3 ms·

Because if you shop locally, more of your money stays in your community, resulting in healthier local economies. Instead of your dollar spent at Walmart getting

Because if you shop locally, more of your money stays in your community, resulting in healthier local economies. Instead of your dollar spent at Walmart getting cut up and sent to Madison Avenue and Beijing, it goes to the local PR agency and a local cut-and-sew factory that you may not have even known existed. Also, those better prices are due to the fact that Walmart's buying power means that they tell the supplier how much they will pay for the item, and leave it to the supplier to figure out how they can manufacture it and still make a profit. You can imagine the corners the supplier needs to cut to make that happen. Source: http://localfirstaz.com/aassets-lfaz/10-shift/pie-chart-economy.jpg http://localfirstaz.com/aassets-lfaz/10-shift/pie-chart-econ...

Houshalter 13y ago
A technological civilization isn't even possible without massive specialization and worldwide cooperation. The first world standard of living wouldn't be possible if every country wasted it's resources trying to be self-sufficient (not that is what you were advocating for but it's the same principle, just to a smaller degree.) Besides what do I care if my dollar goes to some stranger down the street, in another state, or in another country? They are all human beings I don't know, and I don't particularly care about the welfare of any more than the other. >Also, those better prices are due to the fact that Walmart's buying power means that they tell the supplier how much they will pay for the item, and leave it to the supplier to figure out how they can manufacture it and still make a profit. You can imagine the corners the supplier needs to cut to make that happen. A pressure to be more efficient and decrease prices is a good thing. They would try to cut corners anyways, and lower prices might arguably make up for it.
- swalkergibson 13y ago
  > [W]orldwide cooperation What cooperation, exactly? Malaysian children being forced (perhaps not in the physical sense, but certainly in the economic sense) to work 13 hours/day for less than 1 USD so that Target can sell Kathy Lee Gifford's branded sweaters for $15? Is that really the world you want to live in? There is no cooperation here, it is exploitation pure and simple. > [W]hat do I care if my dollar goes to some stranger down the street Well, first of all, he lives in your neighborhood. If he is economically secure, it is less likely he will break into your house and steal your TV. > A pressure to be more efficient and decrease prices is a good thing. They would try to cut corners anyways, and lower prices might arguably make up for it. Great! So we have shoddily constructed, shitty products that are not meant to last more than a few months anyway, but that we believe are cheaper because the marketing machine told us that we saved 47 cents on the purchase of $foo_widget? Real society has real people in it, not robotic automata that always act perfectly economically rationally and conform to some sort of capitalist fantasy.
  - Houshalter 13y ago
    >What cooperation, exactly? Malaysian children being forced (perhaps not in the physical sense, but certainly in the economic sense) to work 13 hours/day for less than 1 USD so that Target can sell Kathy Lee Gifford's branded sweaters for $15? Is that really the world you want to live in? There is no cooperation here, it is exploitation pure and simple. And you think the worker would be better off if you didn't buy it? No they'd just be unemployed or employed at a worse job. I'm all for spreading the wealth generated by the economy more fairly, but simply removing trade doesn't actually make anyone better off. >Well, first of all, he lives in your neighborhood. If he is economically secure, it is less likely he will break into your house and steal your TV. The money you lose by buying more expensive local products, plus the the probability that the small amount of your money that actually goes to a local worker will make him less likely to rob, times the probability that he would rob your house specifically... Even with absurd estimates of how likely that is, it's still cheaper just to spend the money you save on insurance than what you would gain from slightly reducing the risk of robbery. >Great! So we have shoddily constructed, shitty products that are not meant to last more than a few months anyway, but that we believe are cheaper because the marketing machine told us that we saved 47 cents on the purchase of $foo_widget? What are you referring to that has been reduced in quality so much it actually costs more in the long run (especially things where this is done without the consumer's knowledge or choice to buy higher quality elsewhere.)? And can you actually attribute that to Walmart specifically, and it wouldn't have happened anyways? Or even just people making irrational purchasing decisions or just having a high time preference?
    - swalkergibson 13y ago
      > And you think the worker would be better off if you didn't buy it? No they'd just be unemployed or employed at a worse job. As a matter of fact, I do. The world is littered with suffering due to Western economic expansion (exploitation). For evidence, see the Banana Republics [0] generated in Latin America due to large fruit producers invading under the banner of "this is better for you." Globalization has an extraordinary human cost. > The money you lose by buying more expensive local products, plus the the probability that the small amount of your money that actually goes to a local worker will make him less likely to rob, times the probability that he would rob your house specifically... > Even with absurd estimates of how likely that is, it's still cheaper just to spend the money you save on insurance than what you would gain from slightly reducing the risk of robbery. Did you even look at the artifact that I submitted? 73% of the money you spend locally stays in the community, whereas 43% stays in the community if you shop big-box. Furthermore, there is more than one "guy down the street." If everyone in your neighborhood is now suddenly suffering due to money leaving the community, what does that do to your probability model? > What are you referring to that has been reduced in quality so much it actually costs more in the long run (especially things where this is done without the consumer's knowledge or choice to buy higher quality elsewhere.)? And can you actually attribute that to Walmart specifically, and it wouldn't have happened anyways? Or even just people making irrational purchasing decisions or just having a high time preference? Have you been to a Walmart/Kmart/Target lately? What product have you picked up there recently and thought, "Yeah, this should hold up for a while, thank goodness I saved $2.18 on it!" Additionally, if you have a high time preference, you should definitely not shop at Walmart. Walmart is responding to competitive pressure by "implementing deep cuts in labor hours at the company’s US stores, setting in motion a "vicious circle" of understaffing, operational miscues, and lost sales that is diminishing the company’s long-term value." [1] I don't know about you, but wandering around a 100k square foot building with nobody to help in sight sounds like a serious waste of time to me. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic [1] http://makingchangeatwalmart.org/files/2011/10/The-High-Price-of-Low-Cost.pdf http://makingchangeatwalmart.org/files/2011/10/The-High-Pric...

