Wallmart the Movie! please no flame war..

[monobath]

Is that it? The biggest company in any exchange is the bully?

Generally, yes. Would that surprise you? The biggest companies usually have the most money to influence polticians via donations.

I am talking about interaction between two companies, not influence peddling and corporate collusion with government. That's a different problem.

[monobath]

My preference would be for a free and unfettered market in oil and related products.

I live in the heart of Alberta, Canada's oil country. Drilling activity recently hit record levels, yet analysts publicly admit that convential oil reserves have peaked. That leaves the northern oilsands and some extremely nasty coalbed methane deposits to be tapped.

Unless we collectively give our heads a shake, our oil-driven paradise is going to be running on fumes. Wal-Mart would quickly become a footnote in our misguided suburban experiment: in a few years no one will be able to afford to ship plastic trinkets from China or truck 99 cent creampuffs across the entire continent.

To bring this thread back to film-land (or documentary videoland), I suggest watching The End Of Suburbia

For some reason I can't find the preview clips that are supposedly on that web site. I'd like to watch the video, but I don't care to buy it.

As for the peak oil idea, there is much debate on that. I'm no expert. If oil production really has peaked or soon will, then I think a truly free market in oil would be the best possible thing to bring demand in line with supply, and cause prices to reflect scarcity. That would spur development of alternatives, hopefully cleaner renewable sources of energy, not something like increased reliance on dirty coal.

But in any case, I very much doubt that surburbia is much at risk. The more expensive oil gets, the more attractive alternatives become.

[Alex]

the issue as I stated had to do with Walmart bullying actual manufacturing companies located in the United States and in the process actually causing these manufacturing companies to eliminate production lines, in the United States, that were efficient, but just not efficient enough, according to Walmart.

I understand your passion about this but your review of Walmart is like so many jaded film critics that forget the number one rule: You have to critique the film that was made and not the film that you wish had been made.

You may not like how the story line goes for some companies that get involved with Walmart but it is their chosen path. If a company wants to sell in Walmart, they have to voluntarily approach Walmart about the right to do so. Therefore, the manufacturer isn't going into this blind and is banking on the broad exposure and increased volume that Walmart will bring to the table. Presumably, said manufacturing company wants and needs this increased volume or it would not be negotiating with a company as "evil" as Walmart in the first place!

I mean, Walmart bashing has been around for years now. It is ubiquitous. Is there really ANY company considering business with Walmart that doesn't understand what the term "volume discount" really means? Walmart isn't the only venue to sell ones goods and, most importantly, Walmart can't make a company sell its product at Walmart.

Roger

The problem with identifying evil is that there is more than one kind (even if at best it is subjective to define evil). There is the evil that at least lets you know from day one that it is evil, like fighting on the front line of a war.

But then there is the evil in which the evil is first masked as a relationship and a bond is formed between two sides. Once the two sides are linked and producing a relatively positive result, at the first sign of trouble suddenly previously hidden inflexibilites are exposed, this can happen in a marriage.

I think Walmart did what they did in regards to Rubbermaid because they knew that they could, and sometimes that is a variable that can be defended as not being illegal, yet nonetheless it is still an unnecessary action that weakens the very environment that Walmart claims to support.

And I do find deception to be evil.

[audadvnc]

I am talking about interaction between two companies, not influence peddling and corporate collusion with government. That's a different problem.

It's part and parcel of the same problem. The K Street gang does business with Big Bizness, others need not apply.

But as Reflex points out, the whole globalization fever sweeping the economic world is a fluke brought on by cheap oil. When supplies get tight and those twelve thousand mile supply chains start costing real money, you'll hear a whole new "buy 'Merkin" line from the erstwhile globalists.

[monobath]

But then there is the evil in which the evil is first masked as a relationship and a bond is formed between two sides. Once the two sides are linked and producing a relatively positive result, at the first sign of trouble suddenly previously hidden inflexibilites are exposed, this can happen in a marriage.

I think Walmart did what they did in regards to Rubbermaid because they knew that they could, and sometimes that is a variable that can be defended as not being illegal, yet nonetheless it is still an unnecessary action that weakens the very environment that Walmart claims to support.

And I do find deception to be evil.

I think you are reading more into a business deal than truly exists, Alex. You appear to be equating a business arrangement with a marriage, imputing greater moral significance to it than justifiably exists.

Walmart and Rubbermaid weren't married, and they didn't promise to have and to hold, etc, until death do them part. Rubbermaid put a price on their products, and Walmart rejected that price. There is nothing evil about that. Walmart was under no obligation to buy product from Rubbermaid. It is ethically and morally neutral.

[MovieStuff]

I think Walmart did what they did in regards to Rubbermaid because they knew that they could

That's how a free market works. The alternative is much worse.

Roger

[monobath]

I am talking about interaction between two companies, not influence peddling and corporate collusion with government. That's a different problem.

It's part and parcel of the same problem. The K Street gang does business with Big Bizness, others need not apply.

