LAWMALL
.COM

How to Stop Wal-Mart from Expanding into and Destroying Your Community; and Stopping Globalization

1st Published 7/15/01; Last Update: 11/12/07 - 02:37

Note: This website is intended for persons and communities wanting to consider arguments and options available to them to resist invasion by Wal-Mart and other superstores into their community, and what appears to be an ever-decreasing standard of living for most persons in an ever-increasingly globalized economy, where the rich and ruling classes are getting richer while most of the middle-class and poor are being paying the price, with an ever-lowering standard of living. All of the statements and opinions in this website are allegations, as distinguished from statements of fact or opinion. The obvious purpose of having allegations below, instead of statements of asserted fact or opinion, is to avoid unnecessary defamation and other litigation.

Index and Quick Links to Website Material

  1. a simple reform to reduce future Enron situations - or "What Is Good for the Goose Is Good for the Gander" - Using Competition to Self-Regulate Competition Enron Economics - Issues and Answers to Make Business and Capitalism More Competitive
  2. a website highly-related to the RPA, well worth reviewing to get an overall picture of what is happening in the economy Don't Cry for Arthur Andersen - Millions of Americans Lost Their Savings and/or Jobs during AA's Auditing Leadership">
  3. Wallace Kuralt, Owner of Failed Bookstore Chain, Tells All and Recommends a Simple Reform Which Could Help to Level the Playing Field - All Statements in Document Are AllegationsWallace Kuralt's Allegations and Astonishingly Simple Proposed Reform to Reduce the Appeal and Impact of Superstores
  4. Purpose of this Wal-Mart and Globalization Website
  5. About the Author of this Wal-Mart and Globalization Website
  6. Why You Should Rethink Your Acceptance and Patronage of Bigbox Superstores
  7. Wal-Mart's Growth Is Simply a Failure of Our Federal Government to Enforce the 1936 Federal Law [the Robinson-Patman Act] Prohibiting Price Discrimination
  8. Wal-Mart's Size as of June, 2001 and Wal-Mart's Website
  9. The Pros and Cons of Having Wal-Mart Stores and New Wal-Mart Stores
  10. The Arguments in Favor of Wal-Mart and Further Wal-Mart Expansion
  11. The Arguments Against Wal-Mart and Any Further Wal-Mart Expansion
  12. A Closer Look at the Arguments Purportedly Favoring Wal-Mart
  13. A Major Advantage in Using the Robinson-Patman Act to Fight Wal-Mart Is That You Only Have to Convince One Person - the Judge
  14. Using the Robinson-Patman Act to Fight Wal-Mart Has the Added Advantage of Getting Your Legal Fees and Certain Other Costs Returned as a Matter of Law When the Antitrust Plaintiffs Obtain a Judgment in Their Favor
  15. How Globalization Enriches the Ruling Corporate Interests in the U.S. and the Dictator Rulers in the Third-World Countries While Enslaving the Third-World Poor and Impoverishing Many Middle-Class Americans
  16. How To Deal with a Specific Superstore Problem You May Have
  17. Litigation Expenses for an Injunction Action under Robinson-Patman Act - An Estimate
  18. Comparing the Remedy of Injunction Litigation with the Remedy of Denying Zoning Application
  19. How to Put the Necessary Evidence Together - a Quick Look
  20. What You Can Do After You Left the Barn Door Open and Let the Superstore In
  21. Doomsday Notice! - Analysis and Forecast for Retailing Business; Major Chain Retailers Cannot Compete against Wal-Mart and Are Doomed
  22. Copy of the Robinson-Patman Act by Section
  23. Globalization: Its Evils and Remedies (for the Individual and Community)
  24. Globalization Could Not Be Taking Place without Wal-Mart and Other Big Box Chain Stores
  25. Wal-Mart's Impact on Competitors Including Kmart, Food Wholesalers, Food Manufacturers, and Others
  26. Recommended Books on How to Stop Wal-Mart and Other Superstores from Coming Into Your Community
  27. Recommended Books Exposing the Evils of Globalization
  28. Recommended Websites on How to Stop Wal-Mart and Other Superstores
  29. Fighting Globalism - The DROPPING OUT / Boycott Remedy
  30. Chapter Summaries and 4 Chapters for DROPPING OUT Book Proposal
  31. Additional Remedies for Injured Small Businesses, Farmers, Communities and Others
  32. Additional Information about the Robinson-Patman Act
  33. Community and Business Organizational Meetings - Setting Up; Attendance by Attorney Carl Person
  34. Subscribe to FREE Newsletter to Fight Globalism and Return to Pre-Globalism Economy, Polity and Society
  35. Get Involved: Send Email with Website Link to a Friend
  36. Please Contact Me, Carl Person, If You Have Any Questions!

Purpose of this Wal-Mart and Globalization Website

The purpose of this Wal-Mart and Globalization Website is to set forth the arguments, both pro and con, for use in Wal-Mart expansion battles - to enable local opponents of Wal-Mart's efforts to expand into their community to understand the major issues and decide what route to take to halt Wal-Mart's expansion, and to fight other globalization activities. The website is also useful for persons opposing any proposed category killer big box superstores setting up in or near their community.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

About the Author of this Wal-Mart and Globalization Website

Attorney Carl E. Person, an antitrust attorney, is the author of this website, which for the most part pulls together, in a single website, the various arguments being made in support and in opposition to Wal-Mart expansion into a community and area not yet served by a Wal-Mart or Sam's Club store, and the related fight to stop and reverse globalization. It is hoped that this information will enable the battle opposing Wal-Mart expansion (and globalization) to be better fought. Attorney Carl Person is active in the federal courts today seeking relief against many of the world's largest corporations for violation of the Robinson-Patman Act. For example, see the initial complaint by 145 independent auto-parts wholesalers and jobbers against Wal-Mart, Sams Club, AutoZone, Advance Auto, CSK, Pep Boys, Discount Auto, Keystone Automotive and O'Reilly Automotive at Original Complaint Filed 2/16/00 Alleging Price Discrimination in Automotive Parts and Accessories Industry.

Also, Person is suing Barnes & Nobles and Borders on behalf of a failed chain of bookstores owned by Charles Kuralt's brother, Wallace Kuralt, known as The Intimate Bookshop, Inc., and is suing the Bell yellow page publishers for violation of the Robinson-Patman Act for charging different prices to different customers for yellow-page advertising of the same size and position. Person's first lawsuit involving the Robinson-Patman Act was brought in 1970 (alleging that newspaper advertising at different rates to different persons violated the RPA, which issue the Supreme Court has still held open). At a time when the courts are refusing to enforce the Sherman and Clayton Antitrust Acts, the Robinson-Patman Act has become the only probable source for judicial relief to small and independent businesses, other than whatever may be available under state law, especially California. New York does not have a counterpart to the RPA, and adopts the federal court rulings as to New York's counterpart statute to the Sherman Act.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Why You Should Rethink Your Acceptance and Patronage of Bigbox Superstores

The indisputable fact is that many consumers purchase from local superstores, drug dealers, telephone companies and electric companies, and are difficult to convince that they should stop buying from any of them. What these different types of vendors have in common is a near monopolistic position in the community created and enforced by law. The drug dealer, for example, sets a higher price than a free market would allow by offering and selling drugs in violation of state and federal laws, which laws prevent most potential competitors from entering the obviously lucrative drug market. The telephone and electric utilities are often the only choice, you buy from them or do without telephone, electric service and internet service. The superstores offer lower prices (at least they appear to be lower) by purchasing their goods in violation of the Robinson-Patman Act and other law, at lower prices than being paid per unit by their competitors. As a result, these competitors go out of business, and the superstores are free to -- and do -- increase their retail prices. [Note: In spite of the near uniformity in goods, the superstores do not charge uniform prices; they price according to factors such as driving competitors out of business, and recouping such losses with higher prices when the competitors no longer exist. But, then, what did you expect, something for nothing?].

Meanwhile, the superstores become the main if not only significant source of jobs, because of the destruction of competing businesses, and the consumer then feels part of the superstore squeeze, which is to pay less than a living wage to its own customers who take pride in buying cheaply, and now (through loss of competing employment opportunities) must provide their services, as superstore employees, more cheaply than they were providing their services to the competing stores which their superstore patronage put out of business.

Consumers have to keep in mind the consequences of buying from drug dealers and superstores. Both have a destructive effect. Some persons have to deal with drug dealers because of dependency on non-prescribable drugs which overpowers their own will, and others (such as friends, relatives, community) try to intercede.

Purchasing from superstores is not as addictive. Most customers have the choice of purchasing elsewhere, doing without, or purchasing a near substitute -- and should consider these alternatives before buying from a superstore. Purchases from a superstore mean you are depriving your community of support (through small business) of Little League Baseball, parades, 4-H Club activities, scouting, adult sports leagues, and other community activities often paid for or supported by local small businesses (but not superstores). The dimes, quarters and dollars you save at a superstore put the small competing stores (your neighbors, relatives and friends) out of business and deprive your community of what made it a community, leaving you and your friends, relatives and community with a windowless big box surrounded by a vast parking lot, which at any time could be vacated when the superstore determines that it wants all of its customers within a 35-mile radius to shop at an even larger superstore.

