Cheap TVs, sound systems and appliances are a cover for increased expenses elsewhere. While UNNECESSARY consumer goods have truly gone down in price, certain NECESSITIES have shot up in cost. Couple this with stagnation of incomes among working people and a decline in incomes among the poor and the cheap consumer goods are no bargain.

Two essential aspects of living, housing and transportation have gone up in cost a much greater extent than either the rate of inflation or increase in income. In some Canadian cities, rents and house prices are ten to twelve times what they were 35-40 years ago. At the same time, the minimum wage and welfare have gone up only six or seven times. In the USA, housing costs, adjusted for inflation, rose 42% between 1970 and 1996. During the same period, worker income stagnated, and for families with parents under age 35, actually declined. Americans who made less than $20,000 US in 1997 spent 52% of their income on transportation and housing. (1)

Back in the 1960's a bus ticket cost 20 cents. Same ticket today is $2.50 or twelve and a half times. If the minimum wage had shot up to the same extent it would be $14 an hour! In the US the percent of family income devoted to transportation has doubled since the late 1930's. Looked at in dollar terms, a family making $40,000 US has to shell out $7600 for transportation. if the proportions were the same as in 1939, they would have $3800 extra to spend on other things. (2)

Back in the days when housing and transportation were relatively cheap, consumer durables, were, for the most part, relatively expensive. But no one went without. Everyone had a fridge, stove, and TV. If they couldn't afford new stuff, they bought them second hand. You could always pick up a fridge or TV for 25 bucks at the SallyAnn. NO ONE HAS EVER SUFFERED BY NOT HAVING THE LATEST TV OR FRIDGE. But, people who have to shell out 50 or 60% of their income for rent DO suffer.

Many consumer durables, adjusted for inflation, cost about half what they did in the 1960's. Had the same cost decline happened with housing and transportation, you would have no trouble buying a house in Vancouver for $70,000 or renting a two bedroom apartment for $400 a month. (3) A bus ticket would cost only 60 cents.

Wallmart’s "inexpensive" consumer goods are an example of capitalism's bad priorities. The important things, basic human necessities, are poorly met. In exchange, we get a lot of cheap, badly-made, job-killing imports. It's a lousy trade-off. (4)
http://porkupineblog.blogspot.com/

For decades the Bernays-like entreaties to the modern N. American consumer have burrowed into our subconscious. But the newest, the best and keep up with the Jonses. Now the chickens are coming home to roost.

quote:

---

I don't understand how the high cost of housing in Vancouver is Wal-Mart's fault.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ReeferMadness:
Wal-Mart may not have direct accountability for the high cost of housing but it certainly has a lot to do with the low cost of labour. And that is why people can't afford the high cost of housing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by redlion:
Two essential aspects of living, housing and transportation have gone up in cost a much greater extent than either the rate of inflation or increase in income. In some Canadian cities, rents and house prices are ten to twelve times what they were 35-40 years ago. At the same time, the minimum wage and welfare have gone up only six or seven times. In the USA, housing costs, adjusted for inflation, rose 42% between 1970 and 1996. During the same period, worker income stagnated, and for families with parents under age 35, actually declined. Americans who made less than $20,000 US in 1997 spent 52% of their income on transportation and housing.

---

[ 16 April 2005: Message edited by: Dex ]

While it's true that not all of lifes' changes in NA have been ones that make sense, I'd have to say that fridges, for example, help me take full adgantage of my grocery budget by long-term storage of produce. I think that most people don't regard air conditioning in houses (or CD players in cars) as necessities. In some neighborhoods, that's the case, but in the two places that I live a lot of people don't have many of the things on that list. Keep in mind that many of these automatic appliances were invented to 'minimize' the time spent doing chores in the household. It's not really a conscious choice, but many people that I know, end up not being able to spend that extra time doing social activities, they end up having to get another job to pay the bills- rent (it's high here) and hydro are the two you can't really go without here. I mean, providing they want to eat something other than spagetti or ichiban every night.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lagatta:
You wouldn't be dead from that if you didn't need a car to get to work - the fact that it should be needed in a city such as Victoria is a testimonial to absurdly bad town planning.

---

[ 16 April 2005: Message edited by: Amy ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cougyr:
My mother says that the snowsuit I wore as a tot was used by 22 children. Try that with Walmart clothing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lagatta:
You wouldn't be dead from that if you didn't need a car to get to work - the fact that it should be needed in a city such as Victoria is a testimonial to absurdly bad town planning.

