Supporting Small Business vs. Saving

[smalllife]

In my area there are a lot of small and locally owned businesses, including two grocery stores, near my house.  I manage to avoid large national chains for just about everything else but groceries, where my desire to save occasionally takes precedence. 

Where do you all stand when it comes to supporting a local business (and spending a little more) vs. shopping at the major retailers (for the most savings)?

Personally I try to support the local businesses when I can, and purchase items at the mega-chain that do not have an equivalent at the local stores or are decidedly cheaper.  This generally leads to basic shopping - olive oil, butter, etc. - at the large store and everything else at the local store down the street.  It does help that they have a wonderful bulk section :-)

My reasons include: my money is more likely to stay in the community (that business pays their taxes in my city, state, and country), they pay their workers better (at least in my area), I am fighting oversized-business practices, and voting with my dollars.

Hopefully I didn't miss a thread when I searched for this topic, but I'm interested to see how others feel.

[c]

I almost always shop at small, local businesses rather than at chains.  Generally the prices are higher but I find the quality is better, for example when we eat meat we get it from the family butcher rather from the MetFoods.

For me it probably balances out in terms of cost, for example I spent a Sunday fixing my shower. The guy at the local hardware store talked me through every step of the way over multiple visits and even lent me his own tools.

If something is dramatically cheaper at a big box store I'll go there, e.g. when I needed 50 bags of gravel, they were $3 more a bag at the local hardware store so I went to Home Depot but I'm happy to pay the extra $1 here and there on other random things.

One of the reasons I chose to live where I do is that there are a lot of small, independent businesses here. I like that when I buy something it's usually from someone who specialized in whatever it is I'm buying, so there's a level of support I just don't get at chains.

[Deano]

I'm glad somebody brought this up. I brought up something similar in another thread (more about the ethics of shopping at some of the large chains) and it was crickets, not a single reply. I think a lot of mustachians have a problem on their hands. They save at the expense of the big picture.

For myself I do my best to shop local, shop small, shop sweat-shop free and keep my money in the community as much as possible. This is obviously difficult to do, but whenever the opportunity is there, I take it. I also do my best to avoid already profitable companies who destroy jobs when they don't have to.

Again, it doesn't always happen, but it's in my mind and I do my best.

[arebelspy]

It really depends on your core values, along with what is/isn't available (there aren't a ton of mom and pop small shops in Vegas, at least that I'm aware of).

Similar to people who don't invest in stocks in companies they don't agree with the practices of, one might not shop at a store whose practices they disagree with, regardless of the savings.

Of course, that is under the assumption that they actually disagree with the practices of these stores.  Many, for example, hate Wal Mart.  I'm a fan, and not just due to their prices (that's a whole long discussion I've had with people who are on the other side of that opinion, I think most arguments against Wal Mart are bunk ... and if you just tuned out my post due to that opinion, you need to look at how you take in information :) ).

If you hate Wal Mart, and refuse to shop there, I have respect for that.  If you hate it and shop there to save a buck, not so much.  If you're neutral on it, but think Mom and Pop stores deserve support, so you don't shop there, I respect that.  If you're neutral, want to support mom and pop, but shop at Wal Mart to save a buck, not so much.

The question really comes down to your core values.  There are many things I wouldn't do to save a buck.

But there are many things I would do, that others wouldn't.

Each has to decide for themselves, because each has to live with themselves.

Best of luck deciding the right path for you.

[Paul der Krake]

I am happy to support local businesses if and only if it makes sense economically for me to do so. I am very wary of local grocery stores getting away with ridiculous prices on produce "because it's local and we're the good guys, we swear". The farmers should be getting more money per pound of produce than from a a giant conglomerate, and the local store should have lower margins because of reduced overhead.

Right now, it seems to me than many small stores in my area only survive because of the charity of higher income customers rather than direct competition on quality and price.

[zug]

For groceries, it's an easy choice for me. The mexican mom and pop supermarket has better produce at lesser prices than Safeway. The local discount chain is cheaper, too. There is a WalMart, but I disagree with their labor practices so I do not patronize them, so I have no idea how their prices compare. I also have access to one of the best farmer's markets at the country, which I ought to patronize more than I do.