You should look at the pros and cons of dealing with a superstore and decide what you should do. An elderly consumer might not have the same options as others to buy elsewhere, but why not consider community purchasing parties to assist persons without transportation to travel with you while you exercise your options not to buy at superstores, at least for some of your purchases.

It is difficult not to buy from superstores, because they have increasingly become as necessary for many people as the telephone and electric companies, and it takes more insight and planning to be a good consumer and supporting member of your community. But this is the task you should set for yourself, to make your purchases in a responsible way not only from the standpoint of saving a few dollars when traveling to a superstore [although often spending as much in gas and vehicle wear and tear, and the value of travel and checkout waiting time, eats up such savings], but in looking at the cost to yourself, your friends and relatives, and your community by reason of your purchasing choices. When doing this, you should come to a diametrically opposed conclusion. The correct conclusion you should have reached: Shopping at Superstores Can Destroy You and Your Community.

You pay your real estate taxes to the community, and support of true local businesses, although it seems to be more costly, is the only way you are going to preserve your community, and its social, economic, political, land and tax values.

Don't be an ignorant, self-destructive consumer. The initial price you pay to a superstore is only the beginning of your real costs. Learn what they are and learn how to avoid the full cost of dealing with superstores.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Wal-Mart's Growth Is Simply a Failure of Our Federal Government to Enforce the 1936 Federal Law [the Robinson-Patman Act] Prohibiting Price Discrimination

The dramatic expansion of Wal-Mart and other superstore retailers (as well as our globalizing economy) results from the failure of our Constitutional checks and balances to correct our political system when the components are corrupted by large concentrations of capital and the ability to purchase exemption from law and redirection of tax money into massive corporate welfare. The major corporations (including the major media) have so corrupted the political and governmental process that they have obtained exemption from the antitrust, tax, criminal and other laws and are in the process of destroying small and independent business which the unenforced laws were passed to protect. Embolded by their takeover of the United States, these major corporations have set out to grab as much money as they can by sending American jobs to lower-wage countries, and asking Americans (at least those who still have discretionary income to spend) to buy these foreign-made goods at highly-inflated prices and profits (and little or no U.S. taxes), and with the domination of U.S. business these corporations are engaged in expanding this predatory activity to wipe out competition in the other countries in the world. The profits are not brought back to the United States, and the United States is the loser by the ever-increasing destruction of its higher standard of living. Along the way, law-abiding businesses are put out of business; families lose their economic base with inevitable dissention and tendency toward dissolution; communities wind up with a lower tax base and higher costs brought on by these destructive forces. High-paying jobs turn into low-paying jobs, often part-time and temporary, requiring two or more members of the family to work full time to maintain a standard of living lower than one wage-earner was able to provide 15 years ago. Opportunities in business are reduced because of the difficulties in competing against major corporations which control the press, government agencies, politicians, educational facilities, and political thought and agenda.

The economic and business problems faced by many or a substantial number of persons in the United States at this time are attributable to this failure of our federal government to govern as envisioned in the Constitution. Most persons cannot make the connection, and can't see what is happening and what to do about it. Many of the problems are identifiable micro-economic problems, for which a solution exists. Get rid of the cause. The major corporations depend on your purchasing dollar to finance your own economic destruction. Obviously, if the purchasing dollar were taken away from these major corporations, their power would lessen. How this can take place from a grass roots level is the subject of my book DROPPING OUT. See below.

Also, another factor, which I have never seen discussed, is that enforcement of the Robinson-Patman Act can only take place in the federal courts, because of the terms of the statute itself which gave the federal courts and federal judges exclusive jurisdiction over its judicial enforcement. Most lawyers in the United States are not admitted to practice in any federal court, which means that most lawyers who counsel injured communities and small businesses are not immediately authorized or licensed to go into federal court and are obviously not familiar with the rules, practices and procedures. Smaller towns and villages, where Wal-Mart has been putting in most of its superstores, don't even have a federal court or branch of a federal court. Most states only have somewhere between 1 and 10 federal courts, whereas there are many hundreds or even one or more thousands of towns and villages in each of the 50 states. This makes going into federal court inconvenient and costly for small businesses and small towns and villages.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Wal-Mart's Size as of June, 2001 and Wal-Mart's Website

In a press release issued by Wal-Mart during June, 2001, Wal-Mart states:

With annual sales of $191 billion, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (NYSE: WMT) operates more than 2,600 discount stores, Supercenters and Neighborhood Markets, and more than 480 SAM'S CLUBS in the United States. Internationally, the company operates more than 1,080 units.

In its press release, Wal-Mart notified the world that anyone interested in Wal-Mart can find a substantial amount of information at Wal-Mart's revised "news site for journalists", which "is loaded with information on the world's leading retailer."

To go to Wal-Mart's revised website, just click on Wal-Mart Website.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

The Pros and Cons of Having Wal-Mart Stores and New Wal-Mart Stores

There are good and bad characteristics of virtually anything, including Wal-Mart. The alleged reasons that Wal-Mart and other big box superstores have succeeded in destroying hundreds of billions of dollars of competitors' businesses, land values, and community tax bases are:

  1. Failure of many of the persons in an affected community to understand as much of the problem as they need to know to vote or act intelligently on the issue
  2. Failure of individuals seeking to pay less for their purchases to know about the higher related costs which inevitably result from their "bargain" purchases, including reduced wages, reduced community support, reduced business opportunity, reduced land values, reduced tax base, and lower standard and quality of living for most members of the community
  3. Shortsightedness of employees and other community members when dealing with the Wal-Mart problem [a problem related to the shortsightedness of the financial markets insisting that public companies create immediate as distinguished from long-run profits and values
  4. Accepting Wal-Mart as a religion of sorts that can do nothing wrong in spite of every indication to the contrary
  5. Resignation and related willingness to take whatever is offered as better than nothing
  6. Failure by lawyers, politicians, local elected officials and citizens to understand the legal issues involved and to try to rely instead on professionals in fields other than law and litigation (who themselves may not understand the entire problem) to try to solve the problem
  7. The desire of persons existing at the lower levels of our economy to believe in the good tooth fairy, because from their standpoint it can hardly get any worse
  8. More trusting nature of persons who are brought up in a community in which most persons are known to each other
  9. Non-use and distrust of lawyers, the judicial system, elected officials and government agencies to resolve problems
  10. Additional business and profits for those few businesses not competing directly with Wal-Mart
  11. Resignation of townspeople to the inevitability of having a Wal-Mart in the vicinity, which would do more damage to their town in their opinion if the Wal-Mart were located in a nearby town rather than in their own town

The foregoing reasons are not all-inclusive and themselves can lead to disharmony among persons trying to oppose Wal-Mart, but they need to be articulated. Leaders of the movement to stop Wal-Mart have obviously failed, for the most part, and the time has come to take a different and more appropriate approach.

But, before talking about this approach, let's look at a list (also incomplete) of the major arguments favoring the exclusion of Wal-Mart from any further expansion, and the major arguments favoring further Wal-Mart expansion. Because the arguments in favor of Wal-Mart are much fewer and therefore easier to list, I'll start with these Arguments Favoring Wal-Mart and Its Further Expansion:

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

The Arguments in Favor of Wal-Mart and Further Wal-Mart Expansion

  1. Wal-Mart will provide a new and substantial source of tax revenue for the local community
  2. Wal-Mart will provide a significant number of jobs for the residents in the area
  3. Wal-Mart will provide a larger selection of goods and services under one roof than is available in the business section of any nearby small town
  4. Wal-Mart will provide a lower price for all (or substantially all) of its goods and services than the existing local merchants in any nearby small town
  5. Wal-Mart will provide convenience to its customers through immediate, nearby, no-cost, no-meter-feeding, no-tow parking space
  6. Construction of the Wal-Mart facility will provide some temporary construction jobs to local persons;
  7. Wal-Mart will attract additional business to the community consisting of persons who will patronize Wal-Mart from other communities within a certain number of miles (or radius) from the Wal-Mart store
  8. Wal-Mart will cause the adopted town to grow, together with the values of some of the real estate surrounding the Wal-Mart facility
  9. Wal-Mart will provide opportunity for some local residents to start at the ground level and work up in the Wal-Mart organization
  10. Wal-Mart will provide training for its employees
  11. Wal-Mart will provide profit-sharing, incentives, health care and other benefits to its employees
  12. Wal-Mart will feature and promote American products and services through its "Buy American" or "Bring It Home to America" programs
  13. Wal-Mart will treat its employees as partners in the Wal-Mart enterprise
  14. Wal-Mart will respect and treat its employees well as valued members of the Wal-Mart family
  15. Wal-Mart will compensate its employees fairly and bring prosperity to its employees and the communities in which it operates
  16. Wal-Mart will become a contributor to the local community

The above list of arguments favoring Wal-Mart and its expansion into every community or group of adjacent communities in the United States is pretty slick, very misleading, and has easily been sold to many Americans.