---

Then if you go to the 1970s, it started to take an hour's worth of work to buy a gallon of gas, but from the 1980s to 2000 or so, the minimum wage came up enough that it only took a quarter of an hour's work or less to buy a gallon of gas. Today it's still only about half an hour's worth of work to buy a gallon of gas.

quote:

---

Originally posted by redlion:
...Dexi, you miss the point. People are still buying and renting, but paying far more as a % of income than they once did.That is the point!

... There are fewer simple products. I am sure there would be a market for a modern, safe, and inexpensive vehical, but they aren't being made. So too inexpensive, no frills housing. But all of this misses the point. Why should a house built in 1950, selling for $10,000 in 1965 now sell for $400,000, if "extras" were the cause of high prices?[/QB]

---

Why does it bother you what percentage of income people are spending on transportation or housing?
Does that show that there are more poor people today? Because there really aren't. Does it show that our standard of living has dropped? Because it really hasn't. If people don't spend money on housing and transportation, where would you rather see it spent? Food? Recreation? What is your optimal 'mix' of spending?

So, um, I guess the moral of the story is that Wal*Mart should start building houses and cars?

[ 18 April 2005: Message edited by: arborman ]

Additional resources will be put into immigrant application processing, fast-tracking the admission of about 110,000 wage earners, Volpe said. The action will cut a backlog of immigration cases by 25 per cent, he predicted in an interview.

"We have to turn ourselves from a risk-management system into a recruitment system. We have to rethink how we do business and attract people."

http://tinyurl.com/7ma8h

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dex:
Besides, if you're paying less money for groceries and houselhold goods, it frees up MORE money to be spent on housing.

---

So instead of your money going to farmers, it goes to the bankers in interest payments.

quote:

---

Originally posted by BleedingHeart:
So instead of your money going to farmers, it goes to the bankers in interest payments.

---

quote:

---

These are some possible [alternate] reasons for my termination, after two years of extremely loyal service:

My wages were getting too high. I was soon to start on $11.50 an hour while a new cash associate makes $9.50 (the low wage argument against Wal-Mart never had any merit in my mind).

They were afraid of the fact that I speak out for what I believe in and I have a history of disseminating my ideas about the company. In fact, three days before I was terminated, an associate heard me talking about what I would change and I was called into the manager's office and was asked what the ideas were. They were calm with me but when I said I would be back with more thoughts, I think they were a little indimidated.

Our store has a long history of fear of unions. I remember once reading a store memo that stated they learned of union workers distributing cards on a specified day. I remember one line clearly: "If you are afraid to walk out to your car, a manager will be happy to assist you," or something to that effect.

I was clearly becoming disillusioned with the company (as well as the store, as when I told people repeatedly we have no selection and certain aspects of our member service is terrible). I also said many times I would rather shop at Costco. Everyone agreed with me, so I doubt that anyone reported anything.

I one found a union card under some DVDs in the electronics area. I told an electronics associate and I told him I was thinking of calling, just to see what they could do to overturn the hypocracy the store has become in recent months. The associate demanded the card and reported it to a manager. Whether or not my name was mentioned, I am still unsure.

Recently I bought a digital camera that was marked down significantly. Although I am not allowed to buy it, I sent in my mother to purchase it for me because I needed it urgently. My thinking was that they could control me, but they have no justification to control the shopping habits of my mother.

---

I knew something was coming. With every late of two to three minutes, I would receieve a warning from my manager. The warning, though, was for a third coaching (a written warning). My first two coachings were for lateness. Three coachings lead to something called "decision making day," when you could be fired or you could be sent home to write an essay on why they should keep you. I also knew something was wrong when my manager stopped saying hi to me, odd considering that I have known her for almost two years. Others agree she is continuously growing more hostile and conservative in the face of her usually loyal employees.

I know a temporary associate who was almost let go for no justification. Only when she asked a superior manager to look up her file did they decide to keep her and that was only for an extra three-month temporary term. If she had never fought the decision, she would have left. I tried to fight my decision, but there was no manager that sided with me. When I was called into the office, they filled out an "exit interview" form, which means it's over. I actually pleaded for another chance, but they continuously refused. There were two managers, one was my manager. The manager that wasn't mine (let's call him Steve) started telling me, "So what we're going to do today..." and he paused and looked over at my manager (let's call her Wah) and she said "Yeah." I presume he asked her because he was swayed by my reasoning.

Edited to add:From a second reading of your contribution you might get some help to document all of your evidence while it is still fresh in your mind.

From a first reading of your contribution it seems you probably deserve some time to relax and recover from recent events. Try to spring back to life just as the trees and plants spring themselves to life. Conflict, properly dealt with and resolved ... forms the basis of much of our deepest lifelong learning.

Our public square is a place of dispute and conflict as well as openness and harmony. Welcome also to battle if that is what you seek, ratm.

