« Escaping Drearily Spread-Out Non-Places | Main | So You Want to Be in Pictures? »



As a consumer I pay $30 per year to shop at Sam's Club.

In 2003, with my tax rebate, I also spent $700 on a piano there and in 2002 I purchased two computers and a printer.

Practically, 95% of my grocery dollars spent are at Sam's Club as well as the pricing of any large ticket item, because my perception is that it will offer me the best overall value. They are conveniently located, with one on the way home from work and another 7 minutes from home.

In order to make certain that more of my dollars go into the kitty to send my 3 girls to college so they don't end up working at Sam's, I competitively compare Sam's Club with others offering big ticket items.

Over the course of a year groceries qualify as a big ticket item and with them I put my blinders on, buying 95% at Sam's Club. Note that I recently chose not to get my 4 tires at Sam's Club because Firestone offered a better value on a particular day.

I believe I save money because of Sam's Club and hope they continue to offer me the opportunity to shop there.

No one forces me give them $30 per year to shop there.

As well..no one forces anyone to work at Sam's Club or WalMart.

No one forces a business to sell to WalMart/Sam's Club. If they've done their homework they should understand the risk and rewards. If they didn't, their doom was only a matter of time. WalMart isn't a brand new entity.

As well, no one forces a city to have a WalMart, but just like the political egos that spew the need for the building of new sports complexes for their potentional economic impact, I believe your point that the same case is made incorrectly for the "need" of WalMart being in every mayor's town.

Also, let's not be naive, if not WalMart, another "large company" would pop up and woo a politician with the same promises of becoming the next WalMart with all of the perceived benefits to their town and his ego.

Long live our democratic and capitalistic system.

Long live the ability of all of our citizens to vote for their next mayor and educate themselves so they don't have to work at Sam's Club.

Long live the ability to start a business that does not need to sell to Sam's Club in order to be profitable.

And long live my choice of shopping wherever I perceive the best value.

Now if only our government would get out of our public school system and continue to lower my taxes!


What is "sinister" about Wal-Mart is not its wages or pricing practices per se, but merely how it acts as an indication of the economic situation we find ourselves in today. Progressively more flamboyant and extravagent measures necessitate an aggressive and brutally efficient lower end, one that is relatively gigantic in comparison to the heights it is the base for. The acumulation of wealth by an elite is what gives rise to Wal-Marts, and the fact that this trend seems well set reproduce itself even is what is so chilling.

I found it vastly amusing when Wal-mart began initiating a plan to shrink the size of its stores, given that people had begun to find them far too unweidly. Their ability to look at their stores from an economic perspective is quite good, but they are a lot slower on the human side! Greeters standing in front of a commercial warehouse like a welcome mat in front of a sardine can. Arguments for Wal-Mart using that economic perspective, as the above ones do, will of course find no fault; but when brutal efficiency is presupposed as a valuable telos from the get-go, it is difficult to see the other issues that do not affect that aim.

The comments to this entry are closed.