Before looking at the list of arguments against Wal-Mart set forth below, look again at the above list of arguments favoring Wal-Mart and see if you can spot how each of the foregoing arguments is false and/or misleading.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

The Arguments Against Wal-Mart and Any Further Wal-Mart Expansion

Here is a list of the major arguments (all allegations) which could or should be made in opposing Wal-Mart and any expansion by Wal-Mart into new communities (domestic or foreign). The arguments are not set in any particular order, and undoubtedly some major arguments have been inadvertently omitted (or are considered to be part of another listed argument).

  1. Wal-Mart is allegedly in wilful violation of the federal Robinson-Patman Act and any similar state law (which prohibits price discrimination) as to most of its purchases of inventory, which drives many lawful and law-abiding local businesses out of business, which enables Wal-Mart to lower its costs and sell at lower prices (at the expense of its local competitors and the persons from whom Wal-Mart purchases its goods)
  2. Wal-Mart is allegedly in violation of the federal and state wage and labor laws requiring Wal-Mart to pay overtime to its employees (called "Associates" by Wal-Mart) which enables Wal-Mart to lower its costs and sell at lower prices (at the expense of its local employees and their families)
  3. Wal-Mart often receives subsidies from the state and local governments in the form of reduced interest on construction loans, guarantee by the local government, retention (by Wal-Mart) of sales tax revenues for a specified number of years, condemnation of private business and other property by the community for use by Wal-Mart, government action and priorities favoring Wal-Mart, contribution by government to infrastructure costs, all of which subsidies are paid in part by Wal-Mart's lawful business competitors, who are then placed in further competitive disadvantage by such lowering of Wal-Mart's costs of doing business in the local area
  4. Wal-Mart allegedly uses unlawful tactics to prevent its employees from forming unions in violation of the federal Taft-Hartley Labor Relations Act and various state statutes
  5. Wal-Mart attracts customers by alleged false advertising that many of its offered goods are made in America (through its "Buy America" and "Bring It Home to the USA" campaigns), which advertising is in alleged violation of various federal and state laws prohibiting false advertising and solicitation of business - such alleged activities enable Wal-Mart to obtain customers and sales at a lower cost, at the expense of competitors and Wal-Mart's customers
  6. Wal-Mart allegedly has lower wage and labor standards for its employees than the local communities realize, resulting in poverty for Wal-Mart's employees, their family and their community
  7. Wal-Mart allegedly makes use of part-time and temporary employees from the community which deprives the employees of profit sharing, pay increases, health benefits, vacation and vacation pay, and other benefits
  8. Wal-Mart's purchasing practices requires most suppliers to manufacture goods in third-world countries and to even lower the foreign workers' already-impoverished standard of living by competing with other suppliers to become the lowest-paying employer of all, with employees having the lowest standard of living and highest employer abuse, in the worst sanitary, social, working and educational conditions, to win and retain Wal-Mart's approval and contracts
  9. Wal-Mart's purchasing practice supports dictators and undemocratic practices in third-world countries by requiring strong-arm methods to keep the enslaved third-world employees in line and prevent union or individual complaints about the ever-lowering working conditions and pay -- all to prevent loss of Wal-Mart and other superstore contracts from going to a third-world country with even worse (but lower-cost) working conditions
  10. Wal-Mart's business practices allegedly ignore ethical and moral considerations which are important to the community and its members
  11. Wal-Mart's pay scales and other labor practices allegedly results in a lower standard of living for Wal-Mart's employees with the alleged result that about 90% of Wal-Mart's full-time and part-time employees and contract employees are living in poverty as defined by various standards
  12. Wal-Mart allegedly does not purchase any significant amount of goods or (non-employment) services from local manufacturers or suppliers, so that the customary accelerator of 5 times sales (i.e., that $1 of sales by Wal-Mart expands into $5 in total sales for the community as a whole) is substantially lower than 5 times, and instead much of Wal-Mart's income is spent elsewhere or distributed as interest or dividends to lenders or shareholders of Wal-Mart many of whom are located at or near Bentonville, Arkansas
  13. Wal-Mart's presence allegedly reduces the value of competing businesses, other businesses, most land values, and the community tax base
  14. Wal-Mart's presence allegedy increases the welfare costs and other costs of the community far more than Wal-Mart pays in taxes to the community
  15. Wal-Mart makes no reliable promises to stay; it has hundreds of abandoned Wal-Mart stores throughout the United States, moving from one location to another in search of maximum profits, without regard to the effect upon the communities it invades or flees
  16. Wal-Mart managers are not tied in to any town for long; they are moved from one place to another periodically, sometimes in a matter of a few months
  17. Wal-Mart lowers the aesthetic quality of the working place with its windowless concrete boxes and adjacent asphalt carpet for parking, for the carrying out of its business
  18. Many of these points and other arguments are contained in Professor Edward B. Shils' study and survey on Wal-Mart which can be read in its entirety at The Shils Report, a 250-Page Report and Survey Proving that Big Box / Superstores Are Injuring Towns and Small Businesses in America through Price Discrimination and Other Predatory Practices. This report deals with Wal-Mart and how it seriously injures the local economy, businesses and tax base for the areas in which it does business. The report is based on a projectible survey which might be admissible as evidence in a lawsuit attempting to seek recovery of damages or injunctive relief against a superstore chain for violation of the Robinson-Patman Act
  19. One should not overlook the 1995 study conducted by Prof. Kenneth E. Stone, of Iowa University, entitled "Competing with the Discount Mass Merchandisers", which is widely heralded as a devastating study against Wal-Mart and its effect upon the small towns, villages and communities it invades; Prof. Stone's address is 2208 Van Buren Ave., Ames, IA 50010, tel. no. 515-232-7766 [or 460 Heady Hall, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50010, tel no. 515-294-6269]; the study is not available at any website, but there are about 100 articles referring to his study; Prof. Stone's impressive c.v. can be found at Prof. Kenneth Stone's c.v.

The foregoing list of alleged arguments against Wal-Mart is not all-inclusive, but it does not have to be complete. There is enough set forth in the first five points (if properly presented to the court) to halt further expansion of Wal-Mart for many U.S. communities.

The specific nature of the lawsuit which allegedly should be brought to stop expansion of Wal-Mart or other big box, category killer superstore in a community is discussed immediately below.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

A Closer Look at the Arguments Purportedly Favoring Wal-Mart

Now, let's take a look more closely at the arguments purportedly favoring Wal-Mart, to see if there really is a valid argument favoring Wal-Mart. Each of the items listed above in the Pro Wal-Mart section is set forth below, followed in each instance by allegations of why the item is not accurate or not a good argument:

