Reply #16: AH. Makes me wonder if there isn't more regional conflict here than meets

[jobycom]

the eye. Where I grew up in Mississippi, there was nothing even close to Walmart until Walmart got there. We had a Sears and a JCPenney's, and there was a KMart--and for a while KMart was what Walmart is now. But no one regionally had the money to open a regional style of Walmart. In fact, really, Walmart WAS the regional equivalent, since it was from the same southern impoverished regions.

Walmart in Mississippi isn't as low-paying, and isn't putting a lot of people out of business, because the whole state is low paying and there wasn't enough money to start a lot of smaller stores. So when Walmart opened, it greatly increased the range of merchandise we could buy, and lowered the prices we could buy it at, and it provided genuine work opportunities for high schoolers, entry level youngsters, and people near or past retirement.

However, pop a Walmart into an industrial northern town where there is more money to start with, and it's a very different story. Or pop it into a suburb on the outskirts of a midsize city. There, Walmart's wages are much lower, the products are inferior, and there are other businesses to hurt. But, there are also alternatives to shopping there. So when someone in Michigan tells someone in Mississippi to stop shopping at Walmart, they may be speaking different languages, somewhat.

I don't know, just a thought. I've often vowed to look up wage comparisons adjusted for regional economies, but I never have. I'm lazy, as well as stupid!:)