this post was submitted on 26 Dec 2024
758 points (99.0% liked)

News

23684 readers
3275 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Two studies reveal that Walmart’s entry into communities lowers household incomes by 6% over 10 years and increases poverty by 8%, even when accounting for cost savings.

Its practices, such as undercutting competitors, suppressing wages, and squeezing suppliers, harm local economies by reducing employment and forcing smaller businesses to close.

Walmart’s “monopsony power” enables it to pay lower wages and dominate suppliers, compounding these effects.

The findings challenge the idea that low prices alone benefit communities, emphasizing long-term economic harm.

——

Non-paywall link

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Aslanta@lemmy.world 17 points 3 days ago

I thoroughly enjoyed this article. It was full of cited information and even the sources led to interesting reads.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 14 points 2 days ago

I just despise this, the deck is stacked against us so hard that a normal life feels so.... Utopian in how impossible it is to acquire.

[–] glimse@lemmy.world 133 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Hard to start a business when your competitor is Walmart.

Hard to make a living when the main employer is Walmart.

Hard to move when you don't have any money.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 38 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Hard to start a business when your competitor is Walmart.

It's also hard to maintain an existing business when your competitor is WalMart.

They can afford to undercut you until you go out of business, then they can charge whatever the market will bear.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (4 children)

Which is a lot on inelastic goods like food.

Edit- to use the correct term

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 13 points 3 days ago

The Walton Family are terrorists

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 39 points 3 days ago (2 children)

This just in, studies rediscover basic functions of an economy. Again.

A few more studies bro, just a few more. We are sure to figure this stuff out if we just do another study.

[–] Juice@midwest.social 15 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Someone should look into this capitalism thing and see if its creating any problems, surprised noone has thought about it till now

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 4 points 2 days ago

Oh yeah, we should do a study....

Wait a minute, I am on to you grant boi.....

[–] Don_alForno 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The frustrating thing is: Sometimes the same economists who do these studies tend to magically forget their own findings a week later when they are interviewed by some news channel about what the government should do about x or y. Because they can't live with the fact that some of the base principles and beliefs of their own school of thought are deeply flawed.

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 1 points 2 days ago

Or, more likely the economic incentives that they are exposed to (academia, grants and the politics of both) reward this behaviour.

The principals are understood, I remember reading about similar issues with the Dutch East India Company (you know that recent company that just went under in 1799) back in school. The reason we are where we are is that people (economists often try to say otherwise, but are included in this set) in the system we have are incentivised to not actually change things, but to come up with reasons why they should stay this way.

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 117 points 4 days ago (2 children)

No fucking shit.

This was news in like 1990.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 32 points 4 days ago

Unfortunately dipshits will still argue about it to this day

Ya, I remember it being mentioned when I worked for them about 25 years ago. Unfortunately I cannot find any articles. All local news at the time, probably. Towns that had citizens who banded together and successfully combatted Walmart moving in, etc.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 49 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

Walmart encourages their employees to apply for federal and state programs like food stamps because they don't give their employees enough hours and give them weird shifts making it hard to even have another job.

And then they want them to use them at Walmart.

It's disgusting.

[–] Wogi@lemmy.world 19 points 3 days ago

Walmart is one of the largest welfare queens in the country. They profit off of poverty, and are actively incentivized to not only keep communities poor, but to make them poor.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 21 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

You get a 10% employee discount!*

*Limited items, only available for employees who work 40+ hours/week (which is almost nobody). All grocery items are ineligible.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 75 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (4 children)

Wastes vasts amounts of urban land on parking instead of housing or more businesses

Is often so deep in parking lots and strip malls its impossible to walk to

Cheap prices and cheap chinese manufacturing to help eliminate local competition

Massive corporation has more bulk buying power than local competition

Designed to be a one stop shop, fix your car, buy a tv and grab some food

Self checkouts pays robots instead of people in the community the store is in

The people who do work there are paid shit wages for life, often not even keeping up with inflation meaning they actually get paid less every year

Probably paying less taxes than they should be for the amount of space the business takes up and the amount of traffic generated

Helps promote car centric design which is a terribly ineffecient and expensive way to move people within an urban area.

[–] negativenull@lemmy.world 44 points 4 days ago

All profits are exported out of the community, instead of staying/swirling about the community.

More than half of Walmart's employees are on food stamps or some other form of government assistance. So along with everything else, our tax money goes to pay their employees because they won't.

I call that a tax break, paying shit wages, AND ruining the local area by making everybody more poor all rolled into one because Walmart employees often shop at Walmart for their employee discount (because they can't afford to shop elsewhere on their poor wages), meaning that their wages go right back into the company's coffers right alongside our tax dollars.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] leadore@lemmy.world 24 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Another quality-of-life lowering thing caused by Walmart/Amazon that's obvious but they didn't go into, is that once Walmart and Amazon have eliminated so many local businesses, everyone is forced to shop at them. Even if we don't want to, we have nowhere else to go--we can't just boycott them and still get stuff we need.

