Wal-Mart: Helpful Or Harmful?

Divisive as it may be, Wal-Mart is representative of American culture and the values and practices ingrained in our society. The three articles present differing angles regarding the massive corporation and all of them make legitimate points. However, after reading each piece, it becomes clear that the negative consequences of Wal-Mart far outweigh any positive benefits.

Stacy Mitchell's article makes harsh accusations against Wal-Mart, citing examples of corporate greed and small businesses left suffering. A major principle of the American Dream is the ability to start one's own business, yet most see this 'business' as the small-town variety as opposed to a multi-national corporation. Mitchell uses the example of a strip mall in Denver featuring Asian themed businesses that was at risk for becoming a Wal-Mart; thus, forcibly evicting the owners by condemning the property if they refuse to leave. Although the center may dilapidated, it is profitable and culturally relevant. Destroying it to make room for a retail giant seems almost shameful.

Offering $10 million in public subsidies for the corporation, Denver gives tax dollars directly to the powerful and profitable Wal-Mart machine. "Consumer choices are not all that's driving the growth of the corporate chains. Public policy plays a major role" (Mitchell). Wal-Mart does more harm than good for this town because thousands of jobs will be lost and local businesses will be in competition. The tax policies have loopholes that benefit large chains because they can transfer funds whereas small business must pay on every dollar they make. There are major incentives for corporations. "All of this adds up to a startlingly titled playing field, a rigged system that could hardly be classified as free enterprise. Our hometown businesses deserve better" (Mitchell).

Wal-Mart's official website paints a much different picture. It emphasizes the values of its founder, Sam Watson, and how he desired a family environment with respect being the major value. There is an entire section devoted to diversity which praises the importance of having a varied group of employees. However, within the past few years, there was a major class action lawsuit involving discrimination against minority employees at Wal-Mart. Such an action does not reflect a company that values diversity. "Meet Our Suppliers" also praises the diversity of those who supply the retail giant with their goods. The suppliers profiled demonstrate variety, yet it appears that the company selected those who would bolster their image as a diverse community. It seems that the middle-aged white men who were born into wealth and inherited companies were left out of these profiles. This practice is not unique to Wal-Mart but is worth noting.

Most interesting on the website were the "Benefits" and "Wal-Mart Culture" sections. Designed to entice people to work for the corporation, the listed benefits for employees include comprehensive health care, retirement plans, and in-store discounts. According to statistics, 92% of employees are insured fully. Two things about this were not consistent. First, in Mitchell's article, she cites that over half of Wal-Mart employees were eligible for Welfare and many more of them qualified for other assistance programs. Is Wal-Mart truly taking care of its employees? Secondly, what percentage of store workers are full-time employees? In most cases, benefits are only for those who work full-time. Furthermore, a 10% discount on store items is not much. Employee discounts usually range from 20%-50%, and most grocery stores offer $4 generic prescriptions. Upon close examination the benefits aren't that great.

"Wal-Mart Culture" shows the irony of the corporation. Sam Watson prided himself on a comfortable and family-like atmosphere, embracing diversity, and offering excellent customer service. The 'Sundown Rule' involves not putting off until tomorrow what can be accomplished today: the site used the example of a pharmacist getting a phone call from one of his diabetic patients who had lost her insulin and he immediately drove to the pharmacy before opening hours to make sure she had her life-saving medicine. Also mentioned were the 'Open Door' policy for discussing ideas and problems, the '10 Foot Rule' for smiling and offering assistance within ten feet of a customer, and the idea that management should not be stuck behind a desk but actively involved with all employees and tasks. These are all good ideas that make for a solid business. Wal-Mart seems like a company that was started with noble intentions and did very well because of its approach to employees and service. As a small and locally-owned business these approaches work. However, as Wal-Mart spiraled out of control-- in the sense that it expanded rapidly and became a giant multi-national corporation-- these policies are not as effective when it comes to such a large network. As business becomes increasingly de-personalized, these measures lose their efficacy. Having a "door greeter" is a nice gesture, yet in a giant warehouse with glaring fluorescent lights it does little to make a consumer feel 'at home.'

Snyder's article shows the most balanced approach to the debate and tries to examine the issue from both sides. When a Wal-Mart wants to come to town, it divides the community, and his article reflects this. A blazing corporate giant detracts from the charm and quality of a small-town life. However, he makes an excellent point when he says that Wal-Mart offers low prices and everything you need in a single stop. This can be good for poor families because not everyone the luxury of wealth, and for some discount shopping is the only option. "How do you choose between the desires of a family with four children living below the poverty level, for affordable clothing and food, with the desires of others who have escaped a lifetime of crowds, pollution, and stress for a particular quality of life?" (Snyder). But this issue goes much deeper than prices: "If a big-box comes, it will make money. If we disallow it, it will go elsewhere and make money. It makes little difference to them. Either way, it makes an enormous difference to us" (Snyder). Therein lies the conflict with big business. He goes on to say that "there will be no winners-- except the large corporations, who seem to win no matter what" (Snyder).

It is important that Snyder mentions the impact on the local economy and environment, and not allowing the town to be "controlled by absentee forces" (Snyder). Wal-Mart claims to embrace the community, but it disrupts small businesses and local endeavors. The constant trucking of items causes the air to be filled with pollution and food produced by local growers is lost to these massive shipments. Communities-- with or without Wal-Marts-- need to come together to do all they can to ensure that Big-Business does not overpower their way of life. Snyder's suggestion of a household and clothing collective was a brilliant idea of a local solution. A corporate giant is not sensitive to regional needs.

Wal-Mart's inconsistent treatment towards employees and commitment to diversity make the company's motives questionable. The devastating impact it has on locally-owned and small business cannot be ignored. It is appalling to hear of the tax benefits and loopholes that encourage a new corporation to come to town. As a citizen and consumer, I think that Wal-Mart is an ugly-- albeit realistic-- representation of our society. Big-business tends to present an impressive package to entice people, and then it destroys everything in its path. Small-towns are becoming increasingly similar as they are losing the shops and business that make them unique. I personally choose to take my business to places that support the local economy and make Shelby County unique. Most of the food I eat comes from the Farmer's Market or dining in a restaurant that is not a franchise, I purchase books and clothes from quirky little boutiques, and Iet local vendors handle my needs whenever possible. Wal-Mart may be convenient, but it is not without dire consequences.

WORKS CITED:

Mitchell, Stacy. "Wal-Mart, the Abuse of Eminent Domain and Corporate Welfare." December 2003.
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/independent_business/walmart_eminent_domain.html

Snyder, T. Richard. "Boxed in by Big-Box Debate." Village Soup. 30 April 2007.
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/walmart/2007/belfast_maine_snyder.php

Wal-Mart Official Website. "Diversity. "Meet Our Suppliers." "The Wal-Mart Culture." "Benefits."
http://www.walmartstores.com/GlobalWMStoresWeb/navigate.do?catg=215