The Walmart Rule

So, I’m in Ikea over the weekend, buying a large mirror to assist with my violin practice, when one of the employees recommends I go to Walmart instead. There’s just one problem – the Walmart rule.

I have never been into, much less purchased anything from a Walmart store. And I won’t ever be purchasing anything from a Walmart store either – not while they seemingly care only about the lowest possible price, and not about employee healthcare benefits, fair wages, worker’s union rights, and other fundamental, basic issues. My personal code of ethics precludes me from going near to a Walmart store – I like to call it my “Walmart Rule”. Only if there’s no alternative for 100 miles, I’m stranded, and need something essential will I ever even remotely consider actually buying anything there. And even then, I would be very disappointed in myself.

I was saddened to think that someone would recommend that I go there – and even more saddened they worked in retail at the time of making such a recommendation. This isn’t the first time such a thing has happened in this country – it’s filled with people who just don’t see such glaring problems (how else does a company get away with having over 1.3 million employees, with such a basic level of benefit provided?), people who probably also think Big Pharma is doing them a favor in sponsoring prescription assistance programmes (because, big pharma wants to avoid universal healthcare, and other healthcare reforms, medicare/medicaid pricing, etc. At All Costs).

Meh. I managed to get myself worked up even thinking about Walmart.


5 Responses to “The Walmart Rule”

  1. DG says:

    I always used to try and avoid shopping at ASDA in the UK, because it’s owned by Walmart…. but according to my better half, ASDA apparently treats it’s employees better than some other UK supermarkets…. which is surprising.

    So – good luck in avoiding Walmart. I presume you’ve seen the relevant South Park episode?

  2. Pete Zaitcev says:

    Have it ever occured to you that all the anti-walmart hysteria may be just propaganda by leftist journos? And BTW, since you mentioned that, union organizers belong in jail (we are too civilized to hung them from the lampposts). I would not cry about medical benefits either; the problem is created by the anti-market overregulated medicine in America, where user A gets service from provider B, but B is paid by someone else (C). Since A does not pay, there’s no incentive to consume less for A, or provide better service for B. If we had truly market medicine, maybe we would not need to demand Walmart to provide benefits. It’s absolutely ridiculous to think that employers are unquestionably responsible for employees’ medical coverage. The warped reality of the American system made you think that it’s normal, but it’s not. And the aforementioned journos made you think that government-run medicine is the only alternative, when it’s not. I don’t know what other “fundamental” issues you mean, but perhaps they are equally meaningless as the union racketeering and government meddling into the medicine.

  3. jcm says:

    I’ll agree that there exists no basic assumption that employers must provide healthcare…but in the absence of sanity, that is how the US healthcare “system” operates. I also agree that the complex chain of handling makes the process ridiculous. I guess, I’m agreeing with you on many of your points! BUT…

    …given that the US healthcare system *is* so fundamentally broken, and given that a company like Walmart could easily afford to do better, and given that neither you nor I would be willing to work for a company that did not provide coverage ourselves…I think that they both should and could be helping the situation. One reason I buy coffee in Starbucks and don’t actively rant against them is that they offer better healthcare than most of us are getting, to any employee who works more than a very minimal number of hours each week. I was genuinely surprised to hear about that, from friends who work for that company.


  4. Pete Zaitcev says:

    I’m sorry for arguing on your blog again, it is so stupid. I’ll talk to you about it some time maybe.

  5. jcm says:

    Oh, I don’t mind arguing with you Pete – like I said over dinner, I have *infinite* time for smart people, even if I don’t always agree with them. You and I don’t agree, but we at least agree to disagree, and I really enjoy that. Let’s grab dinner/coffee when I’m over – you around over Christmas if I do do that crazy roadtrip?


Leave a Reply