Wal-Mart is good for the U.S.

student251192, I know this is your first debate, but you do realize that sources/links are needed in this debates to prove truth to your points? I will accept three of his statements as truth as of now, but will not accept "Various scandals plague this franchise. Wal- Mart is helping everyone become McFatty's with "savings in every bag, a McDonalds in every store."..."Corporate is also at its worst in this sickening company, as evident with the thousands of lawsuits filed against this company by employees tired of lack of morality in this harsh business place." because these statements are blatant hearsay. Especially the "McFatty's" line, seriously, what are you talking about there? "Musicians and record companies have to edit and censor their music so that Wal- Mart can carry it." -Wal-Mart has a policy of only selling edited, "clean" versions of albums they believe to have objectionable content. These same "edited, "clean" versions of albums they believe to have objectionable content" are the same songs that appear on the radio. Radio channels are not bashed for editing songs as it is in the public's best interest, Wal-Mart has the same, solid policy. "Low quality items such as skateboards and cheap apparel are sold here, cheapening the value of real, quality items." -How so? Who gets to determine low/high-quality products? And how do "low-quality" products cheapen the value of "high-quality" products? Supply and demand. If people want something, they are willing to pay more for it. Also, are you saying that Wal-Mart is the only store that sells both "low-quality" and "high-quality" products? At sporting goods store, you can buy a cheap skateboard or an $1000 kayak. One person may determine the cheap skateboard to be "high-quality" and the canoe "low-quality". And vice-versa. And you are also saying it is wrong to sell cheap apparel as it cheapens the value of expensive apparel. Once again, it is a person's right to choose between a $1 shirt from Wal-Mart and a $35 shirt from Abercrombia&Fitch. "For example, a few months ago, a mom bought a brand new PSP for her 6 year old son for his birthday. When the PSP was turned on, pornographic pictures flashed on the screen. Wal- Mart claimed no responsibility, as Wal- Mart claimed that the pictures on the PSP was related to a manufacturers problem. Remember, this was a NEW PSP." -To attribute an isolated incident to a chain that has more than 1000 stores in the U.S. is unfair. I could easily use a similar situation with another store. For example, I ordered Domino's the other week; I ordered 2 large cheeze pizzas and a sprite for $15. Instead the delivery man came to my door with 2 large pizza and a diet sprite, and I gave him a large $5 tip because I was feeling nice. I set the pizzas upon my kitchen counter and found that two slices of pizza were missing. I also found that the sprite was actually diet sprite. I was of course enraged and called domino's for a refund; they refused to acnowledge my situation. My verdict: all Domino's are bad and Domino's is bad for America. Is that fair? No. But it uses the same logic as your Wal-Mart example. Forbes awarded Wal-Mart #1 on the list of most generous corporations for 2008. About 90% of its donations go to charities in the area surrounding Wal-Mart locations. The Forbes article reports "Some beneficiaries of Wal-Mart's goodwill include the Children's Miracle Network, America's Second Harvest, the Salvation Army, the American Red Cross, the United Way of America and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation." (1) A report by the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis says that "Wal-Mart benefits rather than harms the US economy". The Bank studies (with the results between 1985-2003) showed that personal income, overall employment, and retail employment grew in the 89 countries studied that had a Wal-Mart compared to countries that didn't. One of the greatest economists ever would also agree. Adam Smith was in fact the one who said "an exchange of goods at low prices benefits everyone". The studies also busted the myth that "Wal-Mart wipes out local jobs and depresses wages". (2) "Wal-Mart has been at the forefront of the productivity boom," says Ohio University professor Richard Vedder, author of the book The Wal-Mart Revolution. In a market economy success goes to the business that best and most efficiently serves consumer needs. And that is what Wal-Mart does. The low prices that Wal-Mart consistently puts out for its goods are good for the consumers and the overall economy. When a consumer saves money on goods it frees them up to buy more goods. More goods being manufactured and sold is good for all parties involved. Wal-Mart accounted for 12% of productivity gains in the 90's, which also helped the rate of inflation according to the Federal Reserve. Wal-Mart has and will continue to be great for the American economy. (2) Wal-Mart can be good for small businesses and the surrounding communities. Research from Loyola University Chicago has shown that in urban areas Wal-Mart has helped small business, while the same can not be said for rural areas. Because more consumers go to the area in which Wal-Mart is located, more consumers end up going to the small businesses. One local store owner said "Wal-Mart was just the big gorilla coming into the community … I think its more perception than reality." (3) A 2005 study by MIT Economics professor Jeffrey Hausman tracked grocery prices paid by 10,000 families in dozens of markets, shopping at various stores over 48 months. The studies showed that Wal-Mart had lower prices in almost every category and that Wal-Mart helped shoppers who didn't even set foot in their store. Shoppers paid about 5% less for household goods in areas where there are Wal-Marts compared to not. The studies also showed that Wal-Mart can help more than any tax cut or social welfare program ever could. Hausman calculated that low income families can increase their spending power by as much as 30% just by shopping at Wal-Mart. He also found that a Wal-Mart in a town can increase overall consumer welfare by up to 3.75%. (4) -----SOURCES----- (1) http://www.forbes.com... (2) http://www.msnbc.msn.com... (3) http://www.washingtonpost.com... (4) http://www.macleans.ca...