tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post113798586068142393..comments2023-11-03T06:35:48.003-05:00Comments on Shark and Shepherd: Something Wal-Mart this way comesRick Esenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07280070509167910367noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-1138139919851391102006-01-24T15:58:00.000-06:002006-01-24T15:58:00.000-06:00That's a weak reply, Shark. About what you would e...That's a weak reply, Shark. About what you would expect from a lawyer. So our choices are Wal-Mart capitalism or Soviet socialism. Either everybody is exploited or nobody is.<BR/><BR/>But there are many points inbetween if you think outside the black-and-white scheme dictated by ideology. <BR/><BR/>That's the problem with ideologues of the left and right: they're all so predictable and wooden. I can predict what position the Shark is going to take in every blog entry. His side is always right and the other side is always wrong. That kind of partisan mentality is precisely what is poisoning politics in America.<BR/><BR/>So I challenge the Shark to blog something unpredictable for a change and prove me wrong. I know the Shepherd could do it--He was no partisan ideologue. But can the Shark do it too?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-1138072806492806372006-01-23T21:20:00.000-06:002006-01-23T21:20:00.000-06:00I agree that both the Shark and Shepherd ought to ...I agree that both the Shark and Shepherd ought to be concerned about the poor, but I guess I missed the part of the Gospel that said this required the endorsement of dime store socialism. <BR/><BR/>People who go to work for prevailing wages in poorer countries are almost universally better off than before they were "exploited." My company is building a plant in China( to sell into the Chinese market, though, not to make stuff for sale into the US) and the prevailing wages over there are a fraction of what they are here. But the Chinese workers who earn them are going to be able to build a better life than they could be if no one came along and "took advantage" of them. <BR/><BR/>If, as US labor unions would have it, American companies were forbidden from following the local labor market, the jobs wouldn't exist and these workers would be, quite literally, back out on the rice paddies. Quite compassionate, that. <BR/><BR/>Back home, I suppose we could mandate that Wal Mart and other retailers pay more than a market wage in the US. Some workers would be better off -"less "exploited" if you will. But many others would be unemployed because it just wouldn't pay to hire them. That's a solution that's just chock full of love.<BR/><BR/>The next step might well be to mandate that it hire workers whose productivity is less than their salary. But we tried that. I think it was called the Soviet Bloc and I don't recall that the results were all that compassionate.Rick Esenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07280070509167910367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-1138069735846397332006-01-23T20:28:00.000-06:002006-01-23T20:28:00.000-06:00Regarding Wal-Mart, does the Shark have a concept ...Regarding Wal-Mart, does the Shark have a concept of exploitation or "taking unfair advantage"? I'm sure the Shepherd did, but His point of view doesn't appear often in this blog. <BR/><BR/>The claim is that Wal-Mart exploits workers abroad who make its low-cost goods and then exploits workers here by paying low wages, blocking unionization, and offering lousy benefits. Taxpayers then make up the difference, paying for the healthcare Wal-Mart doesn't provide. <BR/><BR/>Perhaps we shouldn't do anything about this exploitation. The cure might be worse than the disease. But let's be honest about the Wal-Mart business model: naked exploitation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com