NEIL ROSENKRANS
Contributing Writer
I recently saw a bumper sticker that read “Wal-Mart – Wrecking All Little Merchants and Ruining Towns.” Did someone just say that the sky is falling? Well, if nothing else, at least its respectful labels were politically correct.
Those who live within the greater Malibu area might be unfamiliar with Wal-Mart because the retail giant stands a better chance at anchoring roots in Baghdad than in our utopian fortress. It seems that our celebrity neighbors aren’t too interested in saving a few bucks on their hunting gear and motor oil. After all, it was Paris Hilton who asked on her reality show “The Simple Life”, “What is Wal-Mart? Do they sell, like, wall stuff there?”
The retailer is the target of much criticism, mostly from the left. The first assertion is that Wal-Mart drives small, local merchants out of business. This is likely to be true if the local merchants are not efficient enough to compete against Wal-Mart at a comparable price level. However, when Wal-Mart enters a community it creates more jobs than it displaces by its presence.
Wal-Mart’s efficient value chain creates a benefit that we can all enjoy — lower prices. Rush Limbaugh got it right. Earlier this month he said, “If you ask me, if liberals had any sense of consistency and decency, they would love Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart serves people who don’t have a lot of disposable income to spend and still enables them to purchase products that they want and need and at a price lower than they can get anywhere else.”
It’s a harsh reality to those in opposition that the vast majority of Americans are willing to forego the nostalgia of buying their shampoo and cat litter from Mom and Pop in order to hang on to a greater share of their hard-earned cash. But that’s the reality.
Good things can happen when Americans save money. Global Insight, an independent economic research and analysis firm, reported last year that Wal-Mart saves working families $2,932 per year. Think about the possibilities for a moment. These are real savings that can then be spent on anti-Wal-Mart campaigns and bumper stickers.
Another criticism of the retailer is that it pays its employees too little. I’m sure that there are at least a handful of leftists who believe that the corporate giant is “run like a plantation” (you know what I’m talking about).
First of all, we must sort out the facts. According to Wal-Mart’s official Web site, the national average for regular hourly Wal-Mart wages is nearly twice the federal minimum wage and higher in urban areas.
Second, the applicants and the retailer are both willfully entering into an employment agreement that they both deem acceptable. Is the wage too low for me personally? Maybe. That is probably one reason why I decided not to ask for a job application the last time I waited in the check-out line. However, is the wage too low for the person who has no job or higher education? Maybe not, but I will let that person decide.
Higher unemployment is the result from demanding employers to arbitrarily pay higher wages. Demanding Wal-Mart to pay fewer employees more money is not the best solution. Wal-Mart will pay more to its employees once the labor market dries up at the current equilibrium wage rates. In fact, we should thank the retailer for employing over one million people – only the government employs more people.
My advice to the anti-Wal-Mart crowd is to stick to the bumper stickers that refer us to the catchy phone number to dial if we don’t like the way you drive.
01-26-2006