Comments (11)

• Manuel Lora

  Since there were more applicants than jobs, is it correct to say that it's possible that since the market for labor didn't clear here, that Wal-Mart was paying too much?

  Published: January 11, 2008 7:46 AM

• Curt Howland

  An example of minimum wages causing unemployment.

  Published: January 11, 2008 7:58 AM

• Got to love truth.

  The other truth:

  Unemployment statistics are a bunch of CRAP!!!!!

  There are far more people unemployeed than the number counted by the government. Socialists will do anything to keep their lies going.

  Published: January 11, 2008 8:58 AM

• More truth:

  Also it is more proof that GOVERNMENT HATES POOR PEOPLE and CAPITALISM LOVES THEM!!!!!

  Published: January 11, 2008 8:59 AM

• Maverick

  "Since there were more applicants than jobs, is it correct to say that it's possible that since the market for labor didn't clear here, that Wal-Mart was paying too much?"

  Not exactly. I would read this as too many people are blocked from work in other industries so they are wiling to work for wages much lower than they would be able to get in their own industry if there won't be government intervention. The real truth is that Wal-Mart pays less than the true free market rate because the actual (not free) market rate is the one which dictates the wage. In some industries there is artificial lack of people in some industries (like Wal-Mart) there is more people than jobs. This is only one of the unintended? consequences of government regulations. In one word, this is not a contract society anymore this is a status society. Your wage is not dependable on the very facts of how the market distribute the realized production between capital and labor it is depends on the very fact of your status. In what position in which industry you have the job. Thats the name of the game. Doesn't matter if you work hard, smart and produce thing consumers wants, the only thing here is your status and the status of the people who decide about your wage. If you don't like it you can starve but not much else. The other way is to elevate your status, but thats a hell of a hard work if possible.
  

  Published: January 11, 2008 10:27 AM

• Brent

  "Since there were more applicants than jobs, is it correct to say that it's possible that since the market for labor didn't clear here, that Wal-Mart was paying too much?"

  Manuel, Wal-Mart doesn't have much wiggle room, though. They are probably $1-2.50 / hour more than what the minimum wage is there, but if they were to lower the wage they plan to pay, then they get jerked around by the anti-Wal-Mart / pro-Union political hacks.
  

  Published: January 11, 2008 12:47 PM

• Michael E. Piston

  Attacks on Walmart reflect a growing anxiety that unbridled competition has resulted in a shift of income from the working to the executive / entrepreneurial class and in fact economic statistics tend to show that such a shift has occurred. Libertarians need to spend less time sneering at their opponents and more time developing fact based argument why government non-intervention in the marketplace is benefits most Americans, rather than insisting it should be taken on faith.

  Published: January 12, 2008 7:51 PM

• newson

  to michael e piston:
  walmart is merely a symptom, not the cause of the hollowing-out of the middle-class in the us. if you check out mises.org a little more carefully, you'll come to understand that the federal reserve/fractional reserve banking system is behind the enormous asset market booms we have witnessed, especially in the last decade. highly inflationary monetary policies that have favoured those lucky enough to have salaries tied to asset prices (eg option packages), and those who were asset-rich to start with.

  Published: January 12, 2008 9:35 PM

• Vanmind

  Since when would unbridled competition do anything other than help working people (by keeping consumer prices as low as possible)? As newson posted, we must never conflate legitimate economic cycles with artificial booms based on central bank shenanigans (which is what actually transfers income from worker-types to executive-types). The best fact-based argument for libertarianism is the wanton death & destruction that socialism always has wrought.

  That "growing anxiety" is misplaced, and should instead be directed toward government.

  Published: January 13, 2008 6:14 PM

• EotS

  I'm a staunch adherent to free market principles, so I often chuckle at free-marketers cheering Wal*Mart as a great representation of free markets at work.

  Wal*Mart is pushing hard for nationalized health care. Corporatism anyone?

  Published: January 13, 2008 6:20 PM

• Alan Andersen

  When free-marketers cheer Wal-Mart as a great representation of free markets at work, they are cheering the function, not the company's lobbying stance.

  Von Mises taught that any given action can have two separate components, so a person who sells products under market is still engaging the the free market as to the market price, and at the same time is making a charitable contribution as to the difference.

  Likewise, Wal-Mart is a free-marketeer as to its basic function, but is a national socialist as to its lobbying stance.
  

  Published: January 13, 2008 10:25 PM