Summary
Two studies reveal that Walmart’s entry into communities lowers household incomes by 6% over 10 years and increases poverty by 8%, even when accounting for cost savings.
Its practices, such as undercutting competitors, suppressing wages, and squeezing suppliers, harm local economies by reducing employment and forcing smaller businesses to close.
Walmart’s “monopsony power” enables it to pay lower wages and dominate suppliers, compounding these effects.
The findings challenge the idea that low prices alone benefit communities, emphasizing long-term economic harm.
——
I wonder what an ideal structure is that does the opposite. I know the obvious “small business” etc, but like as policy what structure would make a populace more wealthy?
Mixed zoning would probably help.
Just going for small business doesn’t work, either. You need some greater percentage of employees than you do business owners. There has to be a point where you reach a critical mass where there is no longer a sufficient labor pool if everybody is trying to be an entrepreneur / small business owner.
Stop vertical integration (ban the fuck out of it) and give anti monopoly laws teeth. The reason Walmart at the like can do this is by making themselves the only real choice for the poor (and then making everyone poorer).
Edit: also to add things like walmart hold suppliers over a barrel so if you ban the vertical bullshit you also give the companies supplying walmart more ability to ask for more.