Pro Wal-Mart Arguments Followed by Critical Comment Allegations

  1. Wal-Mart will provide a new and substantial source of tax revenue for the local community; HOWEVER, these amounts are small in comparison to the dollar amount of destruction to local business, reduction in land values, reduction in tax base, and tax abatements and benefits provided by the local government to Wal-Mart
  2. Wal-Mart will provide a significant number of jobs for the residents in the area; HOWEVER, many of the new employees will come from other towns because Wal-Mart pays so little that most employees cannot afford to live in a town which can support a new Wal-Mart; many of the Wal-Mart employees will be required to hold at least two jobs, and will be living below the poverty line no matter what they do
  3. Wal-Mart will provide a larger selection of goods and services under one roof than is available in the business section of any nearby small town; HOWEVER, this causes a loss of the business providing different types of goods and creates an unwanted homogenization of goods being offered throughout the country, without significant regard to local preferences or local manufacturers and suppliers
  4. Wal-Mart will provide a lower price for all (or substantially all) of its goods and services than the existing local merchants in any nearby small town; HOWEVER, this is not true when all the costs are taken into account, including the higher social costs for the underpaid employees; the loss of businesses and their value and the destruction of families dependent on such businesses, and the inevitable price increases which will be imposed by Wal-Mart when competitors are pushed out of business and when manufacturers raise their own prices to Wal-Mart to offset the loss of their vastly more profitable small business customers as they are put out of business by Wal-Mart; the immediate attraction of what seems to be a lower price has severe consequences to be paid by most members of the community; lower prices are an illusion caused by the failure to take all costs into account
  5. Wal-Mart will provide convenience to its customers through immediate, nearby, no-cost, no-meter-feeding, no-tow parking space; HOWEVER, this is paid for by the illegally-low prices at which the superstores buy their goods and would not be available if Wal-Mart and the other superstores paid for their goods at the same price per unit as their smaller competitors are required to pay when buying from the same manufacturers; Wal-Mart has not found a better way of doing lawful business; it has found a way to buy goods at unlawfully low prices and drive its law-abiding competitors out of business, at which time it can and will raise its prices to much higher levels
  6. Construction of the Wal-Mart facility will provide some temporary construction jobs to local persons; HOWEVER, these are fewer than one would think because Wal-Mart is always building new facilities and undoubtedly uses the same lawyers, engineers, architects, plumbers, interior designers (if any) and others from one job to the next as the state is filled out with new Wal-Mart stores; hopefully a few shovelers will be hired from the local area to pitch in for a few weeks during construction
  7. Wal-Mart will attract additional business to the community consisting of persons who will patronize Wal-Mart from other communities within a certain number of miles (or radius) from the Wal-Mart store; HOWEVER, this is a disaster for the surrounding towns because more than 75% of WAl-Mart's business comes from these surrounding towns, according to Prof. Kenneth Stone's study
  8. Wal-Mart will cause the town to grow, together with the values of some of the real estate surrounding the Wal-Mart facility; HOWEVER, any such growth will be more than offset by the destruction of business, property, tax-base and other values
  9. Wal-Mart will provide opportunity for some local residents to start at the ground level and work up in the Wal-Mart organization; HOWEVER, Wal-Mart's personnel turnover is so high, due to low wages and poor working conditions, that the likelihood of any one employee moving into real management appears to be less than 1 out of 100
  10. Wal-Mart will provide training for its employees; HOWEVER, this type of training is for a job paying slightly above mininum wage, and below the poverty level for anyone trying to support a family with one or more children on the wages received for full-time employment with Wal-Mart
  11. Wal-Mart will provide profit-sharing, incentives, health care and other benefits to its employees; HOWEVER, these benefits are not given to part-time employees, or to temporary personnel, or to full-time employees who have not yet served one or two years; and when the benefits are given, they do not change the employee's financial condition to any significant extent
  12. Wal-Mart will feature and promote American products and services through its "Buy American" or "Bring It Home to America" programs; HOWEVER, Wal-Mart now appears to be importing close to 90% of its goods from other countries, directly or through suppliers, so that Sam Walton's sales pitch of "Buying American" has been changed to "Selling Out America and Americans"
  13. Wal-Mart will treat its employees as partners in the Wal-Mart enterprise; HOWEVER, this is pure fantasy, designed to make the overworked and underpaid Wal-Mart employee forget his/her impoverished and virtually enslaved situation, especially while the real money is turned back to Bentonville, Arkansas and to Wal-Mart's officers, shareholders and other investors
  14. Wal-Mart will respect and treat its employees well as valued members of the Wal-Mart family; HOWEVER, this is just more hype with little factual support; most Wal-Mart employees are destitute and forced to accept whatever Wal-Mart hands out to them, for fear of losing the next paycheck needed by them to survive; see Barbara Ehrenreich's book NICKEL AND DIMED for her own story as a Wal-Mart employee, earning about $6.00 per hour or $210 per week (before taxes)
  15. Wal-Mart will compensate its employees fairly and bring prosperity to its employees and the communities in which it operates; HOWEVER, this is contradicted by the facts
  16. Wal-Mart will become a contributor to the local community; HOWEVER, this amounts to ever so little, and often does not even offset the amount of continuing governmental subsidies (such as tax abatement and receipt of all sales tax moneys) which Wal-Mart receives when it sets up a new store in an area.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

A Major Advantage in Using the Robinson-Patman Act to Fight Wal-Mart Is That You Only Have to Convince One Person - the Judge

When trying to decide what to do to stop Wal-Mart from coming into your community, costs become the most important problem. Wal-Mart has unlimited funds to spend, and the funds available to the community are limited. How much does it cost to reach and convince 1,000 or 5,000 or 15,000 community members? When suing in court for violation of the Robinson-Patman Act, you only have to convince a single person - the judge. The cost of doing that should be much lower than the costs of convincing a community some (or many) of the members of which have already been fed pro Wal-Mart messages by some community businesspersons or leaders who perceive they will personally benefit from a Wal-Mart superstore.

The judge gets one set of papers, holds an evidentiary hearing to take testimony for 1-2 days, and renders his decision. Oh, by the way, a motion for a preliminary injunction takes precedence over all other matters before the judge except criminal trials (which under the federal Criminal Expediting Act have to be given priority over almost everything else). Thus, the federal court route can be quicker, and at lower cost, often (it can be supposed) with better predictable results.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Using the Robinson-Patman Act to Fight Wal-Mart Has the Added Advantage of Getting Your Legal Fees and Certain Other Costs Returned as a Matter of Law When the Antitrust Plaintiffs Obtain a Judgment in Their Favor

Wal-Mart and other major chains when seeking to build a superstore in a community have often spent in excess of $1,000,000 in trying to build community support (and make payments or provide benefits to some key officials or other players) and the zoning-approval application process, thereby requiring the community to raise and expend moneys to try to offset this inherent advantage. If and when the group opposing Wal-Mart or other chain store defeats the proposal, there is no reimbursement of these expenses. When stopping Wal-Mart or other superstore through a Robinson-Patman Act Action, however, there is a right under law to recovery of the plaintiff's reasonable legal fees (which will always be a fraction of the amount spent by Wal-Mart in opposing the action) as well as various court costs, including depositions, expert witness fees and expenses, filing fees and various other costs. This is an attractive feature of stopping Wal-Mart through Robinson-Patman Act litigation. The same is not true when using other types of litigation (such as zoning appeals), because generally (I suspect) legal fees are not reimbursed to the persons opposing a zoning application if they defeat the application.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

How Globalization Enriches the Ruling Corporate Interests in the U.S. and the Dictator Rulers in the Third-World Countries While Enslaving the Third-World Poor and Impoverishing Many Middle-Class Americans

President Bush, during a televised meeting with Prime Minister Tony Blair on or about July 17, 2001, stated in substance that globalization is good for the poor in 3rd-world countries. This sound byte from Bush, the newly-appointed spokesman for the ruling corporate interests in the United States, is not true, and is highly misleading. The poor in fact are, or are becoming, slaves for the global business interests, suffering from continuously-degrading living and working conditions and reducing, below poverty-level pay, with no more than remembrances of how good it was being one of the "poor" before globalism dictated their present living and working conditions.

The basic problem with 3rd-world countries is their dictatorships, lack of democracy, and strong-arm (military) control, supported by the United States and its controlled financial and military institutions, in the name of "globalism". This enables their ruling groups to require peasants to perform work at low wage cost and high social injustice, in a near or actual prison-camp environment, for the globalizing companies of the United States. Through globalization, Wal-Mart and others have shifted their manufacturing and purchase to avoid paying U.S. manufacturing workers the U.S. minimum wage or higher, and to be able to force third-world manufacturers to compete by lowering their wages, hours and working conditions to the least possible amount, creating slaves out of poor peasants and additional riches for the already super-rich.

This amounts to an imperialist expansion of these politically-dominating political-economic interests in the United States to the easily-dominated 3rd-world countries, where the dictators are supported by the American military. A few pennies per dollar are siphoned off for the poor-peasant workers from sales of 3rd-world slave-labor products to United States consumers. These consumers are given several cents off when buying these products. But in the process the U.S. consumers are unwittingly destroying their own job base, society and security while taking their cash savings when buying from Wal-Mart and other superstores, and the third-world poor are further impoverished and exploited by 3rd-world manufacturing using child, prison, sickly, and slave labor under inhumane and wholly-intolerable conditions.

The press in the United States does not report on this aspect of globalism (when reporting on the "advantages" of globalism) because it would undermine the ruling groups' efforts to replace American workers with low-cost 3rd-world peasant slaves, and to drive the cost of products to superstores to labor-cost levels which could be reduced only at constant gunpoint.

An enlightening book on the topic is YEAR 501 - THE CONQUEST CONTINUES, by Noam Chomsky, Boston: South End Press, 1993, paperback, US$19.00, in which Chomsky equates the genocide and subjugation of colonial times with the economic exploitation, killings and dictatorships which accompany and enable present-day "globalization" and domination of the world economy by some of the largest corporations operating in the United States (whether U.S. or foreign corporations).

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

How To Deal with a Specific Superstore Problem You May Have

If a superstore or major retailer threatens to invade your community, there is a remedy, but you should act very quickly to go into court (preferably before any construction-site digging takes place). You should bring an injunction and declaratory action based on the retailer's continuing violations of the Robinson-Patman Act (and, if applicable, continuing overtime-pay violations and fraudulent advertising which if not enjoined would adversely effect local employees and local businesses), and seek a preliminary and permanent injunction in the same evidentiary hearing to prohibit the superstore from opening up in the community as long as the owner (the major retail chain) continues to violate the Robinson-Patman Act (and, if applicable, wage laws and deceptive advertising statutes). By not seeking monetary damages, you may be able to obtain a permanent injunction right away (through consolidation of the preliminary injunction hearing with the trial for permanent injunctive relief), without having to post an undertaking or bond (to secure the defendant against loss if the preliminary injunction is ultimately reversed) for the grant of a preliminary injunction. This is the best and quickest (and perhaps least expensive) way to deal with the problem, instead of trying to take the political/bureaucratic route of obtaining new, crippling zoning restrictions, which could lead to lawsuits by the major retailer for violation of the "civil rights" of such uncivil, uncaring transnational corporation. Of course, opposing zoning applications should be companion route to stopping Wal-Mart and other superstores from entering the community.

