Walmart Essay

Alex Manco Professor McEachern English 112 30 phratry 2011 To the Zoning Board of Trumbull, The Wal-Mart The modern day commercialize has taken nigh interesting turns with innovations such(prenominal)(prenominal) as the television, the car, and internet. While the moral values of such turns has al charges been in question, it is no question that e truly major slew has taken efficiency to a new level. Corporations like McDonalds, GE, and Bank of the States acquit completely dominated the market with not simply when their ample resources and effective marketing dodges, exclusively by people scarcely learned they exist.While most of these vexationes film not gotten much more originatorful in past decade due to government regulation of competition, in that respect is unrivaled business enterprise that continues to grow at a dangerous rate Wal-Mart. It has straight off become app arnt that its growth has come homeed Trumbull, Connecticut and in no way should a Wal-Ma rt be built in our community. It is not unconstipated a matter of the problems our town would face as much as it is a moral wrong to the world as a whole. Wal-Mart may be legal in our free-market economy, but sparings are never that elemental and moldiness be treated very carefully.It would not only wear businesses in the area, but exercise the power of corporations whose business tactics attend unstoppable to modern regulation. The Wal-Mart is not only store, but an inevitable business tactic that t away ensembleow for decimate the economy in both the poor and long term. Wal-Marts rise to power is interesting and uncomforting in how readily it flourished. The first store was blusteringed in 1962 by Sam Walton in Rogers, Arkansas. By 1970, on that point were 38 stores, and by 1975, there were 125. In 1983, Wal-Mart had make its eighth year in a row as Forbes cartridge clips 1 retailer.In 1985, 882 stores had already been built, and in the next 10 old age would reach a s tunning 1,995 stores. Currently, there are 8,970 Wal-Marts an average of 50 a state, and this number continues to grow. The story of Wal-Mart is truly nothing short of business success story, but the speed of its success is slightly unnerving. So what do you think would be the result of building this Wal-Mart in town? I suppose it would open maybe around 60 jobs tops in town, but a volume of the jobs would be minimum wage jobs.Raising the workplace rate of your town has nothing to do with the actual quality of the town, and thats saying that all the people hired come from our town. Also, studies have shown that Wal-Mart principally pay their employees 25-28% less than other retail/grocery stores (Dube, Lester & Eidlin 559). Maybe teenagers pull up stakes have a bit more money, but the jobs that Wal-Mart creates have lilliputian impact on the flow of money. In fact, building a Wal-Mart would only hurt the flow of money in our town. All of the surrounding businesses provide not be able to compete. Retail prices typically drop by 1 to 1. % the moment a Wal-Mart opens (Dube, Lester & Eidlin 562). Local grocery stores like Poricellis and Plaskos notify not be expected to compete with a business of such power. If pocket-sized businesses retort to this Wal-Mart, then the unemployment rate get out probably just about balance out with jobs your Wal-Mart entrust have created. This will destroy the peaceful, small town feel of Trumbull, and replace it with style for corporate siege. Our town would be quite various if we allowed this, but it would similarly support an economic trend that could tear our economy apart.One thing that must be understood in order to understand the entire panic of Wal-Mart is the causes and effects of a monopoly. The definition of a monopoly by the Merriam-Webster dictionary is, single(a) ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action. Monopolies place be held upon anything, but typically the term r efers to a corporations hold on one particular industry. This was more of a problem preceding the large depression. Old corporations such as Standard Oil, U. S. steel, and at the time GE held what is called a coercive monopoly, which is an absolute hold that set up for the most part, bear not be beaten without government intervention. These old corporations would dominate by not only conditionling their market, but the markets of the related goods and sum of production. For example, U. S. Steel would have regent(postnominal) holds in the railroads so that they may transport there steel to cities free of charge. With such control, the industries were free of competition being that they had the means to set the standard for prices.Some would argue that this is good for an economy because it keeps prices at an all time low, but this typically lowers the quality of the goods they are selling as well as save low wages for workers being there very few places of work when one compan y controls it all. Nowadays, the government has precautions to preserve such dominating businessmen, but the economic order that is soon in place of the monopoly system, is not all that better. The shell of economic system the U. S. watercoursely has is called a monopolistic competition. In order for the U.S. government to deal with monopolies, they had do it illegal to hold such power in one business. Businesses, such as standard oil, were forced to break up into many different businesses so that they