That said, I run into this problem with hardware stores. The local Ace hardware is closer than the big box store and has a pretty good selection, but the prices are noticeably higher. My solution to date has been to do a project starter at the big box store (i.e. buy everything I think I need) and then pick up things I forgot or missed at the local store. It isn't a perfect solution, but it allows me to patronize the local store as much as I can afford to while still being able to afford to do carpentry projects.

[c]

Right now, it seems to me than many small stores in my area only survive because of the charity of higher income customers rather than direct competition on quality and price.

I tend to avoid NYC farmers markets for this reason.

[Crash87]

I don't mind supporting local specialy shops at all if they fill a niche (bike repair, organic foods, etc.).

I don't shop anything local just because they are small.

[gooki]

For purchasing items that are simply imported and resold, my money goes to the cheapest outfit I can find. Which even means personal importing in some cases.

For goods that are made locally, I try to deal directly with the manufacturer. Failing that a NZ owned distributor/retailer.

[marty998]

Bought my bike at a local store. It was cheaper online but the store throws in a free service after 90 days.

A computer and internet connection is not going to provide the same personalised service.

Long live the local store & small business owner.

[Jack]

I would have liked to support the Ace hardware in my neighborhood instead of the Lowes two miles up the road, but it's not there anymore...

[CNM]

I frequently face this dilemma, not usually with grocery stores but with other consumer goods.  It is usually somewhat less expensive and definitely easier for me to order things off of Amazon than it is for me to make the time to go to a store, see if they have what I want, and wait in a line to checkout to buy a specific product.  So, I've tried to strike a balance.  If I find myself out of something, I will give myself a day or two to make it to the store.  If I don't then I buy online.

[Jamesqf]

It is usually somewhat less expensive and definitely easier for me to order things off of Amazon than it is for me to make the time to go to a store, see if they have what I want, and wait in a line to checkout to buy a specific product.

And much easier than to go visit several stores, and discover that none of them have what you're looking for.  UPS just delivered my new skis this morning - none of the local stores (including the REI branch) had anything close to what I wanted, took about 15 minutes to find on-line.  A decent pair of muck boots?  Not local, but type "rubber boots" into Amazon's search and there they were.  Same goes for just about everything I buy on-line.

[chucklesmcgee]

I always buy from the place that offers me the product I want at the lowest price. Usually that's Amazon.

It doesn't make sense to me to shop at another business because they pay their workers more. If I really cared about how much the workers made, I'd just donate a fraction of what I saved shopping at a big retailer directly to the employees of a local store. We'd both come out ahead.

[travelbug]

I also wonder about this and we do buy most of our food direct from the farmers.

BUT when it comes to other stuff I shop and bargain hard. I figure if I can buy an item cheaper at retail from another supplier why should I pay the extra? Sounds harsh but I am not going to put someone elses retirement before mine based on locality.

[arebelspy]

This reminds me of the long ethics of Mustachianism discussion we had a few months back.

Sol and Bakari would, I believe, have a different opinion than most have expressed in this thread.

[johnnylighthouse]

I think this is really a golden rule issue, at least as far as employment practices.  Would you honestly voluntarily accept the work conditions in these places?  I know I wouldn't.  It males me deeply uncomfortable to enjoy a low price on the back of someone who's work conditions I see as fundamentally unfair.   See http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/mac-mcclelland-free-online-shipping-warehouses-labor 

[arebelspy]

I think this is really a golden rule issue, at least as far as employment practices.  Would you honestly voluntarily accept the work conditions in these places?  I know I wouldn't.  It males me deeply uncomfortable to enjoy a low price on the back of someone who's work conditions I see as fundamentally unfair.   See http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/mac-mcclelland-free-online-shipping-warehouses-labor

I would work at Wal Mart.

I would not work at Amazon shipping warehouse (or other online one), unless a very dire situation arose (have to feed family and it's the only option).

Those are brutal.  (EDIT: just opened you link, see you linked to the same story I was thinking of.)

