Rick's Cafe Americain

I’ve gotten into a comments section dispute with a couple of Dawn’s conservative friends (Ken and Yaron, for the record), over the evils of Wal-Mart. To see why I am right and they are wrong you can just read this article. That is neither here nor there.

What started the argument was, curiously enough, a disagreement over the wisdom of enforcing child labor laws. I thought this argument was settled in the 1700’s but I guess I was wrong. That, too, is neither here nor there because I don’t want to talk about the pissing contest.

I want to talk about what passes for law “enforcement” against large corporations by the U.S. Department of Labor.

What is it you are right about?  I’m talking about your Wal-Mart discussion.  I have not looked into the subject enough to have an opinion either way, but reading your comments and this post, I’m not sure what your point is either. 

Are you simply calling Wal-Mart evil?  Come on Sir C, you are more sophisticated than that.  Darth Vader was evil (well, not completely thanks to ROTJ), but throwing such labels about really doesn’t accomplish anything.  Are you, perhaps, lobbing an accusation against capitalism?  If so, it may be well deserved, but give me some substance.

I get your point about federal law not being enforce stringently enough (Spitzer come on down), but do you think that proper enforcement will cure the “evils” of Wal-Mart, or is the evil more deep seated than that? 

A corporation has one goal, profit.  I’d love to think that corporations can be good citizens, but the reality is that in a competitive environment, someone will eventually come along and force efficiency—and efficiency for a corporation may not be good for society.  But the attack there is not on the corporation but on the economic and regulatory system being employed.

Does that mean you haven’t read the article? If not, I can understand why you don’t know what I am saying: you haven’t finished reading yet. Come back to me when you have.

As for the bulk of your comment, forgive me if I pass on the opportunity to get into a discussion about the semiotics of “evil.” Particularly when Star Wars references are involved. By your own admission you haven’t followed the story enough to know just what is wrong with Wal-Mart. The answer is “a lot.”

I did not read the entire article, but skimmed through it to see if it suggested some form of solution, other than to just bitch about Wal-Mart (actually the article didn’t seem completely one-sided either).  I didn’t see anything in the article.  At most, it seems to be suggesting that Wal-Mart is the ultimate capitalist, pushing supply/demand/competition and power as far as it can.

All of my above comments still apply ... I am curious as to your ultimate view of Wal-Mart and what should be done about it, but so far you haven’t given much.

p.s. just skimmed through article again...same position.  Come on Ugarte, you don’t usually let others do your talking.

As for your last sentence, that is my fucking point.  If you are going to go out and act as some authority who has investigated this and has formed an informed opinion, well, give us the facts, the reasoning and the solutions.  Otherwise you are just another talking head (like most people on t.v. and blogging). 

I am not an expert on it, so I should just say “Ugarte says ‘a lot’ is wrong”, I guess I should be worried.

I’m asking you to educate, don’t duck it.

The dispute over at Clarified revolved around whether Wal-Mart squeezes its suppliers until they pop. I think the article amply demonstrates that. As for whether Wal-Mart is simply evil, I didn’t want to write a long post about the evils of Wal-Mart generally. I still don’t. That isn’t “ducking it,” it is time allocation.

Well, your post says you got into a dispute “over the evils of Wal-Mart”, not about whether or not Wal-Mart puts pressure on its suppliers.

I saw your link on my site meter… add me to the list of confused people. What do you mean by this?

I thought this argument was settled in the 1700’s but I guess I was wrong.

I don’t think child labor laws existed anywhere until at least the mid-1800’s, and actually I think child labor was the norm up until the early 1900’s.

Just being historically lazy, Yaron. Still, Wal-Mart is a century behind the times.

I won’t even attempt to pick apart your rant (mostly because I agree), and I enjoyed reading it.  Sometimes after days/weeks of seeing corporate shit like this, the bile built up just needs to be let loose. 

More, more!