Even if Wal-Mart has already invaded your community, the injured merchants and town or village may have a remedy: to seek damages and a permanent injunction in a Robinson-Act brought against the superstore for damages occurring during the four-year period preceding the filing of the complaint.

The licensing/zoning route and related court proceedings, and possibly a referendum among voters, can peter out and can be obviated easily by the superstore changing the location of the property, or just going into the adjoining community, for example. On the other hand, a Robinson-Patman Act case is not limited by zoning-board boundaries. The federal judge can grant an injunction prohibiting Wal-Mart from opening up within, say, a 35-mile radius from the plaintiff community or plaintiff businesses.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Litigation Expenses for an Injunction Action under Robinson-Patman Act - An Estimate

The costs of suing to enjoin Wal-Mart or other superstore from coming into your community (and surrounding communities) will depend on various factors, but at a minimum can be expected to amount to about $50,000 (mainly for attorney's fees and expert fees), most of which would be recoverable from the defendant, as a matter of law, if you won the lawsuit. The suit can be completed in a few months because no damages would be sought, in comparison to a typical Robinson-Patman Act suit for damages and injunctive relief, which often takes more than two or three years to bring to a conclusion.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Comparing the Remedy of Injunction Litigation with the Remedy of Denying Zoning Application

The two basic remedies -- of (i) an action for a preliminary and permanent injunction under the Robinson-Patman Act and (ii) denial of necessary zoning approvals and other licenses or permissions, including any appeals -- are not mutually exclusive. Choosing one does not require foregoing the other. Of course, both cost money, which will tend to force communities to make some choices, which requires information and comparison concerning the choices.

The zoning route is ordinarily longer and can be more costly, depending on the size of the community. It costs more to reach 10,000 residents than it does to reach 2,000 residents. There is more organization required for the zoning remedy because of the lists of things which have to be done to try to achieve success with the remedy. The zoning route is more local and because of such reason can be defeated too readily by (i) pitting one town against another, (ii) giving some credence to the argument that your town might as well take whatever benefits there are because the superstore will be located somewhere close, in any event, (iii) there usually is no area-wide regulation or organization which can deal with the superstore problem on an area-wide basis. These are some of the points which come to mind as to the zoning remedy.

The injunction lawsuit remedy has a comparative fixed cost, not dependent on the size of the community, which means that it is more economical for larger towns and villages than it would be for smaller towns and villages. The injunction lawsuit remedy is binding on an area set by the judge, say 35 miles from the center of the plaintiff town or plaintiff businesses bringing the lawsuit, even though this may cover 10-30 communities and parts of two or more counties. The organization is minimal. One plaintiff and one lawyer, at a minimum. The injunction remedy has a finite number of procedures (e.g., preparation and filing of the complaint and motion for a preliminary injunction, an evidentiary hearing) unlike the zoning route which permits as much as a group can do or pay to have done. A billion-dollar company can spend far more money in fighting the zoning remedy than it can in fighting the injunction remedy. The number of persons needed to be convinced in the zoning remedy may be thousands, whereas in the injunction remedy the town or business plaintiff only has to convince one person: the federal judge. Also, because the injunction remedy can be helpful to many more businesses and communities than the zoning remedy, there are many more interested persons who can finance the injunction remedy, at a substantially lower contribution per contributing person. Finally, the zoning remedy has failed to stop Wal-Mart more than 2,000 times, whereas the Robinson-Patman Act injunction remedy has never been tried up to the date of this website revision, as far as I can tell.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

How to Put the Necessary Evidence Together - a Quick Look

OK, let's assume you want to use the injunction method to stop Wal-Mart. What type of evidence do you need?

At the outset, to prepare the injunction complaint, you do not plead your evidence specifically (although you will generally describe the price discrimination and estimate its extent).

However, when making your motion for a preliminary injunction to stop Wal-Mart from opening a new store in the area, you will need to have highly specific evidence. You will not know the price at which Wal-Mart purchases its goods, and the "price" is very difficult to determine because of the myriad of transactions needed to establish the per unit price.

Thus, you will need to concentrate on the price at which Wal-Mart is selling specific items in the nearest Wal-Mart stores and the prices at which your local merchants (or their own suppliers) are buying the same goods from the same manufacturers from whom Wal-Mart is buying its goods. It should be noted that Wal-Mart does not deal with wholesalers or manufacturers' representatives, and insists upon negotiating and buying directly from the manufacturers.

The papers to be prepared in support of the preliminary injunction motion will be what are called "declarations", which are affidavits without using any notary, where the declarant states under the penalties of perjury that what he/she says in the declaration is true.

The moving papers should have declarations from officers and/or shareholders of a number of businesses in the area which would be adversely affected if Wal-Mart opened up a nearby branch (say within 25-35 miles from the place of business). Each declaration would provide a series of comparative figures for a variety of brand-named products of like grade and quality, showing the declarant's (or his/her wholesaler's) purchase price per unit on a recent date, and the price at which the closest Wal-Mart (and/or Sam's Club) stores are offering the same item to the public. In each case, there should be exhibits attached such as receipts, invoices, or photographs, for example.

Also, there should be some evidence about the effect of othe Wal-Mart store openings on these or other businesses, and the claim (made in good faith) that the opening up of a threatened Wal-Mart store would probably result in the declarant's business being driven out of business.

One or more declarations should put together a variety of anecdotal events of what happened to similar businesses in other areas of the U.S. when Wal-Mart or Sam's Club opened up a new store in the area.

Also, it would probably be best to have one or two experts prepare a report explaining to the judge what, in their respective opinions, would happen to the plaintiffs, community, and other interested persons if Wal-Mart or Sam's Club opened up one or more stores in the area.

Also, you must be prepared with witnesses to testify shortly thereafter in what is known as an "evidentiary hearing", which would be similar to a trial before the judge, without a jury, on the issues raised in your preliminary injunction motion.

Prior to such a hearing, the judge may permit or require you to undergo some discovery to be able to refine the evidence you plan to present. At this point, you would be able to find out from Wal-Mart what prices it has been paying for the goods which you are complaining about. (Remember, the Robinson-Patman Act does not relate to services; it only prohibits price discrimination as to goods. What constitutes "goods" sometimes becomes an interesting issue: for example, electricity is generally considered goods; television advertising is generally considered services; and yellow-page advertising is now awaiting a judge's decision in one of my Robinson-Patman Act cases.)

Please remember that the foregoing is only a quick view, and is not intended to be exhaustive. What you need to do will depend, of course, on the factual situation.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

What You Can Do After You Left the Barn Door Open and Let the Superstore In

Most communities in the country have failed to stop Wal-Mart, Home Depot or other superstore chain from coming into their area and the question for them is: What can be done at this point, now that we have left the barn door open and let the superstore in?

The answer is an easy one, and seems to offer no real choice: a lawsuit for a permanent injunction and for monetary damages, where businesses adversely affected, landowners suffering declines in value, and communities suffering from increased costs and a reduced tax revenue can join together within a 30- or 35-mile radius from the superstore(s) at issue and seek to remedy the situation.

The main advantage of this is that the costs can be spread among many persons, and the costs (if the action is handled on a partial contingent-fee basis) can be done for about $100,000 or so, most of which would be recoverable as the mandated costs and attorneys' fees under the Robinson-Patman Act, if the plaintiffs prevailed in the lawsuit.

Once again, I do not know of a single instance where this remedy has been tried, but there seems to be no reason in law why it should not be tried, and why it should not be successful, under the assumed facts that the superstores are buying at discriminatory per unit prices, without applicable defense, and are doing so knowingly.

This type of suit takes longer, and its costs can be spread out over a longer period. Twenty towns could each provide $5,000, for example, to be able to fund the lawsuit.

Lawsuits for a preliminary injunction are costly because they try to complete an entire case, including the trial and decision, within the very short time-frame of several months, which creates massive workloads for the attorneys, parties, the judge, and the clerks and other personnel of the judge. Instead of having months to prepare motion papers and responses, the parties have only days, quite often, which translates into enormous workloads often running 18-20 hours per day for the attorneys, seven days per week.

It should also be noted that if the preliminary injunction remedy does not work out, the plaintiffs can convert the lawsuit into one for damages, or file a similar lawsuit for damages, and obtain delayed relief, but this time for monetary damages as well as an injunction (permanent).