I shop at both.

[Jamesqf]

If I really cared about how much the workers made, I'd just donate a fraction of what I saved shopping at a big retailer directly to the employees of a local store.

Err..  Why do you think small/local retailers pay their workers more than large retailers do?

[Paul der Krake]

If I really cared about how much the workers made, I'd just donate a fraction of what I saved shopping at a big retailer directly to the employees of a local store.

Err..  Why do you think small/local retailers pay their workers more than large retailers do?

[citation needed]
In my experience, that's not the case at all. But then again, anecdotal evidence is meaningless. Maybe Grant or another numbers junkie has a nice chart of proving either hypothesis?

[johnnylighthouse]

I think chuckles was just making a hypothetical statement to underline that he still wouldn't care.

A quick search yielded this:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Empirical evidence suggests that employees at Wal-Mart earn lower average wages and receive lessgenerous benefits than workers employed by many other large retailers. But controversy has persist-ed on the question of Wal-Mart’s effect on local pay scales. Our research finds that Wal-Mart storeopenings lead to the replacement of better paying jobs with jobs that pay less. Wal-Mart’s entry alsodrives wages down for workers in competing industry segments such as grocery stores.

from: http://www.academia.edu/226583/A_Downward_Push_The_Impact_of_Wal-Mart_Stores_on_Retail_Wages_and_Benefits

[grantmeaname]

If I really cared about how much the workers made, I'd just donate a fraction of what I saved shopping at a big retailer directly to the employees of a local store.

Err..  Why do you think small/local retailers pay their workers more than large retailers do?

[citation needed]
In my experience, that's not the case at all. But then again, anecdotal evidence is meaningless. Maybe Grant or another numbers junkie has a nice chart of proving either hypothesis?

You called? 35% wage premium in favor of employees at larger firms.

[Deano]

If I really cared about how much the workers made, I'd just donate a fraction of what I saved shopping at a big retailer directly to the employees of a local store.

Err..  Why do you think small/local retailers pay their workers more than large retailers do?

[citation needed]
In my experience, that's not the case at all. But then again, anecdotal evidence is meaningless. Maybe Grant or another numbers junkie has a nice chart of proving either hypothesis?

You called? 35% wage premium in favor of employees at larger firms.

Has Walmart read this study?

[arebelspy]

Has Walmart read this study?

Do you think WalMart pays less to a stockboy than a mom and pop grocery store pays to a stockboy?

[johnnylighthouse]

Based on detailed payroll data Wal-Mart provided in the course of a sex-
discrimination lawsuit, we found that its average wages were $9.70/hr in 2001, and
that 54% earned under $9/hr. Since this sort of detailed data was only available for
2001, and such wage distributions were critical to estimate public assistance take-up,
we used this as the base year for our study. We compared Wal-Mart’s wages to those
paid by large retailers (retailers with 1000 or more workers) in California in 2001
using the Current Population Survey – a representative household dataset collected by
the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Census Bureau. We
found a 31% wage penalty for working at Wal-Mart.

from http://94.23.146.173/ficheros/0f290e7cac0c0514c2990f16dedf7dbd.pdf via google search for "walmart relative wages"

So not mom and pops but... I get the impression that walmart is not the kind of "larger firm" that grantmeaname's link is talking about.

[grantmeaname]

9.70 is a whole lot more than most small-shop retail workers were making in 2001, I'll wager. Plus, Walmart workers get benefits.

[Left]

not off on the walmart thing, but I do like going to the farmer's markets here, towards end of day when they are wanting to leave, they discount a lot. I can get entire trays of fruits/vegetables for $1-2. The meats are similarly priced.

I go to the large chain stores for convenience since they have more stocked up and are closer, but farmers markets are great for produce.

I know this isn't exactly mom and pop, but it's "local", local being anywhere from in the city to inside state/region.

