I was recently having a conversation about insurance costs with a friend who is a senior at Rutgers University. Somehow the conversation digressed to the topic of Wal-Mart. The Rutgers student listed all the classic knocks on Wal-Mart: they treat their employees like a crap, pay them nothing, do nothing good for American manufacturing. This commentary sounded all too familiar. My freshman year at Syracuse University I had similar opinions of Wal-Mart after reading Nickel and Dimed.  My very first college paper was based on the book (man, if I could only find that assignment to post here). Nickel and Dimed is essentially a tale of how hard it can be to live off minimum wage and how companies exploit laborers … it’s modern day, The Jungle. After reading the author’s tale I had a classic case of rational ignorance. The story seemed to make a well researched “Wal-Mart is evil” argument, so was it really worth my time to find other sources on working life at Wal-Mart? The books thesis was in line with what seemed to academics a consensus view; at the time that good enough for me. About two years later I watched what I consider to be one of the best South Park episodes ever: Something Wal-Mart This Way Comes. Again…Wal-Mart… evil.

Fast forward 7 years to a time where I am more in tune with various economic schools of thought and viewpoints. I came a across a podcast on Econtalk with Russ Roberts in which he was interviewing a man who was retired editor. Roberts’ guest had decided to take up position at Wal-Mart and subsequently written various articles on his experiences (Life at Wal-Mart by Charles Platt). Here is a synopsis of the podcast:

Charles Platt, author and journalist, talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts what it was like to apply for a job at Wal-Mart, get one, and work there. He discusses the hiring process, the training process, and the degree of autonomy Wal-Mart employees have to change prices. The conversation concludes with a discussion of attitudes toward Wal-Mart.

What Platt had to say seemed to make sense.  His points were further supported by Robert’s commentary on the general economics of Wal-Mart. I started piecing my Wal-Mart experiences together in my head. All in all, I would have to say I enjoy Wal-Mart. One stop shop, low prices, and great service. So, is there enough evidence that Wal-Mart exploits it labor for me to shun Wal-Mart?

The stigma is that Wal-Mart workers are treated like crap and are unhappy. After hearing about Platt’s experience, I now pay attention to the demeanor of Wal-Mart employees when I shop there. From my experience going to Wal-Mart, their employees, so far, have seemed pretty happy in general. Now, after reading Nickel and Dimed there were a few years that shopping there gave me the heaby jeebies but I didn’t shop there any less. There has always seemed to be some a disconnect, for me, between the experience that I read about in Nickel and Dimed and my personal experiences at Wal-Mart.

I would guess that good portion of recent liberal arts graduates have read some version of a “Nickel and Dimed”. I think Nickel and Dimed misses the human aspects of why people work at Wal-Mart, in other words, what their living situation before the enter employment with the company.  Therefore, it tends to mislead readers into believing that most other Wal-Mart employees dislike their job as much as the author of the book did. Certainly there are people struggling to get by that work at Wal-Mart, but is it right to pin the blame for their struggles on Wal-Mart? I think not. The Platt article may change your mind on Wal-Mart and it may not, but either way it is worth getting another viewpoint on the “Evil Wal-Mart” story that seems to so prevalent in university lecture halls across the country.

CHANGE is here right? Wrong! Since 1896 the Keynesian viewpoints began to overwhelm capitalism.

(I know some of you are chomping at the bits to say that such an assumption cannot possibly be true being that Keynes would have been 13 in 1896. What I am referring to is the emergence of interventionist policy that started to take hold in during the banking crisis in the late 19th century.  To me Keynes merely gets credit for the wave interventionist monetary policy which came to a perverse apex during the great depression).

FDR, Obama and Kennedy all attended Harvard. H.W Bush, Clinton, G.W Bush all attended Yale. The same schools produce the MBA students that litter the ranks of Goldman Sachs. Under Bush the there was Paulson (Goldman Sachs). Under Obama there was/is Rubin (Citi), and Larry Summers who head Obama’s economic council. Current Treasury Secretary Geithner (Dartmouth) worked under Rubin and Summers from 1999 to 2000. Change?

Whats my point? All of these people come from the Keynesian school of thought. We can spend you way out of this thing.  We can do it if we try, we can do it. Hey, it worked in Great Depression…right? It worked for the Japanese, right?

Former Treasury Secretary O’Neill made the following comments to the LA Times.

“Doesn’t this seem like lunacy to you?” said O’Neill, who was President Bush’s first Treasury chief, from 2001 to 2002, in a telephone interview today. “The consequences of it are unbelievably bad in terms of public intrusion into the private sector.”

… “Is anybody thinking there?” asked O’Neill, who also served as deputy budget director in the Ford administration. “It’s too late, it’s not going to make any difference and it’s aggravating as hell when there’s a better idea and you can’t even get it in play,” he said, recognizing little success so far in pitching his own proposal.

I suppose it come down to what was repeatedly preached by Mises. Governments pick the winners and the losers. In the modern era the history books were written by FDR’s Keynsians that graduated from Ivy league schools. They are the ones picking the winners. They are a best and our brightest, right? My gripe is that they all tend to come from the same school of the thought. They leave no room for the entrepreneur to pave his own way.

Obama Pepsi, Bush Coke…when can we have a little Sprite?