... let's tackle a post that set me off line by line, okay?
"Most people cannot stretch a budget simply because they do not apply themselves to saving money vs convenience."
Incorrect and bordering on irrelevant. Wal-Mart products stretch a budget. The mom and pop shop down the street's "convenient"... but it costs extra money and odds are Mom and Pop are forcing their kids to work the store for free, thus cleverly subverting minimum wage stores.
"You can purchase most of what you just listed at places other than wally world and most come in generic brands that are very cheap, again, most people shop at wally world because it is 'Convenient". "
Incorrect and leads me to believe you have never done your own shopping. We'll assume you're referring to foods? Store generic brand products, which includes Wal-Mart products, are made at, in many cases, the exact same factories as the brand name products of lower grade materials and minus some luxury ingredients, and they are sold at a flat rate to "generic" distributors to repackage and re-sell as their own. Grocery store generics, when they cost more than Wal-Mart products, are because of a higher markup; the core product cost the same.
"If no one was willing to buy Chinese garbage, thousands of good paying manufacturing jobs would have never left the USA, and those people would most likely benefit from that."
Not the consumer's fault. Manufacturers outsource to places where labor is cheaper and then pass some, but not all, of the savings onto customers. Furthermore, to put it bluntly, most "Made in America" products which can be afforded by a low-income family are third-rate crap that falls apart quickly. Is the $50 made in America pair of jeans better than the $15 Wal-Mart jeans? Yes! However.. the $25 "made in america" jeans are absolute crap compared to the Wal-mart brand, and this is merely a single example. Domestically made budget products are garbage, period. Do I buy the $50 shirt? ...no. It'd be pointless and stupid when the $15 one lasts almost as long. Maybe if the $25 US brand weren't worth $3 I'd consider buying that instead.
Maybe you're just peachy-keen born with a silver spoon up your redacted, but the rest of us have to pay for $4/gallon gas on the same kinds of wages we all got back when it was $1/gallon.
"Corporate greed is not the cause either. This country flourished when many corporate monopolies existed. The PROBLEM is Americans for the most part are
more LAZY than THRIFTY."
And the American workers also had 70 hour work weeks way back then, and had to buy everything form the company store. Oh and back in the days of those monopolies? It didn't matter if a product was crappily built or unsafe, you either bought Spacely's Sprockets and risked it exploding in your face due to lax quality control and no government oversight or you lived a life devoid of sprockets because there was nobody else to buy them from. The country most certainly was NOT flourishing; it led to the Great Depression. I suggest you at least cursorily peruse a history book before posting such nonsense.
"I sympathize with those of limited income, but Americans in the "Golden Age" learned to do without or improvise, not being able to run to wally world for every little reason."
What are you babbling about? The Wal-Mart nearest to me is a $40 trip. Where do you live where Wal-Mart is somehow magically more convenient than the mom and pop shops? In fact, those places have me by the testicles because if I want a loaf of bread it's either do without until I need enough things to justify a $40 Wal-Mart trip or I have to pay Mom and Pops' exorbitant prices... to a place that doesn't employ persons locally, just scams the wage system by paying family members under the table.
"Nope, as long as the taxpayer is FORCED to bail out corporate greed, nothing will change. However, when no one can PAY TAXES because of that end game, that is the only solution."
This statement is nearly off-topic. Wal-Mart's never needed a bailout. GM sure did, though.
"Of course, most Americans used to live in the Country and raise the majority of their own food, but now those same people who moved to the cities to get good paying jobs in factories no longer have jobs, and cannot AFFORD to return to the land."
Very true, but Wal-Mart is not preventing that. Population growth necessitates dense centers of commercial and industrial pools. History books show that to have always been the case, it's nothing new at all.
"Of course, because SO MANY PRODUCTS ARE NOT AVAILABLE BECAUSE THEY SIMPLY ARE NO LONGER MADE IN THE USA."
They are. You're just not looking hard enough. They tend to be garbage and not worth buying, but they exist. You'd be better off improvising, doing without, or going to Wal-Mart.
"Again, if the majority of Americans simply refused to buy Chinese garbage for one year, IT WOULD DRASTICALLY CHANGE THE DYNAMICS of the American Economy."
Yes, the technology and leisure gap between the wealthy and the poor would grow ever-wider. What's wrong with you, do you have some sort of problem with minimum-wage earners being able to afford halfway decent clothes and some leisure activities? Are poor folks supposed to work four jobs at once to be able to clothe their children? Aren't the non-wealthy permitted some leisure time?
"Mom and pop stores did not cater to international importers and corporate shills. They served the community."
Wrong. Mom and Pop stores got, and still get, product as cheaply as possible and mark it up as much as they can to maximize profits. When they succeed enough, they become a big store, and then they buy another location, and eventually they become the next Zayre's, Venture, Montgomery Ward's, or Sears that will supposedly be the death of America.
"Many of the products they sold were made locally or supported Americans working good paying jobs."
No. Family-owned stores tend not to hire local Americans. They tend to exploit their own family, and that's the end of it. Once they get big, like say.. Wal-Mart did, they might start hiring american workers.
"Wally World has been sued many times for screwing their workers. Again, before the 'Super Megalo marts" came, people could have jobs to support their families locally."
What are you babbling about? Chain and department stores have existed since longer than my grandparents have been alive. Sears has existed since "gunfighter" was still a viable occupation. What fantasy history of "before" are you referring to?
"The problem? Mass Marts can buy extremely large bulk orders, lowering the price. That is why CoOps were formed."
Whom eventually buy each other out and become one united brand. Ever heard of Kroger? Of course you have, if you live in the US. They started as local grocery store markets co-operating to buy in bulk. Now they're a "supermegalo mart" as you ignorantly put it.
"Is America better with mega stores? JUST LOOK AT THE STATE OF AMERICA."
I have been, and apparently for longer than you. Yes, since the department stores have come to prominence the luxury gap between the wealthy and the poor has closed significantly. I'm not sure why you feel this is a bad thing. Do you just have something against poor people?
"Real World? ya, too many people buy CRAP from Wally World."
Wanna trade lives for a year and see where YOU end up shopping, Miss Highpants?
), but I do try to avoid shopping there as i do not like what it does to the local economy. That said, I do still shop there from time to time, as I am on a budget like everyone else.
