Exposing Three Myths About Wal-Mart

Wal-Mart is back in the news again. This time, it's not a lawsuit, crisis, or drama. The big box giant is expanding into new urban markets by going small. According to Yahoo! Finance, Wal-Mart has been actively seeking out parcels of land in the 20,000 square foot range in urban areas of New York, San Francisco, and other cities, with the idea of putting in a cross between their "Neighborhood Stores" and "Marketside" formats. The obvious goal being to increase domestic sales after it's fifth straight decline in quarterly revenue reports of all stores open for more than one year.

As is always this mega-merchant's fate, certain special interests in the US will push the same, tired, old, dishonest myths out about the company, with any marketing approaches made. It's time to discuss a few of these myths, where they come from, and the truth behind them. I too, once believed the company to be some form of "evil." But with a recent dose of rational self-honesty, I've seen where I was mistaken. This discussion is an attempt to approach the topic before the professional trouble makers do.

Exposing three myths about Wal-Mart number one: Wal-Mart treats employees badly.
This myth has made its rounds for years now. While we've all heard the rumors, we also know what the ubiquitous "they" say about rumors: They can't be relied on as fact. This is not to say Wal-Mart has not had their labor issues. In 2009, America's largest employer had to settle multiple lawsuits regarding employees worked off the clock, and denied rest breaks.

But almost every other allegation, rumor, and claim of mistreatment of employees has come from, you guessed it, organized labor. Unions are so angry to not get membership dues from the millions of the company's employees they've cried foul over any straw they can grab. You're welcome to visit the same links I did. The only complaints which I personally could verify came from employees who were terminated for violations of Wal-Mart policies. Isn't it any company's right to enforce their policies? Would we expect smaller businesses to accept such behavior from employees? No, we wouldn't.

Do complaints come from others not involved with unions, hopeful to get billions in membership dues? Sometimes. One example is Hel-Mart.com. I do have two problems accepting the claims from these folks, though. The first is: Their biggest complaint is Wal-Mart is tremendously successful, and when one team wins, someone else must be a loser. Maybe they want the kind of world where everybody wins equally, and nobody prospers more than anyone else. (Mao come to mind?) My second issue with these folks is they have a hidden agenda. From their site, visitors are invited to purchase t-shirts and other paraphernalia with lame, insulting graphics printed on. So, if it's evil for a company to profit, why not just give these crappy t-shirts away? I can not even say the merchandise on this site, is not at least a little insulting. Their "merchandise" portrays the average American as ignorant, toothless hillbillies. Lovely, just lovely.

The long and short of exposing this myth is that, it's a company's duty to maximize revenue, while minimizing expenses. Why should it be different for Wal-Mart, than for any other company? Even on a long, hard work day, I'm sure the employees are glad to be employed. Those who call Wal-Mart evil for paying near minimum wage, and having the occasional idiot manager, has obviously never worked in fast food.

Exposing three myths about Wal-Mart number two: Wal-Mart is predatory.
The goal of any growing business is to maximize growth and profits. Wal-Mart has just mastered the process. What company is it, that would not do it themselves, were they able to? Again, the only resources I could find decrying Wal-Mart, are those with heavy union interests. (Those labor unions just keep popping up, eh?) The message I keep hearing is that businesses are somehow expected to be "guilty" in some way, for success. This is a favorite theme among professional parasites ranging from "protection racket" union thugs, to all manner of politicians-on-the-take.

Yes, Wal-Mart expands to a new community, expands the offerings they carry for their customers, and radiates out to bring in as large of a market share as is possible. Seems to me to be the way a business should be run. Don't these wolf-in-sheep's-clothing unions do the same? If you really believe that labor unions are about protecting their members, I have another bridge I would love to sell you.

Exposing three myths about Wal-Mart number three: Wal-Mart kills communities.
Take a wild guess which special interest makes this claim? Go ahead. Take three guesses and the first two won't even count against you. If you guessed it to be labor union thugs, you win a cookie. Downtown shopping districts saw a decrease in their customer counts when the free market chose to shop in areas like malls and shopping centers for savings and convenience. The customers decided to spend their money where they wished to, and that's as it should be. Wal-Mart did not do any more to hurt downtown businesses than those companies own bad decisions did. Get better or get beaten.

It wasn't Sam Walton who made small business owners refuse to advertise, shop around for suppliers, or even treat customers well. Those small business owners did it to themselves by refusing to adapt to changing market dynamics, hiring lazy "entitled" family members, and clinging to out-moded traditions. Wal-Mart is nothing more than a company operating with a healthy self interest, like any company should be.

Sources:
Yahoo! Finance
Fox Business
Boston.com
UFCW
More Labor Union propaganda
SCFL.org
Hel-Mart.com