It should be noted, once again, that the recommended Robinson-Patman Act litigation seems to hold the solution because it is available even after the failure of the zoning remedy.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Globalization: Its Evils and Remedies (for the Individual and Community)

In addition to the above arguments against Wal-Mart specifically, there is the list of points below which describes the evils of globalization, as to which Wal-Mart is one of the leading globalizing companies:

  1. Loss of high-paying employment
  2. Increased low-paying service jobs (e.g., part-time associate or temporary position at Wal-Mart or other superstore)
  3. Destruction of small and independent retail and wholesale businesses
  4. Lowering of standard of living for 90% of the American people
  5. Increase in wealth for top 5% of the people (not necessarily American by the time they become very rich)
  6. Increased taxes to pay for goods and services which formerly were obtainable without significant cost
  7. Inability for many college graduates to pay off the loans taken out for their education with the added salary resulting from the college education
  8. Every-increasing concentration of capital and lessening of opportunity
  9. Control of politicians, political parties, political agendas and political solutions by the major corporations, including some which happen to be U.S. corporations
  10. Control of news by major media to support agenda of the major corporations
  11. Inability of major corporations to be concerned about their communities and workers, and ever-present willingness to sacrifice them to increase already-obscene profits
  12. Control of education so that it supports the major corporations instead of the competition needed to go up against these corporations
  13. Inability of most employees in a city to afford to live in the city in which they are employees of the major corporations
  14. Exporting the techniques used to destroy the U.S. to help destroy other countries as well
  15. Pushing for more and more consumption in spite of the inability of the world to absorb the related waste and regenerate the consumed resources
  16. Destroying the differences in regional cultures to enable the same products and services to be sold by the major corporations to everyone in the world
  17. Forcing U.S. employees to take less and less until there is nothing left to give, and then transferring the manufacturing operations to countries which permit exploitation of their labor
  18. Major corporations obtain tax subsidies in lieu of needed government services to the ever-increasing class of needy individuals
  19. Capital is used to destroy communities (by moving business operations to countries with lower labor costs) instead of being used to build businesses and communities in the U.S., and then assist in the sale of the cheaply-made foreign goods at high prices and profits to American consumers

Of course, this is just off the top of my head. There are many more consequences which should be listed. Let me direct you to a few sources for additional information. I suggest that you read the following books:

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Globalization Could Not Be Taking Place without Wal-Mart and Other Big Box Chain Stores

An interesting subject for economists is whether globalization would have taken place if the Robinson-Patman Act had been enforced. Or to put it another way, if the superstore chains had not driven most of the small, owner-managed competing stores (such as pharmacies, food stores, convenience stores, book stores, video rental stores, music stores, auto-parts stores, office supply stores, clothing and department stores, sporting goods stores, liquor stores, hardware stores, beverage stores, appliance stores, gas stations, and other stores selling to the retail public), and if the superstores did not exist (because they cannot exist without the advantage of a substantially lower price for the goods they buy), would there have been a drive by these small business owners or their suppliers to set up manufacturing plants in foreign countries, and move the plants from one country to another in search of the lowest possible wages and working conditions?

The answer is No. Small retail businesses are generally too small to try to purchase their goods from foreign manufacturers, or to set up manufacturing facilities of their own, either in the United States or in one or more foreign countries.

Small business would buy locally, for the most part, as they did before being put out of business by the superstores, who started out by forcing U.S. manufacturers to give them, the superstores, unlawfully low prices for the goods they bought, and subsequently with the volume of retail sales they developed in the United States (stolen from the small business they put out of business) use the volume of business to scour the rest of the world in search of even more economies to take over even more industries and competitors at the retail level, thereby destroying competing small businesses in the United States, smaller, law-abiding chains (such as W. T. Grant and Montgomery Ward), and then the U.S. wholesalers (by refusing to buy from them), and then the regional manufacturers (because they couldn't afford to pay slotting allowances in competition with larger, national manufacturers), and then the U.S. manufacturers (who would up giving increasingly higher percentages of their output at cost or below to the superstores demanding lower and lower prices, or lose the superstore's business).

Today, the U.S. manufacturers of goods sold in superstores are deathly afraid to speak up, for fear of alienating the superstores who are buying most of the output of the U.S. manufacturers at or below cost. The U.S. manufacturers have been forced into merging (one of the reasons for our ever-increasing economic concentration) to try to offset this onslought, but without success, because any time the manufacturer achieves any additional economies of scale (or absence of competition), the superstores demand that it be passed on to the superstores in the form of even lower prices, which drives more small-business competitors out of business, and further weakens the manufacturer, who now is selling an even higher percentage of its output at or below the variable manufacturing cost, with no contribution by the superstore to the manufacturer's overhead.

To put the question another way, what advantage would there be to the United States or to the world to have a single superstore survive, putting all other superstore owners and small business owners out of business? Do we want only one retailer being the purchaser of most goods and services in the U.S. or in the world? The U.S.S.R. failed in its efforts to have a single organization make all manufacturing and distribution decisions. Why should Wal-Mart be any better at these decisions?

Unless Wal-Mart is stopped, the way things are going at this time, we will wind up with Wal-Mart being the only (surviving) retailer, with everyone else having been put out of business.

The Robinson-Patman Act was enacted to prevent such a result and did, from 1936 up to sometime during the early 1980's, at which time (with a favorable federal regulatory climate, willing to let Wal-Mart and other superstores violate the antitrust laws), the superstore phenomenon started, fueled by some major retailers learning that they could buy goods at unlawfully low prices and expand dramatically throughout the U.S., putting small-business owners and law-abiding smaller chains out of business, by paying unlawfully low prices for products, reselling them at bargain prices to U.S. consumers (similar to persons who sell pirated videos and CD's at discount prices), and then offering low-wage employment to the former employees and owners of the competing stores which were put out of business.

One could, however, what would stop a wholesaler from doing the same thing that Wal-Mart is doing? In other words, if Wal-Mart had not been invented, what would have stopped a wholesaler or manufacturer from buying abroad and selling those goods to the 10,000,000 or so small business in the United States?

Just asking the question suggests the answer. Wal-Mart, with one person (Sam Walton) making the purchasing decisions, is able to take the retail sales for 10,000,000 small businesses and concentrate them into a single purchasing (i.e., buying all baseballs with child labor in China, as a not so far-fetched hypothetical). The ability at one time for any one manufacturer or wholesaler to do the same thing, by selling to all 10,000,000 retailers at one time is non-existent. The diversity of purchasing interests, the delays involved, the desire by responsible, locally-owned and locally-operated manufacturers suggests that they would not agree at one time, in the desired numbers, to get together and have their products made in foreign countries, especially under terrible wage and working conditions, when to do so would be to undermine the jobs, families, economy and relationships which had been created and nurtured over the years.

The responsibility of many small businesses competing with each other enabled the U.S. to prosper, and the avarice and willingness to violate the law by the leading superstores destroyed what had been created by honest businesspersons over the years.

I invite one or more economists to look into the above scenario and do a study for use in court in support of the needed litigation designed to cure the problem caused when the political process has stopped working (because of excess reliance on the funds and other support received from the interests supporting further concentration of the U.S. and world economy).

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Wal-Mart's Impact on Competitors Including Kmart, Food Wholesalers, Food Manufacturers, and Others

Wal-Mart's annual sales ($191 billion) exceeds the gross national product of many countries, and at the rate Wal-Mart is growing, unless stopped, would have 50% of many categories of retail sales in the U.S. within a few years. There is no reason that Wal-Mart won't go into the business of selling new cars and SUV's and trucks, especially those made in foreign countries, or into offering medical and dental and legal services, and automobile repair services (using some of its extensive parking area for the construction of automobile service bays and automotive diagnostic equipment), and automobile driving instruction, and travel agency services, and casinos, and holiday cruises. It already is going into the branch-banking business, and the credit card business, it seems.

What does this mean for competitors? What do they have to do to try to remain in competition. Here is one example, of what the 2nd largest retailer (Kmart, 1/5th the size of Wal-Mart) is doing to try to remain in business (already having come quite close to calling it quits in the early 1990's).

During March, 2001, Kmart (with $40 billion in annual sales, which is about 1/5th the size of Wal-Mart) entered into a 10-year exclusive supply agreement with major food wholesaler Fleming under which Fleming is to supply all of Kmart's 2,100 Kmart and Kmart supercenter stores in the U.S. with all of their grocery, meat, produce, frozen foods, dairy and other grocery items requirements in what is estimated to be a $65 billion contract ($6.5 billion per year for 10 years). In other words, Kmart has handed the nation's leading food wholesaler a $65 billion contract for the purchase of food products from thousands of food manufacturers, foreign and domestic.

In doing this, Kmart will no longer purchase any food items itself, thereby ceasing to do business with many hundreds or even some thousands of present food-product suppliers (mostly manufacturers, many locally based) to Kmart. Most or many of these food manufacturers will lose Kmart's business.

