full time cashier with a regular schedual I want to be able to get my daughter back but when safe ride put me out of Buisness Walmart was the only job I could find. I don't mind having to pay my dues and prove myself, but after a year I am a bit surprised that I haven't progressed more,...
GoAndie
5:24 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Louis Myers, you hit WalMart right on the mark!
This company mass produce cheapness, but with the economy being what it is, I still shop there, BUT I 'm very, very selective on what I buy. I try to get the MOST out of every purchase just as they do out of their employees.
It's sad to think that we, shoppers, help fund them and help promote them hiring people who has to get govt assistance. I heard their employees talk about making less than 40/week, part-timers get no benefits, and they cut hours to control how much workers bring in weekly. And since millions shop there, the cycle continues; as longas we continue to shop, they will be in business to put out other businesses.
GoAndie
12:20 pm on Wednesday, August 29, 2012
John McGrew, it was sarcasm, DUH!!! The question was meant to be a joke, just like the one you made:"who made you God?". I don't need to answer that, we all know the answer. Just like we all should know that we can't stop shoppers from buying WalMart.
J. H.
2:42 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
To get on the Walmart bandwagon is a downhill spiral of cheap chinese made merchandise and low employee wages. In the end the only ones that win are the Walton family.
John McGrew
3:22 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Then don't shop there. Dollars speak louder than words.
Miles Rich
5:43 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Most of Walmart's stock is no longer owned by the Walton family. The stockholders win, but you are correct, very few other people do. It is a downhill spiral to bottom.
Nathan Schwinn
4:19 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Patch has a thing for Wal-Mart. This is about the 5th Wal-Mart related story they have run.
Durn Lib'ral press, give it a rest and don't be such suck-ups for page hits.
Miles Rich
5:46 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Why is it, Nathan Schwinn, when you don't like the story, even though the story is true, you attack the messenger. There have always been newspapers with liberal or conservative editorial pages. It just so happens that more journalists are progressive or lean left because they are more open minded, but most professional journalists attempt to be fair and report a story accurately. I am sure you watch the Fox News Channel, on which there is very little news, and almost none of it is Fair or Balanced.
Laura
6:33 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Walmart is the largest private employer in this country and the largest corporation in the WORLD. They have invested millions in organizations that influence public policy in this country. Considering the impact walmart has on every one of us -- even those of us who refuse to shop there -- I would say that five stories is not that many.