Comments on: Is Walmart really more evil than Google?

By: Ranjit Mathoda

Ranjit Mathoda — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 02:50:18 +0000

The discussion of how medical services should be funded (private by wealth and desire, public by majority rule coercing resources from all, some hybrid or out of the box approach) and delivered (competitive providers, monopoly provider, etc.) often does involve a discussion of whether capitalism or socialism or something else is better, but to my mind those terms are fairly crude and vague, and really are about how you organize the effort to get to the goal, rather than a goal itself. The goal, what I called the just society, is for everyone to be healthy, which surely includes receiving a certain amount of basic services. How that can best be created is worth discussing.

By: Ranjit Mathoda

Ranjit Mathoda — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 22:06:07 +0000

It's a fact Google simply wouldn't hire most of the people at a Walmart skill level. I don't disagree that Google gives the people it hires a very high level of pay and perks (including 20% time to work on self directed projects), but that doesn't mean they give any perks or pay to people that Walmart will hire and give pay and benefits to.

In pointing out that Google is very profitable my intent was not to say it is evil for making a profit, but to point out the criticisms of Walmart relating to its dominance, market share, mind share, profit per employee, etc., pale in comparison to that of Google.

With respect to your point about Walmart treating its employees badly, my point is that Google treats those same people worse (not offering them a job, pay, or perks). I actually think it is fantastic that someone figured out a way to utilize workers at a low level of skill profitably.

I do think it is terrible that such workers aren't given more opportunities to obtain higher levels of skill, which I hope my essay makes clear.

By: juandos

juandos — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 20:44:38 +0000

" In a just society, everyone clearly should have a certain amount of basic services, including healthcare"…

WRONG! That ISN'T a just society you are describing, its a socialist society…

By: Anonymous Coward

Anonymous Coward — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 01:34:04 +0000

Saying that google doesn’t treat its employees as well as Walmart treats their employees based on skill level, is entirely off the mark.

The next time Walmart tells their janitor to spend 20% of his free time working on developing a new mop, give me a call.

And what’s with the crock about how much money google makes for it’s shareholders?! Yeah, they make more money for their shareholders, THEY HAVE FAR FEWER EMPLOYEES TO SPREAD THE WEALTH TO. Compare the number of employees they’re trying to give that money to for Walmart and Google. Start to see why it’d be hard to give more to their employees without suddenly getting a bunch of really early retirees?

And even if they were to try and spread that money into development, they are already paying EVERY employee to spend 20% of their time doing R&D. So there’s next to no point.

The reason that people think walmart is evil is because they TREAT THEIR EMPLOYEES LIKE SHIT. Look at starbucks! The skill-level required to work there is basically on-par with Walmart, and yet they have great health coverage and employee benefits. Certainly, their products cost more, but that’s what those sorts of initiatives get you. Walmart is evil because we let them be evil. We care more about the cost then the employee treatment. If we didn’t we’d all shop at superstores that cost twice as much as they should but treated their employees very well.

Walmart is only as evil as its shoppers.