The Instigator
crazypenguin
Con (against)
Losing
60 Points
The Contender
Kleptin
Pro (for)
Winning
70 Points

Wal-Mart is good for America

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/17/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 5,378 times Debate No: 1882
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (14)
Votes (26)

 

crazypenguin

Con

Thank you for joining this debate,

I will first state a couple of my points,

Wal-Mart does more harm than good by paying lower wages, decreased health care benefits and squeezing competitors out of the market. With the "squeezing" part, Playing the same old game when Wal-Mart comes to town just won't cut it in most cases.

Also when Wal-Mart came to US counties from 1987-1998 the poverty lines all rose drastically.

Wal-Mart built it's new Mega-Store right outside Huntington so it didn't have to contribute to the taxes of that county, what kind of neighbor is that?

I will state more of my points in my next argument.

Thank you,
Kleptin

Pro

As this argument is about how good Wal-Mart is for America, I would like to focus on America as a whole.

While you may be correct in stating that Wal-Mart offers low wages and poor benefits, this is an issue with employment. Remember that Wal-Mart is not obligated to provide the country with jobs. Wal-Mart is obligated to provide the country with goods and services in exchange for profit. In addition, people seeking employment do not necessarily have to choose Wal-Mart. They may seek employment elsewhere.

Your point about the poverty line rising seems to be a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. Do you have any information that shows a legitimate and indisputable correlation?

I'm not quite sure where Huntington is, but if Wal-mart built a new store outside Huntington, it is probably still within the jurisdiction of some other county. It still pays taxes, just not the same taxes, and not to Huntington.

I have addressed your arguments and will present mine.

Capitalism is a fairly simple economic system. A free market in which appealing to the public will earn profit. The fact that Wal-Mart is doing well as a business in and of itself shows that the American public is benefiting from it. Otherwise, the damage would be reflected in the stock market and sales figures.

Wal-mart generates money, and that money doesn't simply sit in a vault. The money is used to enhance the corporation in order to provide better service so that they can make even *more* money. In this case, everyone wins except the people who, as you say, work at Wal-mart. But as I have responded, those people are more than welcome to work elsewhere.
Debate Round No. 1
crazypenguin

Con

Thank you for joining this debate,

I will rebutt my opponents points and move on to mine

My opponent stated that "While you may be correct in stating that Wal-Mart offers low wages and poor benefits, this is an issue with employment. Remember that Wal-Mart is not obligated to provide the country with jobs. Wal-Mart is obligated to provide the country with goods and services in exchange for profit. In addition, people seeking employment do not necessarily have to choose Wal-Mart. They may seek employment elsewhere. " My rebuttal is that there is limited space in other stores and if you are an american who needs a job you have to go to Wal-Mart who then can afford to pay low wages because that person has no where else to go and he needs this job. So they actually have to seek employment here in Wal-Mart.

Second "Your point about the poverty line rising seems to be a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. Do you have any information that shows a legitimate and indisputable correlation?" First can you explain to me what hoc is and my point was a statistic so even if something else had something to do with this Wal-Mart still had an impact considering I said when Wal-Mart stores were built so Wal-Mart had something to do with this.

Third "I'm not quite sure where Huntington is, but if Wal-mart built a new store outside Huntington, it is probably still within the jurisdiction of some other county. It still pays taxes, just not the same taxes, and not to Huntington." Wal-Mart would not be within the jurisdiction of some other county because as I said, Wal-Mart was placed right outside Huntington so that it would not have to contribute to the tax-base of the city. What kind of neighbor is it being? Why doesn't it want to contribute to our economy? Because that would cost more money.

Fourth "Capitalism is a fairly simple economic system. A free market in which appealing to the public will earn profit. The fact that Wal-Mart is doing well as a business in and of itself shows that the American public is benefiting from it. Otherwise, the damage would be reflected in the stock market and sales figures." Wal-Mart is doing good because of several reasons, First Wal-Mart has so much money by ripping off their employees, giving them bad benefits and selling goods at higher prices. If all other stores were doing this they would be good in the stock market and sales figures to.

Fifth " Wal-mart generates money, and that money doesn't simply sit in a vault. The money is used to enhance the corporation in order to provide better service so that they can make even *more* money. In this case, everyone wins except the people who, as you say, work at Wal-mart. But as I have responded, those people are more than welcome to work elsewhere." As my opponent agreed with me saying that everyone wins except the people, who as you say, work at Wal-Mart. So my opponent does agree that working at Wal-Mart is a bad idea and you don't gain anything you only lose. Also I already stated above that Wal-Mart is the only place left to work at so the people have to go their which is why Wal-Mart can pay low. My opponent also said that the "money doesn't simply sit in a vault. The money is used to enhance the corporation in order to provide better service so that they can make even *more* money. " Again my opponent has agreed with me by saying that Wal-Mart keeps on making money because of their cheap labor and expensive goods, and yes maybe a small part goes to enhancing the store but the bigger parts are actually either stored in a vault or used to build another Wal-Mart which leads to overpopulating America and making it have a lower economy.