Fleming, with the additional $65 billion in purchasing power, is now expected by the industry press to bring increased pressure on its own food suppliers to lower their prices to Fleming, and the press is speculating whether that decrease in price will accrue as well to the competitors of Kmart who also buy from Fleming, and if not, what reaction Fleming is going to get from its other customers, who are going to be hurt financially if Kmart purchases the same products from Fleming at lower per-unit prices, which is the obvious purpose of the arrangement, because of the failure of everybody to comply with the requirements of the Robinson-Patman Act.

Now, because the 2nd largest retailer in trying as hard as it can to compete with Wal-Mart (and really not being too successful in its efforts) is entering into an exclusive supply arrangement with Fleming which will enable Kmart to get the lower prices it needs to have a shot at competing with Wal-Mart, the other retail chains which buy from Fleming are going to be losing business because they will be paying more per unit than Kmart (and obviously have been paying more per unit than Wal-Mart).

Here is what the industry press (Private Label Buyer, March, 2001) has to say about this 10-year, $65 billion Kmart-Fleming deal:

Kmart's plan to take on Dallas-based Fleming Companies' BestYet private label provides substantial synergies to both partners with relatively little downside.

Kmart, as it expands further into food and deeper into its battle with Wal-Mart, gets a broad-based private label program without new investment or infrastructure. Fleming gets substantial incremental volume to buttress its purchasing power, as well as a higher profile for BestYet via 2,100 Kmart and Kmart supercenter stores.

The private label deal is just part of a new 10-year $4.5 billion (annual volume) supply chain arrangement [plus an additional $2 billion per year discussed below] in which Fleming will provide substantially all of the food and consumable products to Kmart stores: grocery, meat, produce, frozen foods, dairy and other grocery items.

Supervalu, which had supplied Kmart in tandem with Fleming, looked only briefly at its opportunity to bid on the entire pot before folding its hand and walking away. Only time will tell who made the right move in this high-stakes poker game.

* * * In addition, discussions now underway could add more than $2 billion annually in HBA [health and beauty aid products] to the deal [making this $6.5 billion in annual volume].

* * *

Flemings execs note that the Kmart deal will create a more national presence for BestYet, driving substantial new volume and providing increased procurement leverage. While that was music to the investment community's ears, it worried some vendors already squeezed by buyer superpowers.

* * *

The big difference is this isn't just "anybody." It is Kmart, the $40 billion giant with stores in 50 states, the Caribbean and Asia Pacific. Fleming is a big leaguer, too, with annual sales of $15 billion. Prior to the Kmart deal, it served 3,000 supermarkets, 3,000 C-stores and nearly 1,000 supercenters, discount, limited assortment, drug, specialty and e-tailers Fleming also provides Piggly Wiggly and IGA private label programs.

* * *

There is much speculation on how many efficiencies will be passed on to Fleming's existing retail customers. There are also rumblings that the deal might help Kmart compete against these Fleming-supplied stores. One had only to turn to investor bulletin boards on the Internet to get an earful.

* * *

" ... It gives Fleming a lot more volume, but it creates some potential complications for them in supplying competitors in the same marketplace. This one should be really interesting."

The problems being referred to are the better prices which Kmart is going to receive from Fleming than Fleming's other customers, which will hurt such other customers (i.e., Piggly Wiggly, IGA and others).

Our government, it should be noted, is doing nothing about this problem, merely watching while Wal-Mart (not Kmart, which has no chance to catch up to Wal-Mart) winds up with most of the retail business in the U.S., and destroys additional hundreds of thousands of retailers, wholesalers and manufacturers in the process.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Recommended Books on How to Stop Wal-Mart and Other Superstores from Coming Into Your Community

  1. SLAM-DUNKING WAL-MART! - How You Can Stop Superstore Sprawl in Your Hometown, by Al Norman, hardcover, Raphel Marketing (Atlantic City, NJ), 1999, $29.95
  2. IN SAM WE TRUST - THE UNTOLD STORY OF SAM WALTON AND WAL-MART, THE WORLD'S MOST POWERFUL RETAILER, by Bob Ortega, paperback, Times Business/Random House, NY NY, 2000, US$16.00
  3. HOW WAL-MART IS DESTROYING AMERICA (and the World) - And What You Can Do About It, by Bill Quinn, paperback, Ten Speed Press (Berkeley, CA), 2000, $US$10.95
  4. NICKEL AND DIMED - ON (NOT) GETTING BY IN AMERICA, by Barbara Ehrenreich, hardcover, Metropolitan Books/Henry Holt, NY NY, 2001, US$23.00

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Recommended Books Exposing the Evils of Globalization

  1. THE CASE AGAINST THE GLOBAL ECONOMY (AND FOR A TURN TOWARD THE LOCAL), edited by Jerry Mander and Edward Goldsmith, published in paperback by Sierra Club Books, San Francisco, 1996, US$17.00
  2. WHEN CORPORATIONS RULE THE WORLD, by David C. Korten, paperback, Kumarian Press/Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 1995, US$19.95
  3. THE CASE AGAINST FREE TRADE - GATT, NAFTA, AND THE GLOBALIZATION OF CORPORATE POWER, by Ralph Nader, William Greider, Dick Morris and others, published by Earth Island Press / North Atlantic Books, 1993
  4. CORPORATION NATION - HOW CORPORATIONS ARE TAKING OVER OUR LIVES AND WHAT AND WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT IT, by Charles Derber, with an introduction by Ralph Nader, published in paperback St. Martin's Griffin, New York, 1998 (and 2000), US$14.95 (with comments by Jonathan Kozol, Ralph Nader, Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Noam Chomsky, Senator Paul Wellstone and David Korten
  5. ONE WORLD, READY OR NOT - THE MANIC LOGIC OF GLOBAL CAPITALISM, by William Greider, published by Simon & Schuster, 1997, US$27.50
  6. OPPOSING THE SYSTEM, by Charles A. Reich, hardcover, published by Crown, 1995, US$23.00
  7. AMERICA: WHO STOLE THE DREAM?, by Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele, paperback, published by Andrews & McMeel, K.C., Mo., 1996, US$9.95
  8. WHO WILL TELL THE PEOPLE - THE BETRAYAL OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY, by William Greider, hardcover, Simon & Schuster, 1992, US$25.00

Other books opposing the globalizing economy are listed in the above-listed books and at Other Books Opposing the Global Economy

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Recommended Websites on How to Stop Wal-Mart and Other Superstores

There are various excellent websites which you should review to get useful information and suggestions on how to prevent Wal-Mart and other superstores from invading your community. These sites, in no particular order, are:

  1. PBS Website 2001 TV Broadcast STOREWARS - When Wal-Mart Comes to Town a television documentary by the PBS network involving Ashland, Virginia, with valuable resources for persons interested In 0pposing Wal-Mart, other superstores and globalization; includes list of websites and other communities opposing Wal-Mart
  2. Wal-Mart Watch Website published by a union representing employees in competing stores This is an important website for persons gathering information to oppose Wal-Mart
  3. Al Norman's Slam-Dunk Website on How to Stop Wal-Mart This is an important website for persons gathering information to oppose Wal-Mart, and to obtain low-cost information pamphlets
  4. Stop Wal-Mart from Destroying East Spartanburg [SC] This website is for an online petition by local residents to stop Wal-Mart from entering their town; the host website provides the interactive programming to enable any community to put up a similar online petition for residents to sign electronically
  5. Stop the Wal-Mart Threat a union website with valuable information
  6. Website for Stopping Wal-Mart from Entering into Branch Banking Business based on Wal-Mart's alleged violations of the Robinson-Patman Act and other alleged bases - this is the administrative counterpart to attempting to stop Wal-Mart by going into federal court for injunctive relief
  7. Abstract of Research Paper entitled "The Impact of Wal-Mart on Retail Market Structure in Maine" by Georgeanne M. Artz, May 1999, thesis for master's of science degree with several abstracts of research papers by Prof. Kenneth E. Stone in the same /abstracts subdirectory; a good place to start looking for the type of research and experts you may want to consult when dealing with the Wal-Mart/superstore problem
  8. Wal-Mart Sucks Website, a website with various bulletin boards to register complaints about Wal-Mart
  9. Impact of the Wal-Mart Phenomenon on Rural Communities by Kenneth E. Stone, 1997 part of a Farm Foundation conference and series of papers by various experts on farm and rural matters; this is not the famous 1995 Stone study referred to above

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Fighting Globalism - The DROPPING OUT / Boycott Remedy

The only way left to fight ever-increasing globalizing of the economy and return the United States to its people, short of revolution, seems to be through a return to local living and a local economy, which can be tailored by the residents to fit their needs. A local economy is less dependent on Nikes, gold chains, television commercials, purchasing of unwanted items, private schools, $2,500 rental apartments, $200 per month parking, and other high costs of living in expensive cities which are unable to provide adequate services except for politicians, drug dealers, gangsters and others stealing from the public.

