THE PAPER

Everyone handles themselves differently, and as we all know...Each individual has their own opinion. Business ethics multiplies the discussion, and getting everyone to agree is never a walk in the park. In the world of ethics a thin line separating ethical and un-ethical actions can quickly be crossed. Is a mass merchant like Wal-Mart acting ethically and good for America? Or has this monopoly game gone on too unethically long?
Wal-Mart has a broad span of likes and dislikes from America, but after given the facts I can bet most would agree that Wal-Mart is bad for America. There are numerous ethical problems with Wal-Mart as well as numerous things that just don’t seem right with the company. Wal-Mart is nationally known for having awful wages for their employees. I believe this is unethical simply for the fact that what Wal-Mart pays their normal employees is not enough to support one self and not enough to live. The money a Wal-Mart employee makes in one year is a couple thousand dollars below the poverty line. There for making the statement that if you work at Wal-Mart you will be broke and poor and won’t be able to support another person, let alone a whole family.
Another problem with Wal-Mart is the working conditions. Employees at Wal-Mart have been forced to work off the clock, have been locked in the building during night shifts, have had their overtime pay not paid in full, have had random wage decreases. Wal-Mart is also known for discriminating against females during the hiring process. Wal-Mart also has been documented for making employees miss their break/meal periods, as well as the overlooking off illegals being hired and forced to work for cheaper pay and longer hours. This is just a short list of a lot of unethical decisions by Wal-Mart.
If a Wal-Mart were to move into my neighborhood, there are a number of factors that would play into my choice of wanting the Wal-Mart or hoping it would open elsewhere. A new Wal-Mart opening in my area would mean a variety of new jobs would be created. If I lived in a small town or in area that was not too populated this would probably be one of the few and only reasons I would be for a Wal-Mart opening up. A new store like Wal-Mart would give people a one stop shop where they could get everything they needed which sounds good to the consumer but if the town was small though this would be bad for other local businesses. A small grocery store that used to get a lot of traffic now would lose a lot of business, due to the fact that a small business owner cannot compete with Wal-Mart’s prices. This would eventually drive that store out of business. As stated in the case study within 5 years of a new Wal-Mart opening two other supermarkets close.
Wal-Mart’s bossy attitude requests tax breaks when they move into a community, they claim this so their presence does little or nothing to increase the local tax revenues, but from after looking at Wal-Mart’s track record this is solely only for Wal-Mart’s own personal gain. Wal-Mart boasts that with a new store comes a lot of more jobs but when you dig deeper and look at what the true outcome is, Wal-Mart, one store, causes a chain reaction of store closings, job lose, And forces other companies to obey what Wal-Mart’s. I think that America needs to regulate Wal-Mart and put much stricter rules on the company. I don’t see how anyone can think its fair for a company to pretty much be a monopoly type figure, and control the market like they do. It is complete unfair for Wal-Mart to demand certain criteria’s from companies and in theory black mail companies to cut profits just so they can have their product on the shelves at Wal-Mart. Walmart controls about 30% vof the market in household stales and sells 15% of all magazines and 15-20% of all Cds, videos, and dvds, and walmart will soon control 35% of U.S. food sales. This is terrible for the economy and complete unethical and unfair for the rest of the market. Wal-Mart seems appealing for the consumer customer but complete screws over everyone else. Before this paper I was an about 2-4 times a month shopper at Wal-Mart. I never understood the ethics and makeup of Wal-Mart until reading the case study and watching the video. I was shocked as to how much Wal-Mart hurts the economy. I find it shocking how one store has so much sway on the market.
After learning the facts I will probably never shop at Wal-Mart again. Yes they have low prices, but I personally, wanting to do some entrepreneur type of work after school, cannot support a company that would drive mine into the ground. It’s one thing if a brand or company dominates the market, but it’s also another thing when they do it ethically. If someone is just better then someone and does it legally and ethically then good for them. They are good businessmen.