[ 25 June 2005: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

Here's a scenario for really driving Wal-Mart into the ground (and good riddance!): network North American SMEs together regionally, give them a hegemonic retail presence in the form of a "Co-Mart" and replace the consumer debt that has been used to fill the present gap between production costs and household incomes with a "social credit" that monetizes the real credit(wealth) of the people without increasing debt.

Dan Swinney Blog Comments on northern Italian SME networks and Co-Mart

[ 06 July 2005: Message edited by: Che ]

'Sam's Club Canada'

quote:

---

RV campers discover Wal-Mart lots

It's not what you'd call a back-to-nature experience, but RV campers travelling the Maritimes say nothing beats a Wal-Mart parking lot for convenience – and price. Wal-Mart is one of the few big businesses to allow camper vans and trailers to spend the night free of charge.

* * *

Bob Kay runs Camper City in Moncton, which is just down the road from the city's Wal-Mart outlet. He said it's hard to compete with a company that lets RVs and camper vans stay for free.

When he looks at the Wal-Mart parking lot at night, he sees people that could be staying at his place. And he doesn't buy the argument that campers only pull into a Wal-Mart when they arrive in town too late to find a campground.

"These people are living there. You go over and look," he said. "They've got awnings out and picnic tables and lounge chairs. They are camping."

---

quote:

---

Bob Kay runs Camper City in Moncton, which is just down the road from the city's Wal-Mart outlet. He said it's hard to compete with a company that lets RVs and camper vans stay for free.

---

Seems to me that's a little like the local Motel saying they can't compete with the free benches at the bus station.

quote:

---

My wages were getting too high. I was soon to start on $11.50 an hour while a new cash associate makes $9.50 (the low wage argument against Wal-Mart never had any merit in my mind).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by shitdisturber:
Quite frankly I'd like to see Walmart close their Brampton, Mississauga and Toronto stores on account of them becoming unionized. Come on, admit it, those who are disgusted with Walmart have now been given the answer!

---

quote:

---

The Labor Department's inspector general strongly criticized department officials yesterday for "serious breakdowns" in procedures involving an agreement promising Wal-Mart Stores 15 days' notice before labor investigators would inspect its stores for child labor violations.

The report by the inspector general faulted department officials for making "significant concessions" to Wal-Mart, the nation's largest retailer, without obtaining anything in return. The report also criticized department officials for letting Wal-Mart lawyers write substantial parts of the settlement and for leaving the department's own legal division out of the settlement process.

---

quote:

---

Wal-Mart is taking a page from the modern political playbook. Under fire from well-organized opponents who have hammered the retailer with criticisms of its wages, health insurance and treatment of workers, Wal-Mart has quietly recruited former presidential advisers, including Michael K. Deaver, who was Ronald Reagan's image-meister, and Leslie Dach, one of Bill Clinton's media consultants, to set up a rapid-response public relations team in Arkansas.

. . . .

To keep up with its critics, Wal-Mart "has to run a campaign," said Robert McAdam, a former political strategist at the Tobacco Institute who now oversees Wal-Mart's corporate communications. "It's simply nonsense for us to let some of these attacks go without a response."

Wal-Mart's aggressive new posture is a departure from its tradition of relying on an internal staff to manage the company's image. The war room, which is part of a larger Wal-Mart effort to portray itself as more worker-friendly and environmentally conscious, runs counter to the philosophy of the chain's founder, Sam Walton. Believing that public relations was a waste of time and money, the penny-pinching Mr. Walton would not likely have hired a public relations firm like Edelman, Wal-Mart's choice to operate its war room.

So what has changed? For one thing, Wal-Mart's critics have become more sophisticated

---

quote:

---

In his response to the store manager who asked about retiree health benefits, Mr. Scott wrote: "Quite honestly, this environment isn't for everyone. There are people who would say, 'I'm sorry, but you should take the risk and take billions of dollars out of earnings and put this in retiree health benefits and let's see what happens to the company.' If you feel that way, then you as a manager should look for a company where you can do those kinds of things."

. . . .

Commenting on a labor union that is fighting Wal-Mart's expansion plans in New York City and elsewhere, Mr. Scott wrote in the Web site, "that way its members' employers" — meaning many Wal-Mart competitors — "can continue to charge extremely high prices for food and tolerate poor service."

Stung by the many news media reports about allegations of sex discrimination, off-the-clock work and child labor violations at Wal-Mart, Mr. Scott wrote, "The press lives on things that are negative."

