Another Shocking Fact About the Walmart Heirs

FredHayek wrote: 50% control? Personally I think that is a good thing. Too often these days, the individual stockholders don't own a big enough percentage of shares to wield power, instead we get companies controlled by execs who award themselves excessive salaries, etc. A group of strong owners tends to think more long term and keeping expenses down.

That's right.

There are story after story out there about companies that are no longer run by, or involved with, their founder because they were either forced out or lost power after making the company public or appointing a board of directors.

The smart ones keep voting control, it's the only way to ensure you can always have the final say. i don't blame the Waltons one bit, and actually I'm surprised who has the other 2%, because I'd want 51%.

I don't have a problem with a company being successful, but I do have a problem when it grows so big that it has become a virtual monopoly in many markets. Walmart has crushed out the competition in hundreds of small towns across America. "Efficiency" sounds really good in theory but in the end all the benefit starts to flow to the owners and not the customers if they have no real option but to shop there.

If we didn't do something about monopolies like AT&T, we'd probably all still be making phone calls from landlines with our choice of dial telephone in black or ebony. And paying a lot for the dubious privilege, too.

Yes, I think of all the mom-and-pop stores that no longer exist because they couldn't compete against the cheap Chinese imported crap...

Yeah, I know....It's mom-and-pop's fault for not finding cheaper sources; or making their own products cheaper... As long as the cheaper-is-better worshippers have their way, then it's the fault of the lost businesses for not being able to compete against the mega-box...

LadyJazzer wrote: Yes, I think of all the mom-and-pop stores that no longer exist because they couldn't compete against the cheap Chinese imported crap...

Yeah, I know....It's mom-and-pop's fault for not finding cheaper sources; or making their own products cheaper... As long as the cheaper-is-better worshippers have their way, then it's the fault of the lost businesses for not being able to compete against the mega-box...

Another excellent post from the "we should all pay more just so we can save mom and pop" corner. To hell with competition.

I have family who live in a rural area down south and now the NEAREST place they can buy groceries is a Walmart 45 miles away. There used to be a grocery stores within five miles of them and two more larger ones within 10 miles. The same thing is true with almost anything else they want to buy - Walmart is the only place to get it now. It's bad enough that all the smaller stores were run out of business but think of the wasted time and gas having to drive that distance.

Again, I have no problem with success but it doesn't come without a downside.

BearMtnHIB wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote: Yes, I think of all the mom-and-pop stores that no longer exist because they couldn't compete against the cheap Chinese imported crap...

Yeah, I know....It's mom-and-pop's fault for not finding cheaper sources; or making their own products cheaper... As long as the cheaper-is-better worshippers have their way, then it's the fault of the lost businesses for not being able to compete against the mega-box...

Another excellent post from the "we should all pay more just so we can save mom and pop" corner. To hell with competition.

And I suppose if it had been YOUR "mom and pop" store to close down you would have been perfectly happy to go work for $7 an hour at Walmart, right? Personally, I WOULD rather pay more and keep a healthy assortment of jobs and business locally based.

AspenValley wrote:

BearMtnHIB wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote: Yes, I think of all the mom-and-pop stores that no longer exist because they couldn't compete against the cheap Chinese imported crap...

Yeah, I know....It's mom-and-pop's fault for not finding cheaper sources; or making their own products cheaper... As long as the cheaper-is-better worshippers have their way, then it's the fault of the lost businesses for not being able to compete against the mega-box...

Another excellent post from the "we should all pay more just so we can save mom and pop" corner. To hell with competition.

And I suppose if it had been YOUR "mom and pop" store to close down you would have been perfectly happy to go work for $7 an hour at Walmart, right? Personally, I WOULD rather pay more and keep a healthy assortment of jobs and business locally based.

Go for it. A lot of people are not financially able to be as generous as you can be. Remember... the 99 percent are all not upper middle class, or even lower middle class, some of them are plain old poor. But of course, your socialist ideology doesn't cater to the poor people, not if they get in the way of your collective planning.

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

AspenValley wrote:

BearMtnHIB wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote: Yes, I think of all the mom-and-pop stores that no longer exist because they couldn't compete against the cheap Chinese imported crap...

Yeah, I know....It's mom-and-pop's fault for not finding cheaper sources; or making their own products cheaper... As long as the cheaper-is-better worshippers have their way, then it's the fault of the lost businesses for not being able to compete against the mega-box...

Another excellent post from the "we should all pay more just so we can save mom and pop" corner. To hell with competition.

And I suppose if it had been YOUR "mom and pop" store to close down you would have been perfectly happy to go work for $7 an hour at Walmart, right? Personally, I WOULD rather pay more and keep a healthy assortment of jobs and business locally based.

Go for it. A lot of people are not financially able to be as generous as you can be. Remember... the 99 percent are all not upper middle class, or even lower middle class, some of them are plain old poor. But of course, your socialist ideology doesn't cater to the poor people, not if they get in the way of your collective planning.

So now it's "socialist" to choose to support your own local PRIVATE businesses? rofllol rofllol rofllol

How do you think it benefits the "poor people" you are so worried about to have to drive 45 miles to buy a head of lettuce, even if it's five cents cheaper than it was at the old store?

In the town where my grandparents were born in the Ozark mountains- a few mom and pop stores overcharged the locals for decades for things like soap and toilet paper. About 12 years ago- Walmart came to town.

Two stores went out of business a few years after Walmart- one store was a very small grocery- the one that overcharged the community of 10,000 people for almost 50 years. The other store was a sporting goods store that overcharged for items like fishing poles and worms for bait.

Walmart comes in- the soap and toilet paper price dropped 40%. The 45 dollar fishing poles could be had for $18 bucks. The mom and pop grocery employed mom and pop- and 2 other employees at minimum wage. The sporting goods place employed pop- and one employee at minimum wage. A total of 6 jobs were lost when Walmart came in- and the community started reaping the benefits of properly priced products.

Walmart employs 220 people at the store they brought in. It is widely known in the town that Walmart is the best place to work - a steady job in an otherwise jobless community.

Maybe in the city- a Walmart job is just like any other minimum wage gig- but in rural America it can be the best place to work. Walmart coming to town put a few hundred workers to work- and it resulted in 6 jobs lost- and the community was now able to buy toilet paper and other products without getting ripped off.

This is the straight up truth.

A win-win-win! Maybe you can find an example where Walmart put more moms and pops out of business than it hired- but I doubt it.

Even if you can find that example- overall the increased economic activity and competition that a Walmart store coming to town creates has had a positive impact in rural communities all over the country.

The overwhelming benefits can not be over looked by a reasonable mind.