When a company breaks thumbs, and blackmails other companies to get lower prices, and uses their store name to get what they want, in my eyes that is just completely imbalanced. When it comes down to if I would manage a Wal-Mart, my gut says yes. If managing a Wal-Mart got me higher pay, and a better chance to reach my goals in life then yes I would work at Wal-Mart. After seeing the bully attitude Wal-Mart possesses I would not be able to allow myself to work there. I take much pride in my work, and to represent a company that handles themselves like Wal-Mart does, I simply have to pass on working there. Wal-Mart follows the Narrow view of corporate responsibility. They are out for profit maximization and believe they have no social responsibilities other than to maximize profits. Yes the function of a business organization is to make money; the owners of corporations employ executives to accomplish the goal, thereby obligating theses managers always to act in the interests of the owners and profits. Wal-Mart completely fails the theory of the invisible-hand argument. The argument states that if businesses are permitted to seek self-interest, their activities will inevitably yield the greatest good for society as a whole. This is clearly untrue and Wal-Mart’s selfish behavior hurts America more than it does greater good. Friedman believes that by saying executives have social responsibilities beyond the pursuit of profit means that at least sometimes they must subordinate owner interest to some social objective like cutting back on pollution or changing the ingredients or pulling a product that is doing harm to people. The problem is that sometimes it is in the greater good for the company to be socially responsible and will do certain things for in the long run get what their self-interests originally were. The attitudes of the public make it in the self-interest of corporations to cloak their actions in this way.
Kant’s theory states that an act is morally right if and only if its agent would be willing for the maxim of the act to be followed by everyone all the time. When asked is Wal-Mart good for America a Kantian would most likely think that Wal-Mart is bad for America. The maxim of Wal-Mart and the way they do things would cause a Kantian to say there is no way everyone would be able to agree on what Wal-Mart does and there is no way everyone would be willing to have low wages, and have a my way or the highway type attitude.
Utilitarianism states an act is morally right if its utility is at least as high as that of any act one can do instead, otherwise the act is morally wrong. A utilitarian would probably think Wal-Mart is good for America. The act of producing overseas, and demanding low costs, would not do as much damage and would not be as high as the utility of the output that creates. A utilitarian would believe that Wal-Mart creates enough good to overcome their bad.
An Aristotelian view of Wal-Mart would agree with the Kant’s of the world that Wal-Mart’s “good” does not outweigh the evil and overall Wal-Mart is bad for America. We are all human and have hearts and will do the best for the social greater good, but when profits and money get involved people tend to just hunt for them. I believe that if Wal-Mart had a broader view of corporate social responsibly they would still profit and still make money, but America would be able to put up with them, and not be the slave Wal-Mart wants us to be. Brink Lindsey is a very well-spoken man. His word choice and flow of conversation makes him sound pretty convincing. He debated that there was no way America has lost a million jobs to china. No matter how much debate and persuasion Brink goes after, there is no way to dance around the fact that, by having everything made in china for lower costs, yes it gets it to us relatively cheaper, but if these things were made here, and if they were handled here in America these are all jobs that people could have.

Brink says at the end that he thinks Wal-Mart is good for America because they are doing what the American economy is all about; they are producing goods that consumers want to buy for low prices. Yes that is true, but it gets so much deeper than that. Wal-Mart takes away jobs and runs other stores, companies, and businesses out of town. At the end of the day having one company over powering and ruining tons of other companies just simply cannot be good for the economy or America. My opinion overall is that Wal-Mart is bad for America. The overwhelming facts, of them dominating like a monopoly and ruining the economy is more than enough to sway me in the direction of not supporting Wal-Mart and most likely avoiding shopping there. Wal-Mart is a mass merchant and many people love the discounted prices and vast variety of goods sold in their stores. Many love Wal-Mart and many hate Wal-Mart. If they don’t start changing soon and start giving back to the economy rather than take from it, I believe they are just a few short years away from losing all trust from Americans and all support from local communities who would rather Wal-Mart stay away, and let the American dream drive itself and let people shop different stores for different products rather than stopping at Wal-Mart for everything.