[johnnylighthouse]

Assuming the large firms walmart was compared to offered the 35% premium you quoted above the small shops, the 31% walmart penalty would come out to 4% above the small shops?  Some but not a whole lot.  Also from my last link:

we estimate that many of the 52% of Wal-Mart workers
who are not receiving health benefits from Wal-Mart are enrolling in public health
programs like Medi-Cal and many of their children enrolling in Healthy Families.
Note that our methodology accounts for the fact that some individuals who have
spouses working at a company with more generous health insurance are opting into
such plans. The public plan enrollment is the focus of our study, and we estimate this
to cost around $32 million annually. Given the greater rate of job based health
coverage at large California retailers overall (61% as opposed to 48% in Wal-Mart),
Wal-Mart workers and family members utilize 40% more in such public health
expenditures than workers in large retailers overall in the state.

[grantmeaname]

So Walmart pays health insurance for one-seventh fewer of its workers than the average large california retailer? That's hardly earth-shaking.

[Bakari]

This reminds me of the long ethics of Mustachianism discussion we had a few months back.

Sol and Bakari would, I believe, have a different opinion than most have expressed in this thread.

I don't know about "most" - the first three reflected my stance pretty much exactly.  I do sometimes get groceries from FoodMax, but its mostly things the local grocer doesn't carry.  I'll often get things online, but I'll give preference to a non-amazon shop if its an option.  I believe in true free markets - i.e. perfect competition, i.e. small independent business, but I'm not strict about it.


That study that shows the 35% better wages for employees of large firms seems to be looking at overall numbers, and not controlling for variables, so it may not be directly relevant to this question:
"The ... selection of employees ... are responsible for the positive relation between wages and employer size."
"Large firms demand a higher... education, job tenure, and a higher fraction of full-time workers."

Unless you compare employees with the same education, work hours, etc, then you can't use relative wage data to say whether any given worker would be better off at a small or large firm.

I offer as counter evidence:
http://www.ilsr.org/key-studies-walmart-and-bigbox-retail/
"Independent businesses spend more on local labor"
"the arrival of a Wal-Mart store reduces total county-wide retail payroll by an average of about $1.2 million"
"...2,953 counties, including both rural and urban places, and find that, after controlling for other factors that influence growth, those with a larger density of small, locally owned businesses experienced greater per capita income growth"
The website lists about 40 independent studies that put hard numbers on the negative impact of big chains on local economies.

And, while we probably don't want to hear it, this is what we should expect, since in addition to paying for wholesale purchases, overhead, and labor, corporations also have to come up with dividends to pay its shareholders - in other words, all of us!  That money has to come from somewhere.  Economies of scale only go so far, so if a company wants to both have the lowest prices, and provide good dividends, it has to reduce costs.  If it is going to have quality product, the only place left to give is wages.

[arebelspy]

This reminds me of the long ethics of Mustachianism discussion we had a few months back.

Sol and Bakari would, I believe, have a different opinion than most have expressed in this thread.

I don't know about "most" - the first three reflected my stance pretty much exactly. 

Fair enough.  I meant comments like:

I am happy to support local businesses if and only if it makes sense economically for me to do so.

I don't shop anything local just because they are small.

my money goes to the cheapest outfit I can find.

I always buy from the place that offers me the product I want at the lowest price.

I shop and bargain hard. I figure if I can buy an item cheaper at retail from another supplier why should I pay the extra?

Those were the most recent comments when I made that post.

My stance, as before, is that each has to live with themselves based on their core values.  Do what you know is right.

[grantmeaname]

Good find, Bakari. Now I just need to find the time to go through it all.

And, while we probably don't want to hear it, this is what we should expect, since in addition to paying for wholesale purchases, overhead, and labor, corporations also have to come up with dividends to pay its shareholders - in other words, all of us!  That money has to come from somewhere.  Economies of scale only go so far, so if a company wants to both have the lowest prices, and provide good dividends, it has to reduce costs.  If it is going to have quality product, the only place left to give is wages.

This may be intuitively sensible, but it's also probably wrong.
The dividends the company pays are part of its cost of capital, but Mom and Pop both want a return on their life savings that they put in, and the bank wants interest on that loan, too. Ma is a shrewd negotiatior if the interest rate on the lease is less than the 2.33% dividend Walmart paid out last year. So both businesses have to pay for their capital, but Walmart's is likely cheaper.