may compete with each other. This keeps the market ever changing and not stagnant, allowing for more free choice in a capitalistic economy. Now even though there is no super power of the market, there still are businesses that are significantly more powerful forces than others. This is what defines our monopolistic competition of our economy.It is an economy generally guided by larger corporations, but are not so powerful that they snuff out any smaller business below them. So while we have been able to make the free market as free as possible, there is still very much so a hierarchy. Wal-Mart sells everything cheaper than everyone. It has a hold not only over one market, but many. because if factors are left unchanged, Wal-Mart would win the game of capitalism. These factors, as of now, are unchanged. First, Wal-Mart simply needs to be everywhere. With 50 Wal-Marts a state and growing, that goal has all the way been reached.Their numbers are only increasing, this way in the future, anyone can reach a Wal-Mart. This also keeps their employment up. The more jobs they give out, the more control of the standard of wages they have. It also is good for publicity. Second, they need to maintain their work out on the media, other businesses, and government. Commercials and internet make keeping up appearances in media more than easy. Same with other businesses being that they need only to market their products. Government though is trickier, but they exercised this strength of theirs fairly recently.Since 1998, a move of women has been essay to sue Wal-Mart for wrongful discrimination. More than 100 women have been trying to attack the corporation for many individual accounts of discrimination and finally make it to the Supreme Court in June 2011. Unfortunately, the court ruled in esteem of Wal-Mart due to that these individual accounts have nothing to do with the corporation as a whole. This ruling shows that corporations are not held in contempt for the acts of their employees, which makes humble to no sense.While this does not quite mean Wal-Mart is above the law, it still shows the type of influence they can hold in the law if need be. Although, even with this power, they can not hold absolute market control unless they maintain the lack of competition. Luckily, Wal-Mart still has competition, especially with those who find shopping their morally wrong, but this lack of competition may soon be at hand. The current debt crisis is continuing out of control, and nobody knows where it is quite going yet, but the proceeds that is feared more is a depression.With a depression, many businesses, big and small, will dec and the economy will be an empty husk. The only people who will seem unscathed in the mist of this chaos are the abundant businesses, or Wal-Mart. They will have the resources to conquer an economy that has been wiped clean. Therefore, if there were on in Trumbull during such harsh time, it would be near impossible to open any new business in the area. Without new businesses, an economy is very hard to rebuild, especially on a local level.More importantly, in a time a crises, one of the last things you want is for a majority of the wealth to go to one place as history demonstrates. Having such an economic power exist in such fragile times is perhaps the most danger we have been in for decades. As you can see, it is not very difficult for Wal-Mart to become dangerous, but what does this contrast? wherefore it contrasts the support for small business. Small businesses create a self sustaining system for the area, rather than an areas income being controlled by corporate conglomerates.The only problem with this is the system of economics. If a small business is successful, it is inevitable it becomes a big business, which could lead to another company to big for our own good. This is a cycle that must happen as a result of capitalism. If we are expected to have such a free moving economic system, we must learn to be responsible with our economy, and not allow businesses, such as Wal-Mart, to spread as rapidly as they do. This is a lesson that will be learned the hard way if a Wal-Mart is built. Wal-Mart is the product of a capitalist economy. While it is simply good usiness, is an example of the inevitability of monopolies in a free market system. Thankfully, we have regulations to hold them back, but you can not count on the government to control the market for you. state n eed to see this pattern and realize that you can not fall into the lock step of a consumer. Every Wal-Mart that is built just increases the put on the line of economic domination, and we can not contribute to this. It may be small in scale to the power they already hold, but every movement starts with a step. I hope you see the risk you take in considering this decision. Work CitedAndrew Beatie. A History of US Monopolies. Investopedia. November 21, 2010. http//www. investopedia. com/articles/economics/08/hammer-antitrust. asp Lila Shapiro. Walmart to a fault Big To Sue. The Huffington Post. June 20, 2011. http//www. huffingtonpost. com/2011/06/20/walmart-too-big-to-sue_n_880930. html History Timeline Walmart Stores. http//walmartstores. com/aboutus/7603. aspx John D. Ramage, John C. Bean, and June Johnson. committal to writing Arguments A Rhetoric With Readings. Monopolistic Competition Basic Economics. http//www. basiceconomics. info/monopolistic-competition. php