CORPORATISM - LOOKING GLASS NEWS | |
Wal-Mart's Free Market Fallacy |
|
by Jonathan Tasini Tom Paine Entered into the database on Monday, April 25th, 2005 @ 14:48:52 MST |
|
In the mythical world of the free market—for which Wal-Mart supposedly
serves as a shining example—prices for goods and labor should rise and
fall based on the magic of the “invisible hand” of market supply
and demand. In the nirvana of the so-called free market, workers can sell themselves
for whatever the market can bear. So let me introduce you to a place called China. Wal-Mart—in its never-ending
quest to promote its heartland, Arkansan family values—is a willing customer
of the Chinese labor system, where people work 12- to 18-hour days, earn meager
wages and have no days of rest—all for the honor of laboring inside factories
full of chemical toxins and hazardous machines, leading to sickness and death
at the highest rates in world history. Wal-Mart says its business with China
is just a virtue of the free market. Putting aside the morality of forcing people to work in slave-like conditions,
the so-called free market does not exist in China when it comes to wages. China
artificially suppresses wages by anywhere from 47 to 85 percent below what they
should be,according to the AFL-CIO's complaint about China's labor policies
filed with the United States Trade Representative last year. With Wal-Mart as
its willing customer, an authoritarian regime ruthlessly warps the market for
wages by enforcing a system that controls where people can work and imprisons
and tortures people who attempt to organize real unions or strike. Maybe the
rock-bottom labor costs are really behind Wal-Mart’s slogan “always
low prices,” but the company is certainly not an example of how to win
in a free market economy. It’s easy to see why Wal-Mart and its conservative defenders discard
ideology: money. By ignoring free market principles, the left-wing Harvard Business
School estimates that Wal-Mart reduces its procurement costs by 10-20 percent,
primarily by taking advantage of the artificially suppressed labor market in
China. One can’t help note the delicious irony that Wal-Mart’s “free
market” leadership is powered by an authoritarian regime that still refers
to itself as communist. Back at home, Wal-Mart’s free market mantra stops at the water’s
edge of the public till. By one estimate, Wal-Mart has pulled in $1.5 billion
dollars in taxpayer funded subsidies (see www.walmartwatch.com) . And that's
at the low end, because subsidies are sometimes hard to track based on the lack
of public reporting requirements. Wal-Mart is happy to cash in on government
largess like property tax abatements, infrastructure support, free land and
just straight-out cold cash—all of which are the antithesis of “free
market” ideology. Here’s a way to get rich, if you could collect the dough: How many of
you wish you had a dollar every time you heard some conservative rant first
about the evils of the federal government and, then, call for denuding the federal
government and handing more control over decision making to local communities?
We’d all be rich, no? Well, an odd thing has happened. Conservatives appear
to be against local control. Conservatives and their allies in the press have been bent out of shape over
recent campaigns to keep Wal-Mart from opening stores. These campaigns were
spearheaded by community groups nationwide from Los Angeles to Chicago to New
York. Recently, The Economist , the international organ for the so-called “free
market,” railed against the opposition to Wal-Mart’s entry into
the New York City area. Writing in its April 2nd edition about local legislation
aimed at requiring standards for workers’ pay and health care, the magazine
opined that, “Municipal socialism may seem an odd strategy for the world’s
capital of capitalism to embrace.” Oh, I get it: Local control is only a lofty principle when the goal is to destroy
the government’s ability to implement basic community values like fairness,
equality and justice. But when people rise up to challenge the idea that a corporation
shouldn’t do what it chooses with local community resources like workers,
water, air and soil—oh my God, we’re teetering on the brink of rampant
radicalism and a titanic battle between socialism and the free market. Truth is, Wal-Mart could not survive in a real free market: It would, for example,
have to pay Chinese workers more (which would ruin its low-wage business model)
and spurn any offers of government subsidies. Indeed, it’s fitting that
Wal-Mart, the business model fawned over by free-marketeers, exposes the so-called
“free market” as a lie, no more than a crude—albeit effective—marketing
phrase. By offering the seductive promise of prosperity through something “free,”
we’re told we have to hand over control of our communities to some mystical
“market” force. But that’s just an illusion conjured up to
hide from us real-life actors who exploit the sweat of our brows, deplete our
natural resources to make huge profits and take handouts funded by our hard-earned
incomes. Ironically, Wal-Mart’s behavior does have one redeeming factor. By puncturing
the Wal-Mart-generated myths that it is good for America, by showing that its
low-prices come with a heavy cost, and by revealing how the company is a leech
on communities, we may begin to pull back the curtain hiding the true nature
of the so-called “free market.” |