What about the products? Large businesses have more price power in the marketplace and can negotiate things like sole-supplier agreements to decrease the costs that they pay. Since they manage their own shipping and warehousing in many cases, they may pay less to move the inventory around, as well. Both businesses have to contend with theft and spoilage, but you can bet your ass it's more rigorously monitored at Walmart. So Walmart could easily pay a dramatically lower price than Pa when it orders widgets. Some elements of overhead may have diseconomies of scale, but many business support services are really remarkably cheap when you're dividing by a large enough denominator of sales.

[johnnylighthouse]

You're right that its not earth shaking, and its not a matter of big vs small either, but it is a fact that Walmart pays less than other large retailers and offers fewer benefits.  So I choose not to shop there.  I agree that not everything about their business model is bad, but thats enough for me.

I don't mind shopping at large and mid-sized stores in general although I do often patronize small and or local businesses when available as long as there isn't too much of a premium.

[arebelspy]

You're right that its not earth shaking, and its not a matter of big vs small either, but it is a fact that Walmart pays less than other large retailers and offers fewer benefits.  So I choose not to shop there.  I agree that not everything about their business model is bad, but thats enough for me.

I don't mind shopping at large and mid-sized stores in general although I do often patronize small and or local businesses when available as long as there isn't too much of a premium.

I think that's awesome that you vote with your dollars.  Absolutely the way to do it.

[Jamesqf]

I offer as counter evidence:
http://www.ilsr.org/key-studies-walmart-and-bigbox-retail/
"Independent businesses spend more on local labor"
"the arrival of a Wal-Mart store reduces total county-wide retail payroll by an average of about $1.2 million"

I believe this is called efficiency.  That is, if you have N smaller stores, each will serve a share of the total customer base.  So if when I do today's shopping, I need something from a drug store, auto parts store, clothes store, and grocery, I would have to go around to four different stores, spend time having the cashier ring up my purchases and paying, etc.  If I go to WalMart (or similar retailer), all those purchases are rung up by the same cashier, and I pay once.  Further, in smaller stores the cashiers are likely spending more idle time, because there are fewer customers.

We could even take the smaller business thing further, as for instance the 19th century model of several separate stores - butcher, greengrocer, dry goods, etc - for the things we now buy all at the same supermarket.

[Bakari]

The dividends the company pays are part of its cost of capital, but Mom and Pop both want a return on their life savings that they put in, and the bank wants interest on that loan, too. Ma is a shrewd negotiatior if the interest rate on the lease is less than the 2.33% dividend Walmart paid out last year...

Ma and Pa's return come in the form of their income.  The paycheck of the CEO and upper management of a corporation are considered labor costs, not profit.  If the total income of all executive level employees of the corporation is greater than the net income of Ma and Pa, then that's already an additional amount of money that has to come from somewhere, and that's before even considering dividends. 
As far as the lease, both large and small companies need to lease the building/land the store is on - the majority of commercial real estate isn't owned by the company working in it. 

Now, you are right in implying that the total average historic dividend rate of 4.5% is much less than the average business loan of 5-7%, however if the business is more than 5-10 years old, it has most likely paid off its start-up loan, and from there on pays nothing.  While that initial interest is being amortized into the lifetime of the business, dividends keep being paid out forever.

[smalllife]

So if when I do today's shopping, I need something from a drug store, auto parts store, clothes store, and grocery, I would have to go around to four different stores, spend time having the cashier ring up my purchases and paying, etc. 

I keep waiting for someone to implement a food court style supermarket: you go into a building and have different stands for vendors.  Baker, butcher, produce, home care, and other assorted businesses would be one the walls.  A massive bulk section would be in the center, along with other food products depending on the local demand. The company who owns the building can be national to save on overhead, but the "shops" would be local/regional.  Best of both worlds :-)

To get back on topic, what always stops me from shopping at the huge multi-national corporations are the byproducts of their size.  They can bully the manufacturers overseas into making the cheapest goods possible (and I would argue that this is a bad thing - it comes at the expense of the environment, the workers, and the quality of materials) and buy legislation and its resulting tax breaks/favorable business atmosphere/etc.  I'd rather pay a little more so that I know that the taxes the business pays go back into my country, state, and county if possible.  Even if it is going into the pockets of the CEO, that CEO likely plays golf on a local range, frequents local restaurants, and so on. 