Houshalter 13y ago

A technological civilization isn't even possible without massive specialization and worldwide cooperation. The first world standard of living wouldn't be possible if every country wasted it's resources trying to be self-sufficient (not that is what you were advocating for but it's the same principle, just to a smaller degree.) Besides what do I care if my dollar goes to some stranger down the street, in another state, or in another country? They are all human beings I don't know, and I don't particularly care about the welfare of any more than the other. >Also, those better prices are due to the fact that Walmart's buying power means that they tell the supplier how much they will pay for the item, and leave it to the supplier to figure out how they can manufacture it and still make a profit. You can imagine the corners the supplier needs to cut to make that happen. A pressure to be more efficient and decrease prices is a good thing. They would try to cut corners anyways, and lower prices might arguably make up for it.

swalkergibson 13y ago
> [W]orldwide cooperation What cooperation, exactly? Malaysian children being forced (perhaps not in the physical sense, but certainly in the economic sense) to work 13 hours/day for less than 1 USD so that Target can sell Kathy Lee Gifford's branded sweaters for $15? Is that really the world you want to live in? There is no cooperation here, it is exploitation pure and simple. > [W]hat do I care if my dollar goes to some stranger down the street Well, first of all, he lives in your neighborhood. If he is economically secure, it is less likely he will break into your house and steal your TV. > A pressure to be more efficient and decrease prices is a good thing. They would try to cut corners anyways, and lower prices might arguably make up for it. Great! So we have shoddily constructed, shitty products that are not meant to last more than a few months anyway, but that we believe are cheaper because the marketing machine told us that we saved 47 cents on the purchase of $foo_widget? Real society has real people in it, not robotic automata that always act perfectly economically rationally and conform to some sort of capitalist fantasy.
- Houshalter 13y ago
  >What cooperation, exactly? Malaysian children being forced (perhaps not in the physical sense, but certainly in the economic sense) to work 13 hours/day for less than 1 USD so that Target can sell Kathy Lee Gifford's branded sweaters for $15? Is that really the world you want to live in? There is no cooperation here, it is exploitation pure and simple. And you think the worker would be better off if you didn't buy it? No they'd just be unemployed or employed at a worse job. I'm all for spreading the wealth generated by the economy more fairly, but simply removing trade doesn't actually make anyone better off. >Well, first of all, he lives in your neighborhood. If he is economically secure, it is less likely he will break into your house and steal your TV. The money you lose by buying more expensive local products, plus the the probability that the small amount of your money that actually goes to a local worker will make him less likely to rob, times the probability that he would rob your house specifically... Even with absurd estimates of how likely that is, it's still cheaper just to spend the money you save on insurance than what you would gain from slightly reducing the risk of robbery. >Great! So we have shoddily constructed, shitty products that are not meant to last more than a few months anyway, but that we believe are cheaper because the marketing machine told us that we saved 47 cents on the purchase of $foo_widget? What are you referring to that has been reduced in quality so much it actually costs more in the long run (especially things where this is done without the consumer's knowledge or choice to buy higher quality elsewhere.)? And can you actually attribute that to Walmart specifically, and it wouldn't have happened anyways? Or even just people making irrational purchasing decisions or just having a high time preference?
  - swalkergibson 13y ago
    > And you think the worker would be better off if you didn't buy it? No they'd just be unemployed or employed at a worse job. As a matter of fact, I do. The world is littered with suffering due to Western economic expansion (exploitation). For evidence, see the Banana Republics [0] generated in Latin America due to large fruit producers invading under the banner of "this is better for you." Globalization has an extraordinary human cost. > The money you lose by buying more expensive local products, plus the the probability that the small amount of your money that actually goes to a local worker will make him less likely to rob, times the probability that he would rob your house specifically... > Even with absurd estimates of how likely that is, it's still cheaper just to spend the money you save on insurance than what you would gain from slightly reducing the risk of robbery. Did you even look at the artifact that I submitted? 73% of the money you spend locally stays in the community, whereas 43% stays in the community if you shop big-box. Furthermore, there is more than one "guy down the street." If everyone in your neighborhood is now suddenly suffering due to money leaving the community, what does that do to your probability model? > What are you referring to that has been reduced in quality so much it actually costs more in the long run (especially things where this is done without the consumer's knowledge or choice to buy higher quality elsewhere.)? And can you actually attribute that to Walmart specifically, and it wouldn't have happened anyways? Or even just people making irrational purchasing decisions or just having a high time preference? Have you been to a Walmart/Kmart/Target lately? What product have you picked up there recently and thought, "Yeah, this should hold up for a while, thank goodness I saved $2.18 on it!" Additionally, if you have a high time preference, you should definitely not shop at Walmart. Walmart is responding to competitive pressure by "implementing deep cuts in labor hours at the company’s US stores, setting in motion a "vicious circle" of understaffing, operational miscues, and lost sales that is diminishing the company’s long-term value." [1] I don't know about you, but wandering around a 100k square foot building with nobody to help in sight sounds like a serious waste of time to me. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic [1] http://makingchangeatwalmart.org/files/2011/10/The-High-Price-of-Low-Cost.pdf http://makingchangeatwalmart.org/files/2011/10/The-High-Pric...