Do you think Wal-Mart is instrumental in the redistribution of wealth?

Question

How else to define it? Wal Mart allows people to buy goods that were at one time barred by economics.

Answer 1

Walmart gives poor ppl the oppportunty yo buy some things rich ppl like

Answer 2

The the extent that the growing income inequality is a product of trade with low wage countries Walmart can be seen as a symbol of the of the redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich. However it there were no Walmart some other stores would be selling the imported products.

Answer 3

I wouldn't call it a "redistribution" of wealth. Wal-Mart hasn't made poor people rich, and hasn't caused rich people to lose money. It's just more $ for the rich who own Wal-Mart.

Being able to buy a few consumer goods does not constitute distribution of wealth.

Answer 4

.....Maybe if the goods and service were free...
The instrumental for redistribution of wealth is executed by the government, not for private company because this activity does not create economics benefits..
The goals to redistribute the wealth are political and social, not economical...at less in the present. A policy of redistribute of wealth can produce economics benefits for the society in the long run.
Walt Mart only wants to make more money that they did...

Answer 5

Others have very well answered this question.However Wal-Marts impact does create some perplexing question in communities as well in union circles examples;1-Business influenced town government oppose retail operation in there area but enjoy the TAX benifits.2-Unions feel threatened but many jobs are created by Wal-Mart business(Local 375 largest account).Also,consumers support can not be over looked-Americans have SPOKEN.

Answer 6

Wal Mart keeps poor people poor by paying them crap and giving lousy benefits. They are only making themselves richer.