But as Reflex points out, the whole globalization fever sweeping the economic world is a fluke brought on by cheap oil. When supplies get tight and those twelve thousand mile supply chains start costing real money, you'll hear a whole new "buy 'Merkin" line from the erstwhile globalists.

Yes, the US Government is supposed to have three branches, not four. But regardless of whether Walmart may be the beneficiary of K-Street deals with lawmakers, you don't think Walmart is obligated to buy product from Rubbermaid if Rubbermaid raises prices, do you?

One way to fix K Street is to reformulate the government, sew up the breaches in the constitution (e.g., commerce clause), and stuff government back inside.

[reflex]

For some reason I can't find the preview clips that are supposedly on that web site. I'd like to watch the video, but I don't care to buy it.

The clips are hidden in the "preview" section: http://www.endofsuburbia.com/previews.htm

[Scott Spears]

Hmmmm, we've been here before.

In my opinion, Walmart is approaching evil statis. Why would I say something so outrageous? I feel that any entity that views their one and only function is to make money at all cost, then they are evil. I see Walmart this way. They don't care how it happens as long as it's legal and falls within the laws of supply and demand. It's a mindless money making machine in the same way a shark is a mindless eating machine. So what if you put a company in Wooster out of business? That's the price of capitalism. The shareholders are getting richer. The CEOs are taking home multi-million dollar paychecks. Everything is good with the world. Meanwhile the working class of america is getting poorer and poorer. Hey, nothing says these people are entitled to jobs or fair wages. Tell them to go get retrained in computer skills, but wait those jobs are being outsourced to India by other companies.

Some will say that's the price of a world economy and Walmart is helping people in third world countries which is true until they can find another work force in another third world country who will work cheaper, Then Walmart will pull those jobs, thus decimating the first country's economy. The Walmart corporate machine doesn't care.

Somebody said if 100 million people a day are shopping at Walmart they must be doing something right. Yes, they offer low prices, but at a cost that most people don't comprehend or have the time to research because they are barely making ends meet with the time they have and yes some don't want to know or even care.

It basically comes down to the corporate mentality. Profits, profits, profits. At all costs. What's the old saying, "Money is the root of all evil." When all you see is money, then you are a single minded monster who will exploit every living thing and resouce to get what you want. That's evil. Pure, unthinking evil.

Hey this is just my opinion.

Scott

[ccortez]

Hey this is just my opinion.

It's not, actually. It's also the thesis of the book and movie "The Corporation" -- that corporations are pathological in their pursuit of money and ergo they're not much fun in societies or at parties.

Price != Cost

But I've said that before... ;)

[npcoombs]

more and more America looks like one big Walmart to me.

They subsidise their E64 until Dwanes goes bust, then they'll dump s8 developing and try to flog DV cams. The startup costs will make it unprofitable for another startup to develop the stock.

[MovieStuff]

So what if you put a company in Wooster out of business?

But Walmart didn't do that. Rubbermaid fired 1000 people rather than make less profits.

That's the price of capitalism.

That's the price of making bad business decisions in a free market.

The shareholders are getting richer.

The shareholders of Rubbermaid could have saved 1000 jobs by being "less rich". They chose otherwise. Rubbermaid still exists and so do the shareholders' dividends. They didn't lose their jobs. ;)

Roger

[Alex]

But then there is the evil in which the evil is first masked as a relationship and a bond is formed between two sides. Once the two sides are linked and producing a relatively positive result, at the first sign of trouble suddenly previously hidden inflexibilites are exposed, this can happen in a marriage.

I think Walmart did what they did in regards to Rubbermaid because they knew that they could, and sometimes that is a variable that can be defended as not being illegal, yet nonetheless it is still an unnecessary action that weakens the very environment that Walmart claims to support.

And I do find deception to be evil.

I think you are reading more into a business deal than truly exists, Alex. You appear to be equating a business arrangement with a marriage, imputing greater moral significance to it than justifiably exists.

Walmart and Rubbermaid weren't married, and they didn't promise to have and to hold, etc, until death do them part. Rubbermaid put a price on their products, and Walmart rejected that price. There is nothing evil about that. Walmart was under no obligation to buy product from Rubbermaid. It is ethically and morally neutral.

Yes, they ARE married. By virtue of the fact that those were LOCAL jobs on the line that actually employ the very people who would shop at Walmart. If only 1% of the product line at Walmart came from overseas, one could presumeably look the other way, but that is not the case. Just what percent of products sold at Walmart actually were manufactured in the United States? If it is signficantly less than 50%, and Walmart treats Rubbermaid the way that they did, then Walmart is an out of control and out of touch empire, a common problem among the rich and elite who periodically need to be reminded the cattle they herd around actually have common sense.

Just what were George Bush, Condoleeza Rice, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld doing the day after Hurricane Katrina ended?

[Alex]

Walmart equals Great Britain back in the 1700's, the Rubbermaid company equals the thirteen colonies, if we have a healthy enough populace, something's gotta give.

[Evan Kubota]

Both of those entities you mentioned are corporations. Corporations don't have the right to representation or sovereignty... Furthermore, Wal-Mart did not create Rubbermaid.