Schadenfreude

Walmart is attemping to move into the suburbs of Madison WI but town after town continue to pass licensing reviews for retailers exceeding so many square feet aimed squarely at keeping Super Wal-Marts out of our communities.

Personally I like that I can get an oil change for $13 at the Super Wal-Marts. And since I am mainly a purchaser of goods (not a seller of goods) I see no harm in advancing the goals of a very efficient company. Critics point to the local businesses which will not be able to compete and the low wages and limited health care offered at Wal- Mart. Now I worked for a family run business and many do not offer a living wage and often cannot afford to offer health insurance. Is this a double standard? Hold the large company to certain standards that the small company does not need to meet. Some cities per the Economist are even requiring that Wal Mart provide a "municipal determined" level of health care to it's workers. Big gov't has moved from Wash DC to the cities.

The marketplace is the best place to determine prices and when Wal-Mart cannot hire or keep the good employees they want to keep is when their wages and benefits will increase.

Is it really a bad thing to have a company that is very very good at negotiations in order to bring the best prices to the consumer? I would argue that capitalism needs these kinds of efficiency inequities between firms to grow and prosper. For-profit firms must strive to become more efficient than their competition, however the rules should be the same for all involved. Winners and losers are biproducts of an efficient and healthy capitalistic society.