Go to If I get smart with you....how will you know?
- Add a comment
- Go to How can this be? Wal-Mart to Sell Generic Drugs for $4 per 30 day supply.
Horay for Wal-Mart, but ...
imagine the impact if the GOPers hadn't PREVENTED the federal government from using its purchasing power in the new medicade part b entitlement program
posted by
fwmystic
on September 22, 2006 at 2:13 PM
| link to this | reply
Dear Rarmcwa...
...it's a good question you pose, and I'm not sure I have a ready answer.
Rather than attempt a direct answer, let me point you in the concept of the 'race to the bottom'. The corporate mindset has changed radically in the last 30 years. Corporates are no longer acting as responsible citizens, with some care for the social and ecological environment in which they operate (and upon which they depend for their very survival). Now, corporates are only interested in the bottom line. Manufacturing is cheaper in eastern Europe than the US? Then shut all those American plants overnight and move! When the Chines or the Thais undercut the eastern Europeans, they'll be off again. Employee or environmental laws too tight where the factory is right now? Then just up sticks and move it to a place where they're non-existent! So what if people get fucked over in the process - it's all about profit!
The problem with this is that it's extremely short term. How far can you cut costs? When you have 8-year-olds sewing your trainers for you at $0.50 a day, where can you go from there?
My other thought about your question is that it pre-supposes that 'the poor' are a fixed feature of society. That's just not true. But it is all the time the likes of Wal-Mart are forcing people into selling their one non-renewable commodity - their time - at low, low prices!
One more thing. I didn't use the phrase "money-grubbing". And I don't hold the Wal-Mart jobs, nor the people who do them, in any form of disdain. What I hate with a passion is the fact that large corporates (and Wal-mart is far from the only one here) feel they are big enough and ugly enough to treat people like a disposable commodity, squeezing as much time and effort as they possibly can from them in return for as little cash and benefits as possible. This is not what true capitalism is all about, and is just a road to ruin in the long run.
Another long comment for you, Corbin!
D
posted by
DamonLeigh
on September 22, 2006 at 8:05 AM
| link to this | reply
Dear Damon
Yes, I can see how providing bottom-dog prices on quality merchandise to poor people could be construed as "money-grubbing." And that goes double for people in poor countries, who have been buying everything they need at prices inflated by their corrupt governments, protectionist trade policies and inefficient, command-and-control economic systems.
But tell me, just how does it benefit poor people to have an employer deliver increased pay and benefits to employees when those costs must be passed along to poor customers, many of whom would kill to get a job as good as the ones you disdain at WalMart?
Just asking.
posted by
Rarmcwa
on September 22, 2006 at 6:46 AM
| link to this | reply
Wal-Mart...
...treats its employees appallingly badly - not just in the US and in the West, but also in the developing world where all those $5 t-shirts are made by 10-year-olds, thus saving the American shopper money. How Marvellous.
Do you really think that peddling cheap drugs is enough to balance this situation?
Also, consider this. I did some work for Unilever earlier this year, and discovered that they are pushing in to the 'poverty market-space'. In other words, they reckon that those living in poverty (in the developing world or in the US) have been badly served with 'product' for too long now, and that's where the next big tranche of profits will come from (now that all us wealthy consumers have just about everything we could possibly need and are up to our tits in debt). Could it be that Wal-mart is identifying the same market sector?
Consider this, too. The US has one of the largest populations of prescription drug addicts and
abusers in the entire world. So perhaps you can explain how a retailing giant flogging off prescription drugs on the cheap is going to help ease thus problem? Or could it be that a population is a lot more docile and easier to control and manipulate when they're all doped up to the eyeballs?
(Incidentally, did you know how mad the US looks from the outside for allowing prescription drugs to be advertised on TV? Nowhere else allows that, y'know).
D
posted by
DamonLeigh
on September 22, 2006 at 4:51 AM
| link to this | reply
PS to Success Leader
And yes, smart retailers know about "loss leaders," merchandise sold at below-cost prices to get people into their stores.
At that point, if the shopper doesn't have enough sense to buy the loss leader and split, too bad. Or, as my weird college president uncle used to quip: "You can lead a horticulture, but you can't make her think."
Get it?
posted by
Rarmcwa
on September 21, 2006 at 11:36 AM
| link to this | reply
And furthermore ...
Dear C.D.:
Excellent post, and thanks for bringing it to our attention.
I read a piece by a columnist a few months ago, I forget just whom, but the gist of it was that all the people who portray WalMart as evil money-grubbers are overlooking an important piece of the puzzle, at least when it comes to serving those of limited means. Based on some numbers he looked up, WalMart has saved American shoppers billions of dollars, and since poor people are the most likely to benefit from low product prices (including, these days, groceries at many of their stores), the net benefit to America's underclass exceeded the perceived net loss from low salaries, limited health insurance benefits, etc.
God bless Capitalism ... it's done real good for po' folks than any government program in history.
posted by
Rarmcwa
on September 21, 2006 at 11:34 AM
| link to this | reply
Wal-Mart has been portrayed............
as an evil corporation by scores of groups and some here on Blogit..........based on that assumption....how can Wal-Mart possibly be doing this....it's so out of (perceived) character.
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on September 21, 2006 at 10:26 AM
| link to this | reply
Of course they are but sometimes that works in our favor, doesn't it?
If you can get a prescription for $4, you know where people will do the rest of their shopping, "while they're there." It's a win/win situation.
posted by
SuccessWarrior
on September 21, 2006 at 9:45 AM
| link to this | reply
So, what's your point?
"Out sick."
posted by
Mademoiselle
on September 21, 2006 at 9:44 AM
| link to this | reply