Now to my points:

First •WAL MART EMPLOYEES MAKE HALF THE MONEY THEN OTHER JOBS SUCH AS COSTCO AND SAMS JOBS
It is a proven research that Wal-Mart gives their employees made an average of $8.23 an hour ($13,861 a year). they make $800 below the federal poverty line for a family of three. Costco's workers make an average of $15.97 per hour; Sam's Club pays $11.52 per hour. As you see Wal-Mart employees can barely live off their salary just mantaining enough to support a very poor life while Costco workers make double the money per hour and have a good amount of money each year.

Second •WAL-MART DOES NOT GIVE GOOD BENEFITS
Wal-Mart does not give good benefits. Part-time Wal-Mart workers are not eligible for family medical coverage. They become eligible for individual coverage only after two years with the company which means they have to stay with Wal-Mart and if one of their family members got hurt or sick they couldn't afford the doctor's bill. Also Overall, Wal-Mart covers 48 percent of its workers with company health insurance. Costco covers 82 percent of its workers. Also, Costco's workers are able to get health insurance in six months, they receive thousands more dollars in health and retirement plans from their employer and far more of Costco's employees are included in its 401(k) and profit-sharing plans. Wal-Mart pays 66 percent of the healthcare premiums for those happy few covered employees Costco pays 92 percent. Employee turnover is 6 percent for Costco. For Sam's Club, it's 21 percent. Wal-Mart's turnover is a whopping 50 percent. Which shows that Wal-Mart gives terrible benefits compared to others and overall.

Third EMPLOYEES AT WAL-MART HAVE VERY BAD LIVES
They get low wages bad benefits; they barely can survive in any place if they have a family, or even in that case are living by themselves. Wal-Mart gives such bad opportunities that employees can do nothing but live a bad life. : 4 wal-mart employees spoke out and said that "My paycheck never reflected overtime pay" –Liberty Serna another was "Forced to return to work one day after severing part of his hand on the job"-Paul Moser, another one said "no help from Wal-Mart after she was injured on the job"- Latasha Barker and lastly "Managers work off the clock to get the job done" –Robbin Franklin. Wal-Mart is so unfair to the employees even after severing his hand on the JOB he has to return the next day despite the pain, despite he can't work as hard or as fast which means Wal-Mart would make him work overtime.

Thank you for this debate and I hope we can debate again sometime soon,
It has been really fun.
Kleptin

Pro

"My rebuttal is that there is limited space in other stores and if you are an american who needs a job you have to go to Wal-Mart who then can afford to pay low wages because that person has no where else to go and he needs this job. So they actually have to seek employment here in Wal-Mart."

I personally do not understand this argument. Wal-mart is not a government employment service and to say that Wal-Mart is the only place that people can go to for employment is simply incorrect. Unless you can prove that Wal-mart is the only place that an American can go to for employment with hard evidence, your point is null.

"First can you explain to me what hoc is and my point was a statistic so even if something else had something to do with this Wal-Mart still had an impact considering I said when Wal-Mart stores were built so Wal-Mart had something to do with this."

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc is one of many logical fallacies commonly seen in debate. It beans "because of this, then this". While your argument shows that the poverty line rose at the same time Wal-mart came in, there can also be many other reasons. In order for your example to hold up in debate, you need solid proof that it is specifically the introduction of Wal-mart that caused the poverty line to rise.

"Wal-Mart would not be within the jurisdiction of some other county because as I said, Wal-Mart was placed right outside Huntington so that it would not have to contribute to the tax-base of the city. What kind of neighbor is it being? Why doesn't it want to contribute to our economy? Because that would cost more money."

Let me try to explain. Although it does not contribute to the tax base of Huntington, it would have to contribute to the tax base of SOMETHING, because the land it is built on is owned by some jurisdiction. Here's an example. If a Walmart opened up outside New York, I can complain that New York is not gaining from the taxes that Wal-mart pays. However, outside of New York is New Jersey, so instead of paying New York taxes, Wal-mart pays New Jersey taxes. Wal-mart does not shirk it's responsibilities, it just seeks to maximize profits.

"Wal-Mart is doing good because of several reasons, First Wal-Mart has so much money by ripping off their employees, giving them bad benefits and selling goods at higher prices. If all other stores were doing this they would be good in the stock market and sales figures to."

Capitalism works like this: If a corporation similar to Wal-mart was offering better pay for equal services, then the employees would flock to that corporation from wal-mart. Regardless, your argument begs the question that Wal-mart is the only place a person can work. I do not think it is possible for you to prove that point, so your argument is void.

