Wal-Mart & The Economic Multiplier Effect.

Quote from maxpi:

I do not worry that somebody will take my job through offshoring. If they can do it better and cheaper and they win the contract, I have to find something that I can do better/cheaper than they, no??
More...

Wrong, standards of living come into play. China is one humongous sweatshop, hence no way today's US population can compete with the manufacturing jobs. Even if they tried, the whole system would collapse cause who would buy all the high tech toys being hyped & advertised 24-7.

Globalization does not benefit everyone, in fact it will drive the masses down the toilet. Effects of globalization are already evident all over third world countries, whose populations used to be self-sufficient from mother nature and are now dependent on the 1st world big business. Funny how that coincides with the tactics of pure capitalism and the techniques used by big capitalists to acquire cheap wage labor over 100 years ago.

Jump on board of the players that are capturing all the profits from globalization and you will be all right. <a href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?k=wal%20mart" onmouseover="window.status='Wal-mart'; return true;" onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;">Wal-mart</a> is making a killing from it, no doubt about it. Not for nothing, but they are definitely passing on the cost savings to the US consumer, I actually think Walmart is the biggest factor why this country is not experiencing the inflation it should.
 
Quote from Ripley:

Congratulations on looking at everything negative about Wal-Mart.

I buy my chicken, tires, gas and everything from them. Since everything is at one place, I might go in to buy some printing paper, and I come out with couple of pants, shirts and tires etc. I guess nobody cares about how much of an economic benefit Wal-Mart is and focuses on the negative.

Wal-Mart is the best. Wal-Mart is an economic revival. It brings everything to an economic equilibrium. Wherein which, we can use freed up economic fire power to improve the world in other much economically efficient ways.

You are focusing in on short term negativities which just simply doesn't outweight the longer term future benefits. I say we need at least one Wal-Mart in every American town.
More...


LOL....yeah "we need 'at least one' Walmart in every Amerrican town"...the one store to rule them all.


:p
 
.

SouthAmerica: Reply to All


Many of you made comments about your experiences at the Wal-Mart store. But…

I know about Wal-Mart mostly by what I read in the newspapers and from television programs regarding that company.

About 10 years ago I was visiting a friend in the Hamptons, Long Island and she had to go to Wal-Mart to buy something and I went with her. That was the only time that I have been inside a Wal-Mart store. We stayed in the store for 15 minutes, since she was buying only a hand full of items.

I am able to survive without a Wal-Mart store.
.

**************


SouthAmerica: Source of Information posted


The information that I posted above comes from a website in California where people are fighting like hell to keep Wal-Mart away from their area for them to keep their own jobs in other supermarkets, and small businesses.

I did not compile that information that I posted above regarding Wal-Mart.

Anyone can dispute the quality of their information directly with the source, since they are the ones who have the original sources for all the data.


http://fightwally.com/


PS: The truth is: Wal-Mart will displace current supermarket workers in California that makes an average of $ 15 per hour plus benefits, and replace them with Wal-Mart workers making $ 8 per hour with almost no benefits.

.
 
.

May14, 2005


SouthAmerica: in a “Nutshell”:


Here is the model being adopted today by Corporate America and what American workers can expect in the future from their employers.

“Wal-Mart - the world's biggest retailer has become a lightning rod for critics who contend that it mistreats workers and that the company's low wages force employees to seek government aid in the form of Medicaid health insurance for the poor, food stamps and housing assistance.”

They also can expect to work long hours without overtime pay, no pensions, shorter vacations, etc…


****************


“Wal-Mart stock and morale battered, woes pile up”
Reuters - Fri May 13, 2005
By Emily Kaiser


CHICAGO (Reuters) - Wal-Mart Stores Inc. shares are in a rut as a confluence of events including a weak profit forecast, a federal investigation into a former top executive and a stream of lawsuits have scared off investors.

Now, some analysts think the stock won't recover for years, and the bad news may rub off on employee morale.

"If there was one thing Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton was good at, it was motivating the work force," said Robert Buchanan, retail analyst with A.G. Edwards.

"Today, the bond between management and employees is at risk because of the ongoing controversy surrounding (former Vice Chairman) Tom Coughlin and poor stock performance."

For years, Wal-Mart was seen as a sure-thing. With double-digit sales and profit growth and a seemingly smooth and unstoppable future, it was the poster child for American entrepreneurial spirit.

But lately, the world's biggest retailer has become a lightning rod for critics who contend that it mistreats workers and that the company's low wages force employees to seek "government aid in the form of Medicaid health insurance for the poor, food stamps and housing assistance."

Wal-Mart also faces the largest ever U.S. class-action lawsuit on charges that it discriminates against women in pay and promotions.

Last month, Wal-Mart said it was cooperating with a grand jury investigating whether Coughlin misused company funds. Wal-Mart in March said that Coughlin resigned at the company's request over its probe into unauthorized use of corporate gift cards and personal reimbursements.

