|
Voice of the Environment's mission is to educate the public regarding the transfer of public trust assets into private, mostly corporate, hands.
|
|
|
Ukiah office:
1330 Boonville Rd
Ukiah, CA 95482
707-467-0329
|
|
|
Marin office:
270 Beach Rd
Belvedere, CA 94920
415-435-2007
|
|
|
For two decades, Voice of the Environment has stood up for the people and our communities against the avarice
of corporations and the misguided policies of the corporate-dominated state.
|
|
|
Print This Article
Monday, December 12th, 2005
Big Box Balderdash
Paul Krugman, New York Times
I think I've just seen the worst economic argument of 2005. Given
what the Bush administration tried to put over on us during its
unsuccessful sales pitch for Social Security privatization, that's
saying a lot.
The argument came in the course of the latest exchange between
Wal-Mart and its critics. A union-supported group, Wake Up Wal-Mart,
has released a TV ad accusing Wal-Mart of violating religious values,
backed by a letter from religious leaders attacking the retail giant
for paying low wages and offering poor benefits. The letter declares
that "Jesus would not embrace Wal-Mart's values of greed and profits
at any cost."
You may think that this particular campaign - which has, inevitably,
been dubbed "Where would Jesus shop?" - is a bit over the top. But
it's clear why those concerned about the state of American workers
focus their criticism on Wal-Mart. The company isn't just America's
largest private employer. It's also a symbol of the state of our
economy, which delivers rising G.D.P. but stagnant or falling living
standards for working Americans. For Wal-Mart is a huge and hugely
profitable company that pays badly and offers minimal benefits.
Attacks on Wal-Mart have hurt its image, and perhaps even its
business. The company has set up a campaign-style war room to devise
responses. So how did Wal-Mart respond to this latest critique?
Wal-Mart can claim, with considerable justice, that its business
practices make America as a whole richer. The fact is that Wal-Mart
sells many products more cheaply than traditional stores, and that
its low prices aren't solely or even mainly the result of the low
wages it pays. Wal-Mart has been able to reduce prices largely
because it has brought genuine technological and organizational
innovation to the retail business.
It's harder for Wal-Mart to defend its pay and benefits policies.
Still, the company could try to argue that despite its awesome size
and market dominance it cannot defy the iron laws of supply and
demand, which force it to pay low wages. (I disagree, but that's a
subject for another column.)
But instead of resting its case on these honest or at least
defensible answers to criticism, Wal-Mart has decided to insult our
intelligence by claiming to be, of all things, an engine of job
creation. Judging from its press release in response to the religious
values campaign, the assertion that Wal-Mart "creates 100,000 jobs a
year" is now the core of the company's public relations strategy.
It's true, of course, that the company is getting bigger every year.
But adding 100,000 people to Wal-Mart's work force doesn't mean
adding 100,000 jobs to the economy. On the contrary, there's every
reason to believe that as Wal-Mart expands, it destroys at least as
many jobs as it creates, and drives down workers' wages in the
process.
Think about what happens when Wal-Mart opens a store in a previously
untouched city or county. The new store takes sales away from stores
that are already in the area; these stores lay off workers or even go
out of business. Because Wal-Mart's big-box stores employ fewer
workers per dollar of sales than the smaller stores they replace,
overall retail employment surely goes down, not up, when Wal-Mart
comes to town. And if the jobs lost come from employers who pay more
generously than Wal-Mart does, overall wages will fall when Wal-Mart
moves in.
This isn't just speculation on my part. A recent study by David
Neumark of the University of California at Irvine and two associates
at the Public Policy Institute of California, "The Effects of
Wal-Mart on Local Labor Markets," uses sophisticated statistical
analysis to estimate the effects on jobs and wages as Wal-Mart spread
out from its original center in Arkansas.
The authors find that retail employment did, indeed, fall when
Wal-Mart arrived in a new county. It's not clear in their data
whether overall employment in a county rose or fell when a Wal-Mart
store opened. But it's clear that average wages fell: "residents of
local labor markets," the study reports, "earn less following the
opening of Wal-Mart stores."
So Wal-Mart has chosen to defend itself with a really poor argument.
If that's the best the company can come up with, it's going to keep
losing the public relations war with its critics. Maybe it should
consider an alternative strategy, such as paying higher wages.
SOURCE
Print This Article |
|
|
|
Voice of the Environment is a 501 (c-3) not-for-profit Montana-based corporation formed in 1991.
|
|