"As my opponent agreed with me saying that everyone wins except the people, who as you say, work at Wal-Mart. So my opponent does agree that working at Wal-Mart is a bad idea and you don't gain anything you only lose. Also I already stated above that Wal-Mart is the only place left to work at so the people have to go their which is why Wal-Mart can pay low. My opponent also said that the "money doesn't simply sit in a vault. The money is used to enhance the corporation in order to provide better service so that they can make even *more* money. " Again my opponent has agreed with me by saying that Wal-Mart keeps on making money because of their cheap labor and expensive goods, and yes maybe a small part goes to enhancing the store but the bigger parts are actually either stored in a vault or used to build another Wal-Mart which leads to overpopulating America and making it have a lower economy."

Argumentum Ad Nauseum. Simply repeating that Wal-Mart is the only place to work does not make it true. This is just a gross exaggerration and cannot be substantiated. It must not be forgotten that the main contribution that Wal-mart makes to America, is in selling goods. The more stores Wal-mart opens, the more readily available goods will be to the public.

My opponent then goes to make points about the pay of Wal-mart employees and their terrible benefits.

This entire debate has been very confusing for me. The topic is on why Wal-mart is either good or bad for America, and I believe I was the only one focusing on this point. My opponent has valiantly proven that Wal-mart employees are being mistreated, but Wal-mart employees make up but a microscopic subset of the American population. My opponent would have us believe that WAl-mart is the only company in all of America that hires people, which is a gross exaggerration.

Since it is an indisputable fact that Wal-mart is NOT the only place a person can go to seek employment, this shows that Wal-mart employees work there OUT OF THEIR OWN FREE WILL. So regardless of how ill-treated those employees are, they are doing so because the employees believe there is a fair exchange in working for Wal-mart.

LET US NOT LOSE TRACK of what this edbate is about. Wal-mart may not treat their employees up to the standards that my opponent would want, but this in no way means that Wal-mart is bad for America. It is a corporation that provides the American people with a place to shop. Whereas the percentage of Americans working in Wal-mart is very small, the percentage of Americans that find some benefit from shopping at Wal-Mart is extremely large.

In conclusion, Wal-Mart does Americans much more benefit than harm. The fact that my opponent wishes to focus on a small subset of people, Wal-mart employees that can leave Wal-mart at any time to work anywhere else, is meaningless.
Debate Round No. 2
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
I know how you feel, Kleptin. Overwhelming getting voted against without so much as a ONE justification in the comment section. If it helps to know, I voted for you and am willing to provide reasons if you want. :D
Posted by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
Much appreciated little lady, but this is obviously a popularity contest and not a debate :P
Posted by xsweetlove 9 years ago
xsweetlove
Think ERISA and COBRA. Walmart's health plans fall well within the realm of ERISA and COBRA.

Walmart is good for America because it saves American consumers over 263 billion dollars a year. It drives down prices for consumers who are often trying to pinch every penny. Walmart might be a small town's biggest employer because it causes a lot of mom-and-pop stores to close down due to the loss of business. Walmart's employee can not always look elsewhere for a job.

Props to you for a good argument though.
Posted by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
Who are you and who are you talking to o.o?
Posted by padfo0t 9 years ago
padfo0t
One of your arguements is invalid. I disagree with you but I will eventually have to (on Saturday). Or are you just debating for fun?
Posted by padfo0t 9 years ago
padfo0t
Connor Pas_ _ _ and Autumn Chi _ _ _ _ are here too. They say hi, you know who they are, right?
Posted by padfo0t 9 years ago
padfo0t
Porque Pri is here but not you? R U really sick? Hmmmm...
Posted by padfo0t 9 years ago
padfo0t
From Jordy Lub_ _ _ _ _ :

Hey RishI!
Im sorry you are sick.
Feel better!
Posted by padfo0t 9 years ago
padfo0t
You missed it. Jordy was wearing the coolest hat today. It looked like a disco ball.
Posted by padfo0t 9 years ago
padfo0t
R we still meeting at you know where (where Buttermilk lives) at (you know when)pm?
26 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by nickjack 6 years ago
nickjack
crazypenguinKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:34 
Vote Placed by Madoki 7 years ago
Madoki
crazypenguinKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 7 years ago
Tatarize
crazypenguinKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Kleptin 7 years ago
Kleptin
crazypenguinKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by brittwaller 8 years ago
brittwaller
crazypenguinKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Robert_Santurri 8 years ago
Robert_Santurri
crazypenguinKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by sdcharger 8 years ago
sdcharger
crazypenguinKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by burningpuppies101 8 years ago
burningpuppies101
crazypenguinKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Vote Placed by crazypenguin 8 years ago
crazypenguin
crazypenguinKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by sagarous 8 years ago
sagarous
crazypenguinKleptinTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07