The Wall Street Journal said Coughlin may have used undocumented expense payments to finance anti-union activities.

BAD NEWS PILES ON

On Thursday, Wal-Mart reported a disappointing first-quarter profit and warned that second-quarter results would not meet Wall Street expectations.

The retailer also said it would have a difficult time meeting its full-year forecast.

The news sent Wal-Mart shares down as much as 4 percent on Thursday, and the stock is off some 18 percent from a November 52-week high and near a 4-1/2 year low set in late April. Analysts said the stock was trading well below the valuation that Wal-Mart commanded in recent years, but they were still reluctant to recommend buying it.

Wal-Mart's shares are trading at about 18 times 2006 earnings estimates -- a stock valuation measure known as price-to-earnings ratio. That's a 20 percent discount to Wal-Mart's historical valuation, according to analyst reports.

"While it may present a trading opportunity, too many question marks surround the business for us to be aggressive on the stock," said Emme Kozloff, retail analyst with Sanford Bernstein.

Analysts said the weak forecast alone was enough to make them cautious. Add in the barrage of bad news -- which analysts call "headline risk" -- and Wall Street is preparing for several years of poor stock performance.

"Absent some improvement in return on investment, we fear that the shares could remain range-bound for the next couple of years," Edward Weller, retail analyst with Think Equity Partners, said in a research note.

That could be a blow to employee morale.

"Wal-Mart's common stock has now underperformed the broad market over the past 2-1/2 years," A.G. Edwards' Buchanan said. "Lots of employees still own lots of stock."

Shares of Wal-Mart were down 42 cents, or 0.9 percent, at $47.23 in morning trade on the New York Stock Exchange.

Buchanan said store operations are not as "crisp" as they once were, and that could be turning off shoppers who complain of slow checkout lines and unhelpful staff.

"In a business that centers on top management's ability to motivate the rank-and-file, we believe Wal-Mart has work to do," Buchanan said.

.
 
The Truth is, for what ever reason and for many different reasons : the middle class is diminishing at an accelerated rate.

the spread between the haves and the have nots is becoming very very wide, while Things are costing more and more. bottom line our future is not looking very good economically. just look around and open your eyes what do you see....its gonna get ugly and i am not a negative person but the facts are the facts.

L7
 
Quote from ratboy88:

theorem my ass..... the globalist are just de-diversifying us all so we will become dependent vs self sufficient. then they pull the rug out from under us and say PAY UP SUCKERS. oh by the way your currency is worthless so we'll just take these here little assets like land and resources. and if you fight us you will realize how you have been suckered to dumb down your military strength. there's another name for it it is called loan sharking. then slavery.
More...

Sounds to me like the native american issue from the 1800's...

A couple of more things to help clarify the issue:

* Globalization is a fact, and the greatest promoter has been the US.

* The US has quite a history of world trade. After world war II, though, Europe and Japan were in rubbles, Latin America, the tigers of the middle-east were no economic factors. Oil was cheap, under $3 till the 70's (if memory serves me right). So, it was easy for the US to sell its wares around the world, no competition!

* Things have changed, even oil is a tad more expensive. So, now uncle Sam has a chinese not only competing with him all over the world, but, knocking at his door...

* Technology and population growth have made us a world community...

* Economies are better off with international trade. The US is a good example. Producers manufacture to a greater population than their own. There are risks, which mostly have to do with interdependency. You sell more, hence the contractions are greater. But, also you have the great advantage of making wars more unlikely, Russia and China are quite more open to talk with the US. What is the $ value of this advantage?

* Then, let's not forget that all of those items manufactured in China are cheap, hence: the standard of living of ALL US citizens is better.

* Japan, China and other foreign central banks have been pouring in US $ which have allowed the Fed to lower interest rates, at a cost to these cb's in the 100s of billions.

The 70's come to mind, I'm sure we've been living much better off for the last 20 years, because of the low inflation due to the low cost of chinese consumer items. And, lately, due to the enormous infusion of cheap loans to our government, through Fed bonds.

So, I think your missing quite a few things to the issue of globalization. And, what worries me most, is that you're not alone, and politically your ideas may have a weight in the US, which may bring restrictions to trade, which, in my view would be tantamount to economic suicide for the US.
 
Quote from traderlivermore:


So, I think your missing quite a few things to the issue of globalization. And, what worries me most, is that you're not alone, and politically your ideas may have a weight in the US, which may bring restrictions to trade, which, in my view would be tantamount to economic suicide for the US.
More...

Bro, get the theory out of your head and look at the facts. Globalization is a consolidation of capital, means of production & wage labor. Every single time this process has occured it turned the masses in slave labor. Tons of examples in history.

USA population is on the of the rich, hence cheap Chinese sweatshop products benefit this country greatly. But still, the rifts within this country are growing fast and will continue to do so with globalization.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top