I encourage people to not shop at Wal-Mart, but I realize for many it’s not a real option; hence my little toothpaste buycott. But David and Megan (unlike Jim and Laura) have decided to not visit a Wal-Mart for a year.

From That’s Swell:

David and I have decided to do a year without Wal-Mart.

But now we’re going to consciously decide – NO WAL-MART. Care to join us?? Starting Sept. 1 we will go Wal-Mart free for a year.

If you’re a typical Saks or even Target customer, going Wal-Mart free for a year would like saying you’re not going to eat government-surplus cheese for a year. But David and Megan are a couple dedicated to living frugally. And that makes their challenge just a little more difficult. After all that Vlassic jar of dill pickles for $2.97 goes a long way on squeezed budget.

Why did David and Megan decide to make this journey?

It’s not really for “environmental” reasons that we’ve chosen to not shop at Wal-Mart. It’s a social justice/fair trade issue. We already don’t buy new unless absolutely necessary, and that is more for ‘environmental’ reasons. And Wal-Mart is doing some great things to “go green” (I think the motion lights in the frozen food section are a great idea), but this isn’t about the environment.

What it is about is:

- What if the convenience that we are used to causes inconvenience for others?
- What is the real cost of “low prices”? Who is ultimately paying for it?
- What if “the American Way” isn’t the best way?
- Who is making these items: the clothes, the shoes, the paper plates? Are they being treated the way you would expect to be treated at a job?
- If I wouldn’t want to work under these conditions, why would I ask others to? By spending my money there, am I supporting a system I wouldn’t want to be apart of?
- If a blessing comes at the expense of others, is it really a blessing?

In Part 2 of her series, Megan writes a little bit about Wal-Mart’s history and how it got to where it is today.

As the Wal-Mart empire grew, Sam Walton even started a campaign “Buy American” in the 80s inspiring American’s to buy items made in the US. After Sam Walton’s death in 1992, Wal-Mart took a huge nose dive on Wall street, scaring the CEOs and managers into finding another way to boost sales – a cheaper, way.

Bill Fields was the CEO at the time and he spear headed Wal-Mart’s plan to buy cheap and in China. There was a quick turn-around in China, and access of thousands of cheap goods that could be marked up in unthinkable amounts to make money for Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart managers at the time speak of questioning all the increased inventory – where would they put it all? Wal-Mart CEOs informed the managers this would help their “overhead.”

And boy did it ever. But we also no at least one Real World consequence of Bill Fields’ strategy.

In Part 3 of the series, Megan stays focused on the China question.

…the plan backfired. At the Long Beach, CA port alone (where all of your TVs, tennis shoes and clothing reaches America), 36 Million dollars worth of goods are imported from China – all items we buy at Wal-Mart. And how much is China buying from us? Only 3 Million dollars in goods are shipped out of the US to China (leather hides, cotton, etc.) – making our trade agreement very unequal and not what President Clinton had hoped for.

Meaning, instead of keeping our jobs here – we are shipping out all of our cotton, leather, etc. to go to China where they will in turn create t-shirts from the cotton and tennis shoes from the leather hides and then will ship them back to the US where we will buy them. And because of the job market in China and the cheap labor issues (which we helped create), the Chinese don’t even have money to buy anything besides basic needs – so of course we aren’t shipping anything in for them to buy from us – the trade agreement is hurting the US more than helping.

And in her most current post, Part 4 of the series, Megan writes:

So why Wal-Mart? Why not Target, Big Lots, Dollar General?

Wal-Mart is the leader of a business model that encourages cheap foreign labor, buying more imported goods and causes American jobs to be shipped overseas. The reason that most major retailers have adopted the same practices is because it is the only way they can compete in a market led by Wal-Mart. When price is the major selling point for a retailer somebody in the supply chain is going to lose because goods have to be produced as cheap as possible instead of as fair as possible.

This is the point at which some accuse myself and my co-bloggers of just being Wal-Mart haters (kind of like being a hater of America and freedom, in some people’s eyes) because we don’t regularly criticize other retailers.

If you oppose an injustice and want to see it righted, you don’t attempt to change the whole world in one moment. You pick the single largest offender and take it down. Then you go for No. 2 if it’s still standing. You go where you efforts will have the most positive affect.

And in the case of global, big-box retailing, that’s Wal-Mart.

Jeff Hess: Have Coffee Will Write.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, September 11th, 2007 at 0646 by Jeff Hess and is filed under China, Citizen Groups. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.