The United States of Wal-Mart

John Dicker. The United States of Wal-Mart. Jeremy P. Tarcher/Penguin. 2005. Copyright © 2005 John Dicker. 1-58542-422-6.

Dicker argues that Wal-Mart’s retail domination is something less than a good thing. The slight net job growth Wal-Mart provides local economies is offset by the fact that those new jobs probably don’t provide a living wage; those low wages, in turn, drain local economies as government subsidies are used to support the families of Wal-Mart’s workers. Wal-Mart’s never-ending drive for lower prices for suppliers has only sped up the decline in the domestic manufacturing sector. The retailer has been cavalier with local communities in which it wants to build, often steamrolling over local objections to proposed stores. Finally, the magnitude of Wal-Mart’s market share in “cultural produce” (books, music, movies, and magazines) means that the company’s political leanings have a strong impact on what does and doesn’t reach the American mass market.

Dicker seems somewhat unsure how to present his argument. Is it a critique of Wal-Mart’s place in the economy and society? Is it an investigation into Wal-Mart’s business and labor practices? Is it an indictment of the consumerism that drives us to shop at Wal-Mart despite its shortcomings? Is it a handbook for Wal-Mart’s opponents? All these threads are present, but Dicker never weaves them together consistently.

His argument is often undermined because he relies so heavily on anecdotes. On several occasions, for example, he mentions people and groups that have fought against a proposed Wal-Mart in their communities. There are various fears behind local opposition: greatly increased traffic, economic impact on existing local businesses, anti big-box aesthetics, etc. Never does Dicker compare Wal-Mart in this regard to other retailers like Costco or Target. If there’s a difference in corporate approaches or community responses, what are they and why do they exist? Equally maddening is that he’ll introduce one of these anecdotes and then, if he provides a conclusion to the account at all, it will occur much later in the book.

Sometimes, he ignores his best evidence. Studies by Kenneth Stone and others strongly suggest the Wal-Mart is part of a zero-sum game: for every job created or good sold in a new Wal-Mart, there is a corresponding job or market-share loss in an existing business. Dicker mentions Stone’s work only in passing, though his studies strongly undermine Wal-Mart’s promotion of itself as an engine of job growth.

Then there’s the issue of language. The jacket blurb praises this book as an “irreverent” examination of Wal-Mart. The author and his editors apparently think that a liberal dose of vulgar language passes for irreverence these days. Dicker has a serious subject, and vulgarities do not strengthen his argument. They will win no one over to his side and will likely anger some folks who might otherwise be sympathetic to his cause.

On the other hand, there is much to like about Dicker’s work. In his concluding chapter, he lays out with stunning effect the results of a Democratic congressional study showing that subsidizing Wal-Mart’s low wages has a huge public cost: free and reduced lunches for children of employees, housing assistance, low-income tax credits, Title I education funding, health-care subsidies, and energy assistance.

Dicker’s analysis of Wal-Mart’s antagonists can be interestingly subtle. His sympathy for labor organizers, for example, is tempered by union bungling and malfeasance. He acknowledges that Main Street mom-and-pop shops were in decline long before Wal-Mart and questions those who make old-time retail the battle line in the war against big-box shopping.

When Dicker puts his mind to it, his analysis can be clear and effective. All too often, however, he lets his anecdotal story telling and “irreverent” rhetoric lead his argument astray. What’s horribly sad is that there seems to be more than enough data to warrant a book-length critical examination of Wal-Mart. The retail giant’s history, labor practices, and local and global commercial impact are all worth a closer look than the Wal-Mart’s public relations staff would have us believe.

—September 10, 2005

Return to Reading List

Home - Tech - Praise - Paul - Books - About

printer-friendly layout