A couple of days ago, I wrote
a post examining
a Steven Greenhouse New York Times article on calls by Wal-Mart critics for the company to pay higher wages. In the comments,
Robert Feinman suggested everybody take a look at the discussion of the same article over at RedState.org. I did. It's disgusting. A disturbing number of those folks have nothing but condescension for the Wal-Mart worker.
This is from the main post by "Erick:"
[W]hat would happen if Wal-Mart weren't there to provide jobs at all? Welfare is only a five year option now. Wal-Mart is not increasing "the number of Americans in poverty." Rather, Wal-Mart is providing work for a large number of individuals who would otherwise be working at the corner gas station really making minimum wage. Others would probably be on the street....Wal-Mart brought work to people who most likely would not have work.
Says something for the quality of service you get at Wal-Mart, doesn't it? But I have a feeling most Wal-Mart defenders wouldn't set foot in the place anyways. Here's "tankertodd" in the same vein:
Everyone needs to have a place to start. Wal-Mart offers a way for people to build a work history at a low risk to the employer and employee. Many of these people are also working for extra money or as a post-retirement job. Bottom line is that the government doesn't know enough about people's motivations to mandate that they need/don't need a "living wage."
Compare that to what Wal-Mart itself says about employment opportunities here:
Wal-Mart is one of the fastest growing employers in the world and offers unlimited professional development and career opportunities. Our associates can obtain just about any career they want at Wal-Mart and SAM'S CLUB. From computer operator to graphic artist, store manager to clothing buyer, truck driver to marketer, deli manager to product development, it can be done at Wal-Mart.
I guess Todd skipped that briefing.
Much to Robert Feinman's credit, he actually went over to RedState.org and mixed it up with these folks. It's worth a look. Frankly, I don't have the stomach for it. I did, however, leave a note over at Alwayslowprices.net in response to Kevin's approving citation of this rebuttal of the same article from another free-market conservative economics blog:
There's no real news story here. It's not like someone discovered that Wal-Mart is using slave labor or not paying the minimum wage. That would be a news story. What we have instead is what I'd call a fake news story, generated by a press release from activists that plays to the sensibilities of a newspapers editors, reporters and readers.
Here's my comment:
How is this any more fake than the so-called Social Security "crisis" or the "imminent threat" posed by Saddam Hussein in Iraq? Seriously, Kevin, you conservatives can dish it out but you can't take it.
By the way, do you actually know anybody who works at Wal-Mart? I've had many students who worked there and only one of them was happy. Not surprisingly, he's in the management training program right now. I can assure you that to them this story is not fake at all.
And they call us elitists? Where's Thomas Frank when you need him? I want a good explanation of this.
JR