I have researched and written part of a book (entitled DROPPING OUT) which deals with and advocates a dropping out of the expensive city life for the low-cost and economic growth potential of a smaller community - one in which everyone obtains financing, as unbelievable as this may seem at first glance. Some of the community characteristics are that the local public library is the country club for the middle class, and a meeting place for persons to obtain partners, assistance and motivation. The person with the oldest car is automatically mayor. There will be software available for everyone in town to evaluate by his/her own standards which products and companies are injuring the community and might best not be purchased or patronized.

The book and its subject are intended for persons who are tired of working to pay excessive taxes (used to subsidize globalization and destruction of our U.S. economy) and to pay for services which should be free (such as education), including the taxes needed to be paid before one pays for education, rent and other necessities of life. A small town can dramatically reduce the amount of income one needs to live, and provide a healthy environment for developing a business. DROPPING OUT deals with these concepts at length. I am currently looking for a community in which to implement these ideas. I was told by some mayors of candidate communities that they think the ideas are great, but they fear that implementing them in their town would cause an influx of new residents and create a demand for costly support services which the town was not willing to provide and could not afford.

The withdrawal of public financial support (through purchasing - another form of voting, but without chads) is the way to cure globalism. Let the globalists make and sell their products in other countries, but not in our DROPPOUT COMMUNITY.

I urge you to read the 4 chapters of DROPPING OUT (chapters 1, 2, 3 and 20), which explain where the country is necessarily heading, as more and more persons have less and less money.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Chapter Summaries and 4 Chapters for DROPPING OUT Book Proposal

To see the 30 chapter summaries, click on DROPPING OUT Chapter Summaries for Chapters 1-30. To read one of the four completed chapters or author's notes for Chapter 20, see the options below.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Additional Remedies for Injured Small Businesses, Farmers, Communities and Others

Farmers have been hurt by globalization. My remedy for injured farmers is to bring suit under the Robinson-Patman Act for price discrimination. FarmGate (tm) - How Millions of Small Farmers May Be Able to Recover for Farming Losses and/or Loss of the Farm by Asserting Claims under the Federal Robinson-Patman Act (or any equivalent state) which prohibits manufacturers, wholesalers and suppliers from selling vehicles, gas, pesticides, seed, fertilizer and other items at discriminatory per unit prices

Small businesses suffering from price discrimination in their efforts to compete with major retail chains should consider obtaining compensation for their injuries under the Robinson-Patman Act or comparable state legislation. See RPAMall(tm) - Robinson-Patman Act Price Discrimination Website

Towns and villages which have lost their tax base because of the big box retailers, and category killer stores, can also obtain relief under the Robinson-Patman Act. See Who Can Sue for Unlawful Price Discrimination - Individuals, Corporations, Towns and Other Governmental Bodies

Overzealous prosecutors, working for their major corporate masters, can be fought through attack on their prosecutorial misconduct and prosecutorial abuse. See Prosecutorial Misconduct and Prosecutorial Website - with Opposing Techniques

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Additional Information about the Robinson-Patman Act

The Robinson-Patman Act is the only federal antitrust statute which the courts can be expected to enforce. To a great extent, the Sherman Act and Clayton Act are dead issues. Many judges do not enforce them, probably because they realize that the higher courts (U.S. Courts of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court) would probably toss the action out anyway, which winds up as a favor to the litigants to have the case thrown out earlier, rather than later. But the Robinson-Patman Act is still being enforced, and appears to be the only way to cut into the power of the major retail chains, which obtain their initial financial strength in the United States, by putting their competitors out of business, and then use this illegally-obtained financial strength to expand their activities into other countries, where they put the foreign competitors out of business in turn. See RPAMall(tm) - Robinson-Patman Act Price Discrimination Website

For those of you who have wondered how many of the leading retailers and manufacturers have been getting away with violating the Robinson-Patman Act during the years starting shortly after President Nixon took office, see Why Most Large Retailers, Wholesalers and Manufacturers Are Violating the RPA and Discriminating against Small Retailers

Also, see the RPAMall article "Big Box", "Category Killer" and Superstore Material - a Growing Collection of Links

Injured persons are entitled to a maximum recovery of 9,000 times the amount of gross profit margin they lose, on the average, in a single day of business (assuming a 7-day per week business). See Damages Rule of Thumb: 9,000 X 1 Day's Loss of Profits - $1,000 Daily Loss = $9,000,000 Maximum Recovery

Trade associations, unions, business and communities injured by U.S. involvement in the World Trade Organization would seem to have a remedy in the federal courts, to challenge U.S. involvement in the WTO to the extent that such involvement permits adjudication of sanctions against the U.S. or U.S. industries through a kangaroo WTO court which has no court records, has no open arguments, has no appellate remedies, offers no ability of interested persons to read or respond to evidence submitted by moving parties, and where the "judges" are not disclosed, operate in secret, and have major conflicts of interest, just to name some of the disabilities of the WTO judicial system which should be the basis for a constitutional attack on part of the WTO. The grounds would be that the U.S. Constitution does not permit delegation of judicial powers to what might be the ultimate international mafia family. There is no record as of 6/30/01 of any such attack on the WTO having been heard by any U.S. federal court. There appears to me to be a 50-50 chance of success for such a lawsuit, meaning that one may or may not win. The Supreme Court of the United States has mentioned "World Trade Organization" in only one opinion (2000 Crosby decision); and has mentioned NAFTA in only one opinion (1994 Gibson decision). There are only 11 Court of Appeals decisions mentioning the WTO and 31 Court of Appeals decisions mentioning NAFTA. This means there is no substantial body of case law and that many issues are wide open for judicial resolution. Only 4 Court of Appeals decisions refer to the WTO and to sanctions or penalties.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Community and Business Organizational Meetings - Setting Up; Attendance by Attorney Carl Person

If you and others in a community, representing the community and/or a group of businesses would like to have a meeting in your community to discuss problems you are having with Wal-Mart, Sam's Club, other chain of superstores or globalization generally, please give me a call, at 212-307-4444 (or contact me at my fax number or email address set forth below) and I will be pleased to talk with you about setting up a meeting in your community at which I will attend, to discuss your problems and to go over workable solutions. I do not charge a fee for these visits, but would normally expect reimbursement of my air or train fare.

As an example, a meeting could be held to discuss what remedies a town may have for damage to its tax base by a superstore which has already established itself nearby, which might include a claim for treble damages under the Robinson-Patman Act, damages for fraud and misrepresentation when obtaining any required permits, licenses or approval, and punitive damages against the superstore chain for wilful misrepresentation and deceit. Also, a group of business persons injured by the superstore during all or part of the past four years of superstore competition in the area could discuss their treble-damage Robinson-Patman Act remedies. Or, we could discuss how to file an action for declaratory relief and a preliminary injunction (and permanent injunction) to stop a planned invasion by a superstore in your community - BUT THIS REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ACTION, or the plaintiffs will probably lose any right to a preliminary injunction through the doctrine of waiver (which occurs when a prospective plaintiff sits on his hands and does nothing to complain in court while another (the superstore) is spending money trying to build its new superstore.

Also, you might want to discuss the possibility of turning your town into a DROPPOUT COMMUNITY as I envision in my e-book, discussed above, including the making available of accounts receivable financing to every farmer, professional, home-operated and small business in the community, to create meaningful employment for persons otherwise believing they have no local employment opportunities except at the superstore(s).

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Subscribe to FREE Newsletter to Fight Globalism and Return to Pre-Globalism Economy, Polity and Society

If you want to subscribe to a FREE newsletter (to be published from time to time) devoted to fighting economic globalism and returning the United States to its pre-globalism state, please provide your email address below. Instructions will be sent with each newsletter for easy removal of yourself from the list. [UNDER CONSTRUCTION: OCS please create and add the programming for this.]

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Get Involved: Send Email with Website Link to a Friend

Help your friends, relatives and business associates by telling them about this GLOBIOSITY website. It only takes a few seconds, and you might provide the information which someone needs to deal with the problems of underemployment, failing business, more work for less money, family difficulties caused by adverse economic change, and other problems directly associated with globalization of our economy. [UNDER CONSTRUCTION: OCS please add an email button with a built-in link to this website, and the opportunity for the user to add his/her own message and email address, with a copy of the letter to the user; preserve your work in backupfile please.]

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Please Contact Me, Carl Person, If You Have Any Questions!

If you or your company, community, friends or associates have any questions about how to deal with the problem of getting shafted by a major chain retailer or other transnational corporation (in what is probably part of its globalizing efforts), please contact me, Carl E. Person, right away, through any of these communications means: carlpers@ix.netcom.com, telephone number 212-307-4444 and fax number 212-307-0247.

Attorney Carl E. Person, LawMall Editor/Publisher, carlpers@ix.netcom.com
telephone number 212-307-4444 and fax number 212-307-0247

For Carl Person's c.v. or resume, click on Carl Person C.V.

RETURN TO: Index and Quick Links to Website Material

Copyright 2001-2004, 2006 by Carl E. Person