[Dynasty]

 

I keep waiting for someone to implement a food court style supermarket: you go into a building and have different stands for vendors.  Baker, butcher, produce, home care, and other assorted businesses would be one the walls.  A massive bulk section would be in the center, along with other food products depending on the local demand. The company who owns the building can be national to save on overhead, but the "shops" would be local/regional.  Best of both worlds :-)

Closest I've seen to this is the Pike Place Market in Seattle.  There is the B&I in Tacoma. When I was in Pittsburgh months back, there was a place similar as well. Cannot remember the name.

Basically what you are asking for is a mall that also sells groceries. 

[smalllife]

Basically what you are asking for is a mall that also sells groceries.

A mall has nothing useful in it.  What I want is a "supermarket" full of local vendors surrounding a bulk goods section and other items that are not practical to sell through local vendors.

*Edited quote bracket

[chucklesmcgee]

I think this is really a golden rule issue, at least as far as employment practices.  Would you honestly voluntarily accept the work conditions in these places?  I know I wouldn't.

Really, so you don't support any business where you wouldn't voluntarily accept working in a position at that business?

80 hour nonstop shifts cleaning bedpans as a resident in a hospital? No thanks. Guess I won't go to hospitals anymore and only to private practices where they usually work 6-7 hours a day and take an hour or two off for lunch.

Any form of picking crops? Look, I don't care if you gave me $40/hr, I would not spend hours out in the hot sun, hunched over picking strawberries or whatever, developing carpal tunnel. Guess I'll never buy anything from a strawberry company.

Septic system maintenance? Portapotty cleaning? Guess I'll just use a bush.

[Jamesqf]

To get back on topic, what always stops me from shopping at the huge multi-national corporations are the byproducts of their size.  They can bully the manufacturers overseas into making the cheapest goods possible...

Only because the customers are willing to buy cheap (= shoddy, not necessarily inexpensive) goods.  Small retailers are (in general) perfectly willing to buy the same goods, and sell them to their own customers at a higher markup.

[smalllife]

To get back on topic, what always stops me from shopping at the huge multi-national corporations are the byproducts of their size.  They can bully the manufacturers overseas into making the cheapest goods possible...

Only because the customers are willing to buy cheap (= shoddy, not necessarily inexpensive) goods.  Small retailers are (in general) perfectly willing to buy the same goods, and sell them to their own customers at a higher markup.

Very true - and I don't frequent those businesses either if I can help it.  I guess I'm spoiled by the availability of small, local retailers who focus on local or handmade goods.  I still have a butcher shop within three miles, a soap maker five blocks away (great soap btw), and a plethora of second hand stores.  Groceries are the one piece of my spending that I don't have a small, local business I can frequent regularly.  There is one shop but outside of the bulk food and produce it is pretty overpriced (the same organic brands as the large retailers but with a higher mark up).  I end up getting what I can at the small store - most basics, dry goods, random ingredients - and the non-organic/prepared foods from the supermarket.  Hence my dilemma.

[Done by Forty]

Some food for thought from You Are Not So Smart...

http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/04/12/selling-out/

[sheepstache]

Part of what I struggle with is that "small" and "local" and shit are trendy now.  I don't know whether $8 is what a loaf of bread actually costs or the stores can charge that much because their clientele is of the upscale bougie variety. 

Personally I want to belong to a CSA because, without the middleman and sticking to what's seasonal, there should be some savings or at least on a par with regular grocery produce in exchange for supporting small, local farms (and forcing myself to eat more vegetables).  But now it's a thing and all these middle-class over-caffeinated wonder moms are into it so most of the options end up being certified organic.  Fortunately now I'm in a lower-income neighborhood I found one that does organic-but-not-certified.