The Web site shows many sides of one of the nation's most powerful executives. He denounces managers who complain about the company or their subordinates. He frets about the success of his discount rival Target. He exhorts employees to act with integrity. He mocks General Motors for problems caused by its generous benefits. He rejects a manager's suggestion that Wal-Mart has created "a culture of fear," and he hails Wal-Mart's performance in responding to Hurricane Katrina.

---

quote:

---

Under assault as never before, Wal-Mart is increasingly looking beyond the mainstream media and working directly with bloggers, feeding them exclusive nuggets of news, suggesting topics for postings and even inviting them to visit its corporate headquarters.

But the strategy raises questions about what bloggers, who pride themselves on independence, should disclose to readers. Wal-Mart, the nation's largest private employer, has been forthright with bloggers about the origins of its communications, and the company and its public relations firm, Edelman, say they do not compensate the bloggers.

---

As for parking in Wal-mart, i concur with the others who point out that these people are not 'campers'. It does remind me of a scenario i see acted out every summer though. To get to B.C. Ferries and then Victoria one needs to traverse a miles long causeway. In the summer time hundreds of people camp on the water side of this causeway. For a while i used to have the opinion that they were stupid for camping beside this causeway which is often full of backed up traffice waiting to access the terminal. Meanwhile these campers are continuously assaulted by gas fumes, vehicle noise and the image of being in the midst of a giant parking lot.

Today i have a very different opinion of these campers. I am glad they are on the causeway because there is no way i want them cluttering up my island retreats.

Conversely, i used to do a lot of camping in my van and i never, ever went near campgrounds. Of course i didn't carry my own septic tank around either. Instead i relied on the roadside and service station facilities and was always able to find some quiet, often interesting and remote site to park my van.

Now, you don't "see" the depreciation, but it comes in at the end when you sell your car and get way less than what you paid for it, so you have paid "up front" for a loss in the value of your car. Since you paid up front for that, you can think of part of the effect of depreciation as being the loss of the interest you would gain on the money sitting in your bank account or a GIC.

The government reimburses 46 cents a kilometer on a car, and their experts have gone over the cost factors for a lot of cars and it does indeed work out that you spend about 40 to 50 cents a klick on a vehicle when you take all the above costs into account. (and people usually drive anywhere from 14,000 to 20,000 kilometers a year...)

If you own a car it just makes way more sense to ditch the insurance and take transit instead, and then just buy a day or two's temporary insurance when you MUST get stuff that you can't lug on transit.

And for your info, I have actually gone, via transit, and picked up all my computer components.

[ 07 March 2006: Message edited by: DrConway ]

Everyday low vices

quote:

---

"Sam would have been proud" is the highest tribute that can be paid at the company Walton left behind. Increasingly, though, it's also clear that what the writer Barbara Ehrenreich termed the "Cult of Sam" has played a large role in its current woes. Walton, in his day, played a hard game, but he knew when to hold back. Unions were fiercely resisted, but employees were treated respectfully. Wages were low, but people were made to feel they had a stake in the company. Bargaining with suppliers would be tough, but some holds would be barred. Walton's instincts, in short, helped to keep the company's foibles in check. Absent Walton, the redeeming features of Wal-Mart began to disappear. What remained were the relentlessness, the chauvinism, and, above all, the cheapness. As so often happens, the leader wasn't doctrinaire; but the followers are. A Fortune article from 2003 notes how, at Wal-Mart headquarters, "nothing backs up a point better than a quotation from Walton scripture."

It won't be easy for Wal-Mart to change its ways. Wake Up Wal-Mart likes to point out that Wal-Mart could raise its average wages by two dollars an hour if it raised prices by only a penny on the dollar. But Wal-Mart is led by people whose lives are devoted to coming up with ways to shave a penny -- or a half penny, or a quarter penny -- off of a dollar. Wal-Mart's chief spokesman summed up the difficulty in an interview with The New York Times. Change might be necessary, he admitted, but, "at the same time, we can't change who we are -- we can't change what makes Wal-Mart Wal-Mart."

---

In reading the comments section, I also found a link to this interesting piece off the BBC website. It seems that they are being beaten at their own game in Britain and they don't like it one bit.

Wal-Mart calls for Tesco inquiry

quote:

---

Asda's US parent company Wal-Mart has called for the government to launch an investigation into Tesco's domination of the UK supermarket sector.
US-based Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, told the Sunday Times that such a probe was vital now that Tesco's UK market share had hit a record 30.5%.

Tesco, the UK's largest supermarket group to Asda's number two, said the 30.5% figure was "misleading".

Wal-Mart's comments came as Asda unveiled £130m ($234m) in price cuts.

Tesco's 30.5% market share figure was published last week by independent market research company TNS. Asda's share was given as 16.7%.

---