A good rule of thumb to follow these days is that any book or article that blames Wal-Mart for some real or imagined evil should not be taken seriously. The meme “Wal-Mart is a destructive sorcerer spreading poverty and hardship throughout the world” is now so ingrained in the minds of so many Very Smart And Well-Read People that accusations against Wal-Mart are met with too little skepticism and scrutiny. It’s now a ritual to blame Wal-Mart — and following this ritual, while it might sell books and make the heads of Very Smart And Well-Read People nod, too often signals mental laziness or analytical weakness or both.
The above paragraph was prompted by reading a review in today’s New York Times Book Review, as was the following letter:
John T. Edge – reviewing Paul Roberts’s apocalyptic book “The End of Food” – quotes Mr. Roberts’s claim that today’s “food system can only truly be understood as an economic system” (“Nothing to Eat,” July 27). Indeed so. Unfortunately, though, Mr. Roberts is starving for economic understanding. Predicting that the age of abundant food is ending, he blames not only that timeworn (and mythical) scapegoat ‘overpopulation,’ but the devil du jour: Wal-Mart.
How does Wal-Mart hasten global hunger? By continuing “to drive down retail prices to unsustainably low levels.” But when resources become scarcer – or when people working with those resources suspect their increasing scarcity – prices rise, not fall. Falling prices signal greater abundance. Whether Wal-Mart is a principal cause of this greater abundance of food or, more likely, a retailer especially skilled at bringing the advantages of greater abundance to its customers, the fact that Wal-Mart continues to lower the prices it charges for food is solid evidence that we can safely ignore Mr. Roberts’s chicken-little-like assertions that we’re running out of food.
Donald J. Boudreaux
Share
{ 12 comments }
All true, but only to the extent that we have a free market. For example, agricultural subsidies are a transfer from taxpayers to farmers. At least in theory, that serves to make food cheaper. I'm not so sure about that, since subsidies encourage inefficiency.
You may find my essay, "Is Walmart really more evil than Google?", questioning how people think of Google as fantastically good and Walmart as fantastically evil, of interest:
http://mathoda.com/archives/184
Why is it that when energy prices increase, it's an "energy crisis," but when house prices decrease, it's a "housing crisis?" And both require government solutions. Reminds me of when the temperature decreases or increases, it is anthropogenic
global warmingclimate change.Here's why everything seems like a crisis, "but how long we can continue to meet the demands of the 6.5 billion alive today." Those 6.5 billion aren't helplessly waiting for some author or government to figure out a solution. The author likely would have trouble running a small business to met the needs of a few dozen customers yet alone figure out a central solution for billions.
"like all economic systems, has winners and losers" Ugh. The zero-sum economic system.
"Late in the narrative, Roberts reveals himself to be…a moderate." Does not follow
"'Soylent Green'…as an almost plausible peek at the year 2022"
First, my credentials. Or lack of them.
I am an unemployed truck driver (couple of years OTR[1] — dry vans and reefers) Quit because my body was complaining of the pain, I was chronically sick because truck drivers are not allow to rest, and my soul ached from the inhumane treatment up with which truck drivers have to put.
Before that I was an unemployed Associate Director for Technical Services And Communications at a local university where for most of 20 years I did everything thing they asked and everything they needed (two things) until I was found to be earning too much money and was too old.
Before that I was AUTOCODER programmer, COBOL programmer, Assembler programer, Systems Programmer, and ODAS[2]. I retired after nearly 30 years to avoid the too-much-money-too-old thing.
Before that, boring stuff with long-haul telephony and telegraphy that involved people, and wires and stuff.
I have a BS in Management from Golden Gate University recieved when I decided to bail from what was left of the Bell
System.
Summary: No meaningful credentials in Marketing, the Dismal Science, or anything else productive.
Walmart. Dreadful place. Unless you want prescriptions you can afford. Or the best avocados available in the area.
And I don't know about Walmarts where you are, but all the ones I have seen are surrounded by all sorts of stores–some of them in direct competition with Walmart.
But it the experiences driving a truck that come to mind when somebody starts in on Walmart.
Do you know where your food comes from? Most of the non-Walmart DC's[3] and warehouses (where your food lives on its way to the store) are just simply disgusting.
But the thing that comes to mind first when somebody starts in on Walmart is they way they treat OTR drivers at the stores. They recognize that drivers are humans, eat, wear clothes, buy stuff. That is rare. They even allow trucks to park on their lots — for the occasional 10-hour break mandated by law. (Drivers have abused some stores and we are no longer welcome there but I discovered that even at those it is often possible to talk to the manager (a good idea anyway) and be allowed to park somewhere on the lot.)
