Monday, July 25, 2011

Walmart reply.

Becky:
Do you seriously mean this? Do you know how many farmers they have f.....d?  Towns they have ruined? You admire what they have achieved?! Kim!  Are you just saying this to get a rise out of people? Watch the Frontline episode on Walmart and let me know if you feel the same. If you look closely at the people who's quality of life you think has improved, look again.
Kim:
Hi Becky,

Yes, I'm serious.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/walmart/view/

suggests that Walmart is responsible for jobs moving to China. If there wasn't Walmart, it would have been KMart or Target buying more goods from China and having a bigger market share.

Remember that US dollars going to China do have to come back to us. It might not be RCAs USA TVs, but RCA was doomed anyway as their products became too expensive to produce.

Unfortunately, people suffer when change occurs. But things do change, and Walmart takes advantage and initiates those changes. We had a Walmart behind FV... I'm not sure if it was there when you were. The clientele there didn't seem to mind the cheap and varied goods.

May I put your comment on my blog?
Becky:
Yes, you may.  You can edit the "f......d" if you like for politeness sake.

That Walmart was there when I was there and I shopped at it then. It is since one of the battles I have chosen amongst the many I have to choose from. Maybe because it is relatively easy for me to choose to not shop there. One of the things that bothers me most about them is that they have left most people no choice. They are super wealthy and can do anything they want. Also, the cheap and varied goods are crap and give people the idea that they need more than they do and can have more than they need because it's cheap. More shit in the landfill. I have fallen victim to the craving for more cheap crap, but now get my fix with other people's discards at the thrift store. Much more satisfying, but I still have too much crap. And yes, a small Indonesian child likely made what I have bought second hand, but I somehow feel slightly better about it in that I'm not buying a new thing so another new thing can replace it on the shelf.
Kim:
I like the idea that each has cost and benefits. Maybe the reason we can't agree is that one of us is looking at the costs and one is looking at the benefits. Neither of us is right. 
It looks like you have found another choice to shopping at Walmart in the thrift store (where my wife shops too). I share your feeling that we consume too much, that the quality is not great at Walmart, and that the little shop where they know your name is warm and fuzzy. But Walmart is not evil. It is just an evolutionary point in the history of merchandizing. They fulfill a need (or perceived need) for many. It is great that you are trying to persuade people that they have more choices. Once KMart and Sears were really hot. Now it is Walmart and Costco (where I go). What is next? Maybe a return to yesterday? Or maybe Amazon (where I shop a lot too.)

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I couldn't find the comment line, but the fact remains that people who don't get satisfaction from Walmart or any other establishment, whether because of quality of goods, poor service, hassle of parking do not tend to return that store. Keeping customers happy is critical to retail success. H.

Anonymous said...

I've wondered whether the displacement is in the efficiency of the channel or the quality of the goods.

As a champion of selling your own goods, I think "if you make them you make a chance to add unique and greater value - whether that be service or quality or specific fit".

I hear much of the suffering in the intermediate use of "traders of goods" - channels, and the disparity of makers not reaching their own customers - whether that be farmers or artisans, or even thought workers locked inside the scale of larger and soul-less entities. -David