Only because the customers are willing to buy cheap (= shoddy, not necessarily inexpensive) goods.

Conversely, sometimes I just want the cheapest, shoddiest thing that will do the job.  Do I need high-quality ergonomically-designed kitchen tongs?  No.  So I just got them from the 99-cent store.  Once when I'd been out of work for a long time I needed a particular drill bit size for a job, so I bought it from the 99-cent store knowing it didn't have to last any longer than the job and it didn't make sense to spend my dwindling savings on anything I didn't need, even quality.  But frequently the mom-n-pop places or "made in america" stuff is a higher quality than I'm willing to pay for because it's higher quality than I need.  I can see why since they're standing behind their products in a much more personal way they would want to sell rock-solid things, but there it is.


I don't know if this is super relevant, but I thought this post in response to Obama's SOTU mention of minimum wage was interesting.
http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/02/13/debating-the-minimum-wage/
I've always assumed, like some economists, that higher minimum wage means fewer people are employed because their labor is worth less than the minimum wage.  Or that by couching it in terms of what a self-supporting individual or head of household needs the debate ignores workers like high school students or stay at home parents looking to work part-time to add some "fun money" to the household budget, people, in other words, who would rather work for a low hourly wage than not at all.
The study cited at the end seems particularly interesting:

The main point to realize is that jobs aren’t like tomatoes, where if the price goes up, people purchase less of them.  In fact, studies have found that increasing minimum wage at fast-food restaurants, for example, ends up increasing job stability, which in turn is good for the employer (it costs a lot of money to train newbies) and ends up saving them money.  In the meantime, of course, the working poor, because they have so many needs, spend their new-found money faster than any other group, which in turn, boosts overall consumer spending.

[Deano]

Has Walmart read this study?

Do you think WalMart pays less to a stockboy than a mom and pop grocery store pays to a stockboy?

Not any more. They've effectively driven down wages. Mission accomplished. You can pat yourself on the back for helping out in that?

[grantmeaname]

Any evidence for that theory?

[arebelspy]

Any evidence for that theory?

I didn't bother responding, but my favorite part of the comment was where he did the opposite of the tragedy of the commons, and placed the blame on me!  :D

[Deano]

First thing Google came up with. Also found it in EbscoHost, it's peer reviewed. I have a friend working on a similar study at York University here in Canada, he hasn't published yet, but the effect has been the same here, though we are protected by a minimum wage that is somewhat better here (not to mention healthcare for everyone).

http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/retail/walmart_downward_push07.pdf

Oh, and "opposite of the tragedy of the commons"? I know full well what the tragedy of the commons is, but your comment made no sense. Sorry.

Hope you don't think I'm getting testy with you folks, I really like the forum here, but I find the idea of "saving the world through non-consumerism" at odds with patronizing big box stores, particularly Walmart. People hate to be called out, I get it, so do I. People defend what they do and how they think, particularly those with the zeal of the newly converted.

[arebelspy]

Oh, and "opposite of the tragedy of the commons"? I know full well what the tragedy of the commons is, but your comment made no sense. Sorry.

Think about it more.  You'll get there.

Hope you don't think I'm getting testy with you folks, I really like the forum here, but I find the idea of "saving the world through non-consumerism" at odds with patronizing big box stores, particularly Walmart.

Most of us agree.  We also just find agreeing for the sake of agreeing gains no one any knowledge, and unsubstantiated claims quite useless.

I don't think any of us minds a little back and forth (and indeed, welcome it), so don't worry about us thinking you're getting "testy."  Everything you've posted has been 100% fine, IMO.

[Bakari]

Deano, too bad you missed all the long involved threads on the morality of early retirement.

They were very long indeed, I summarized some highlights on my blog here: http://biodieselhauling.blogspot.com/2012/12/comments-from-mmm-economics-philosophy.html

(and by "highlights", I really mean "my comments" :P but there are links back to the original thread as well.)
After that one, there are 4 more similar and related ones.

This whole thread fits in very nicely with those discussions, and personally, I believe it is one of, if not the key issues in the modern global economy, and the direct cause of our historic levels of wealth inequality