Walmart is Evil

I look forward to a spirited debate. [/QUOTE] I wish to welcome my opponent for accepting this challenge. I look forward to this debate as well. ====== Rebuttal ====== [QUOTE] My opponent offers up that Walmart is 2.5% below the national average wage. My opponent does not explain precisely how this makes them evil, but one would assume he is implying that because they do not pay a certain wage they have no regard for the humanity or dignity of their employees. This is not proved by the statistic, whatsoever. In fact, if wages alone were enough to make a firm evil, then every firm which pays below a certain wage level would be evil. This would amount to some large proportion of the firms in the economy, including all that pay below Walmart, which is only 2.5% below the average. Furthermore, where does one draw the line? Why is $11.75 an hour evil while $12.04, or $15 or even $20 is not. My opponent has provided no standard for why a specific wage level is evil. [/QUOTE] It's greedy because the employees are underpaid for their long hours of hard work. Greed is associated with one of the seven deadly sins and therefore, greed is evil and walmart is greedy which makes walmart evil. [QUOTE] I contend (without the burden to do so resting on my shoulders) that by keeping their costs low, Walmart is able to sell their products at lower prices. This in turn enables low income families to do better with the money they have. Walmart pays their employees the market price for their labor. If they paid over that they would be harming their customers because they would have to hike prices. My opponent's argument zeros in on the supposed evil done to the employees without even remotely considering the good that is done for the consumer in the process. How can an organization that enables millions of low income families to afford groceries, staple goods, and basic needs when they otherwise would go without be evil? [/QUOTE] The reason why walmart's prices are low for now is because they want to put as many other businesses as they can out of business. When/if walmart becomes one of the only few businesses left, their prices will more than likely go up. This is just common sense as corporations like walmart are greedy. [QUOTE] Finally, no matter how they set their prices or who it actually hurt, evil is really about the intent. My contention is that Walmart's setting it's wages at a certain level cannot be and has not been proven to be intentionally malicious. I encourage my opponent to try to prove malicious intent in his rebuttal. [/QUOTE] You can do evil things without it being intentional and besides that, You can tell through their actions that it is intentional. Obviously, the walmart corporation knows that their employees are underpaid because they pay their own employees. [QUOTE] Again, here, my opponent has offered up a piece of information without actually tying it back to his contention that Walmart is Evil. Why must a firm "design it's wages to support a family" to avoid the evil moniker? The burden is on my opponent to present some logical reason why this is so. [/QUOTE] The average employee is paid minimum wage and is strongly discouraged from holding a full time position. Poor labor practices such as these make it hard or impossible for many employees to afford the health care benefits "provided" to them by walmart. [QUOTE] Here my opponent has leveled a bevy of accusations against Walmart without proper citation. He has listed several links in the body of his argument, but I don't have the time or desire to read through the lengthy articles he has linked to find out if his accusations in this contention have even a glimmer of truth to them. It is incumbent upon my opponent to make his argument. If indeed Walmart does the things he describes, it may very well amount to evil behavior, but my opponent must prove it. [/QUOTE] The links contain proof and not only that, the movie, "WAL-MART: The High Cost of Low Price" by Robert Greenwald also provides proof. [QUOTE] As he has stated it here, however, my opponents contention amounts to nothing more than a personal attack. The only portion of the contention for which supporting evidence is provided is the low wage claim, which has been thoroughly discredited in my response to contention #1. I encourage my opponent to provide supporting evidence for the remaining accusations in this contention. [/QUOTE] Like I said earlier, the links contain proof and not only that, the movie, "WAL-MART: The High Cost of Low Price" by Robert Greenwald also provides proof. [QUOTE] Conclusion: My opponent has presented a blistering attack against the Walmart corporation, claiming them to be evil. However, my opponent has utterly failed to make even a single valid argument to prove this and therefore cannot claim to be asserting evilness on the basis of anything more than the flit and fancy of his emotions. This is further demonstrated by his 3 contentions. Allegations of evilness based on emotional feelings alone are quite simply insufficient. Some standard is essential for a prudent assessment to be made. If this is not clear enough on it's own, let me present an example: If I were arguing that "Hitler is evil", my reasoning should amount to more than: "because I hate him". I would be required to make a logical argument such as: (1)Hitler murdered innocent people. (2)Murderers are evil. (3)Therefore, Hitler was evil. My opponent has failed to make even the most elementary of logical progressions to support his claim. I eagerly look forward to his doing so in rebuttal. [/QUOTE] I didn't say it was because I hated walmart. .. . I encourage my opponent to prove that I said it was only because I hated walmart and by that logic I did provide reasons such as but not limited to: (1)Walmart employees are underpaid because of greed. (2)Greed is evil. (3)Therefore, walmart is evil. This isn't based off of my emotions, this is based off of fact. ======= Arguments ======= Technically, Wal-Mart proves it's own evil by selling multiple copies of "Capitalism: A Love Story" by Michael Moore even though they expose the evils of capitalism with walmart being an example of capitalism. Here is what Michael Moore wrote in response to wal-mart selling his dvds: "The corporate coup is complete. Corporations like Wal-Mart now call all the shots, write all the laws, pay off almost all the congressmen and essentially (along with the other Fortune 500 companies and Wall Street) rule the nation. They've helped to eliminate consumer choice and the free market while convincing you they are all for "free enterprise" and the "U. S. A. " More importantly, they've snuffed out any criticism or opposition. They've even co-opted liberals, like the people who made the wonderful documentary, Food, Inc. The last half-hour of this movie includes—I kid you not—an homage to Wal-Mart as the filmmakers swoon over this kinder, gentler company that has decided to—bless them! —put an organic food counter in their stores! Thank you, Wal-Mart! Kumbaya! (And hey, granolaheads, don't forget to flash a smile on the way out of the store at the "greeter" who can't afford to see a doctor. ) Yes, Wal-Mart, by selling Capitalism, is saying to me: "Go ahead and expose us all you want! Hahahhaha! We're so convinced that the public has either been dumbed down or made numb enough to not give a lick about whatever it is you're saying about us and capitalism. We can sell a million of these and it won't make a damn bit of difference about our ability to rule the world. So knock yourself out, big guy! Hehehehehehe. Go ahead and put your little movie on our shelves. It will never start a revolution. " ====== Sources ====== . http://www.newsrealblog.com...