Are things I don't like about Walmart? Sure. There are things about me that I don't like.
But low prices and availability of most of what I need in one place are not among the things I don't like.
[1]Over The Road
[2]Other Duties As Assigned
[3]Distribution Centers
The meme "Wal-Mart is a destructive sorcerer spreading poverty and hardship throughout the world" is now so ingrained in the minds of so many Very Smart
Don keeps picking up the same leftest/moderate strawmen themes to knock down again and again; but face it, mass media could never fill their pages and airtime if they could never present the absurd as the standard of ethic and reason. The fact is, the average person is pretty stupid, and have of those are even dumber. Where would media be without such!
Walmart is doing more for world peace than any other institution in the world by making the US economy dependent upon China and the China's dependent upon US. Without us buying, their unemployment would be off the chart.
Our military industrial complex and China's military both need credible enemies. Just watch the statements about the threat put out by military spokesman on both sides. Thank god we have the Walmart effect to help counter these two defense juggernauts.
Historically, at one time, war was a cost- effective way to obtain resources or control. But the reasonableness of war changed when the dominate resources became creativity and knowledge. War and the military are extremely cost in-effective. However, both our and China's military bureaucracy are fighting the last war and don't understand the fundamental change.
There is a trade-off between oil and alternative energy. This trade-off is approximately 100 billion dollars in low/zero operating cost alternatives to achieve energy equivalent of a million bbl/day of oil. In other words, 50% of one year's military budget would produce more energy in this country than the entire output of Iraq. This yields an inescapable conclusion: Iraq is a very dumb investment.
In conclusion, Walmart and the Walmart supply chain is good for the world, independent of any minor issues.
Tax breaks? Sure. And so also to every body the local pols want to attract to buy the "new development" — consisting of land grabbed by eminent domain.
But for another take on Walmart, dig around and find out who _actually_ (in disasters like Katrina) gets insulin ti the local diabetics, gets drinking water to people, and so forth.
(Clue: look for "Walmart store manager".)
Lincoln McCain: "It seems pretty unprincipled of Walmart to seek these political rents when entering a town, especially when other companies who were there for years dutifully paying taxes get no such tax breaks."
I'm not sure I understand why trying to avoid paying taxes is unprincipled. Can you explain?
Is it Walmart that is unprincipled when governments grant tax breaks to some businesses but not to others? By law and by contract the officers of Walmart are supposed to act in the best interest of the owners of the firm – the shareholders. Isn't trying to avoid paying taxes exactly acting in the interests of shareholders?
Government officials are legally obligated to act in the interests of the legal residents of their community. Are you claiming these government officials are unpincipled in granting tax breaks to large companies? By the way, they grant tax breaks to numerous businesses, not just to Walmart.
The governing bodies of a community realize that the huge sales taxes from a Walmart will flow to their community rather than to the one next door or down the road. That's why most communities grant tax breaks to Walmart, Target, Home Depot, and other large retailers. Elected officials are maximizing the overall tax revenues of their communities, in many cases from residents of surrounding towns. Isn't that acting in the best interests of the population they serve?
Just exactly how are Walmart and elected officials unprincipled, Lincoln? As I see it, both Walmart and governments are fulfilling their legal obligations to the people they represent.
"And there’s the food industry itself, which has long funneled research dollars into scarf-and-bolt goods of the high-flavor and high-fat sort. Roberts cites a report projecting that the true measure of success will soon be whether foodstuffs “can be consumed one-handed, and whether packaging causes a mess.”
America gave birth to the fast food industry because Americans are the busiest and most productive people on the planet.
Did Americans evolve to serve the fast food industry; or, did the fast food industry evolve to serve Americans?
Ridiculous question and blatantly obvious answer, but don't ask it on the campus of the U. of Colorado at Boulder unless you want to find out just how difficult it really is.
What about moral obligations? Just to live by the letter of the law is not enough…
Bring back the prosecutorial spirit of '34!
"What about moral obligations?
Posted by: Crusader | Jul 28, 2008 6:52:50 PM"
Dear Crusader,
I admit the quote is selective, but I have two questions: 1. Of what moral obligations would you be speaking? 2. How do you apply your questions to the thread?
I don’t shop at Walmart because the stores are cruddy and loaded with shoddy merchandise. Actually, you can get the same stuff or higher quality merchandise at TARGET for LESS, these days……