Walmart decides what you will and won't have access to buy. They've pared down the variety of brands and offer a subset of items by those brands minimum, for their efficiency of ordering and stocking items, including groceries. Then the brands stop making the items that Walmart decided not to stock, so they're gone. There are still a few other grocery stores but most have them have merged into a few mega-grocery chains with the same issues as with Walmart.

So even if you're OK with going to Walmart your choices are limited (those of us old enough to remember things we used to be able to buy that are long gone these days may notice this more). So what it's come down to is you get what Walmart offers you, or you order it from Amazon or Temu. There are still a few places to get real things of good quality, but they're harder to find, never local stores, so you have to order online sight unseen, and of course it's an expensive and time-consuming process compared to being able to just go to the store and grab something.

[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 62 points 4 days ago (2 children)

It should be illegal to pay people wages that require them to take public assistance

[–] BakerBagel@midwest.social 32 points 4 days ago

Don't worry, they will fix the issue by eliminating piblic assistance

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago

If your employees have to use public assistance then you should be on the hook for the assistance and the administrative cost of that assistance.

And when that hits 10 percent or more of your workforce then the government forces a union.

We've let the corporations fuck around long enough.

[–] Steve@communick.news 58 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (6 children)

Isn't this obvious?

If an outside Corp comes in displacing local business, the profits that would cycle back into that community now get taken out. It doesn't matter what the prices are, when the community as a whole has less money with each transaction.

[–] Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 3 days ago

Thank you for pointing this out. When you shop small locally-owned businesses, the money is often directly reinjected into local economies. The money you spend at locally businesses puts a girl through ballet lessons instead of putting dollars towards a new yacht. And the ballet company is owned by your neighbor.

If people really want to fight income inequality, stop giving your money to billionaires everywhere you can.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Drusas@fedia.io 34 points 3 days ago (5 children)

This was proven decades ago.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 40 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I was buying camping equipment from walmart. They were out of some of my supplies and a new tent I wanted. I ordered alternative items from a online store and they were so much higher quality than the ones at walmart. Walmart squeezes its suppliers so much you end up with items that are more cheaply made. I've tested this on several different items and have discovered that walmart sources many of their brands straight from china. You can buy the same cheap shit from temu.

[–] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 47 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Theres literally documentaries from 2010 about manufacturers who make a "Walmart version" because Walmart demands these factories make them at a specific price.

Like in one documentary, the same toaster from Target and Walmart, the Walmart one had different cheaper parts inside. TVs, furniture, lamps. Even the plastic storage containers like totes and Tupperware had "Walmart" versions that were real flimsy.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 21 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Snapper Mowers actually pulled from Walmart in 2006 because they wanted to focus high quality products rather then moving quantity.

Selling Snapper lawn mowers at Wal-Mart wasn’t just incompatible with Snapper’s future – Wier thought it was hazardous to Snapper’s health. Snapper is known in the outdoor-equipment business not for huge volume but for quality, reliability, durability. A well-maintained Snapper lawn mower will last decades; many customers buy the mowers as adults because their fathers used them when they were kids. But Snapper lawn mowers are not cheap, any more than a Viking range is cheap. The value isn’t in the price, it’s in the performance and the longevity.

Later in 2013, Briggs & Stratton decided to start selling Snapper in Walmarts again. 2014, Briggs & Stratton closed a Snapper plant. They then had to restructure and other corporate BS, so fuck around and find out. Publicly traded company garbage.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

They also do this with Black Friday electronics now too.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 20 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Their stores extract local spending dollars and transfer them to shareholders who live in gated communities.

If they paid more in wages than a store made in profits they would close the store.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 49 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Sounds like a national security threat. More directly threatening on a daily basis than many other things they claim are threats.

[–] DancingBear@midwest.social 12 points 4 days ago (1 children)

More threatening than Luigi?

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 12 points 4 days ago

Companies failing to properly protect the foodchain have killed hundreds. But you don't see any CEOs in chains.

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world 24 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Low prices AND low value. The cheap ass shit they sell is intended to break and be replaced as quickly as possible. E.g. cheap clothes that wear out quickly. Those who can't afford better are thus trapped in a cycle of repeat buying.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago (5 children)

The boot problem as written by Terry Pratchett. You can buy crappy boots every year for 25 dollars or boots for life for 100 dollars.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] robocall@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago

Walmart is bad for small town America. And the rest of America too.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 15 points 4 days ago

Makes sense. Take 10 small businesses with a owner/manager and say 5 employees. 50 employees. Local convenience store, small grocer, whatever. Not all at min wage, the owner/manager are going to be making a bit more. WalMart rolls in, kills those businesses, now you have four overworked managers managing 40 overworked employees at bottom dollar wages. The other 16 had to go find something else or get welfare services or whatver.

A very simplified version, but I could see how this brings down wages.

load more comments
view more: next ›