> Walmart is one of the most heavily subsidized businesses on Earth. Directly you have agricultural subsidies but another is food stamps paid to Walmart employees [1] as well as Medicaid. Why? Because Walmart pays below a living wage.
No, food stamps are a subsidy /against/ Walmart, not for it. They're paid to the worker and increase the worker's negotiating power. An example of a subsidy to Walmart would be wage supplements used to get businesses to hire low-functioning disabled people.
Although if you're also arguing Medicaid is a subsidy for Walmart you might just be fedposting (as leftists call it now) or a wrecker (as they used to call it). Do you think any good thing in the world is a subsidy for Walmart simply because it's not being forced to pay for all of it? Because you're arguing against food stamps and Medicaid here, two good things.
> If you buy from Walmart, you're paying the Walton family, Blackstone, Vanguard and all the other shareholders (or capital owners).
BlackRock[0] and Vanguard don't "own capital", they manage retirement funds. The people who own the retirement funds own the capital. That would be you.
[0] not Blackstone. People on social media seem to confuse these two a lot, like with that totally false claim that houses are expensive because BlackRock bought them all.
> Also, Walmart is known for setting up in a town, selling their products at below cost to kill all local businesses and then jacking up the prices, if not leaving outright, creating a new food desert.
The evidence is fairly strong that food deserts are mainly caused by a confusing definition of "food deserts".
No, food stamps are a subsidy /against/ Walmart, not for it. They're paid to the worker and increase the worker's negotiating power. An example of a subsidy to Walmart would be wage supplements used to get businesses to hire low-functioning disabled people.
Although if you're also arguing Medicaid is a subsidy for Walmart you might just be fedposting (as leftists call it now) or a wrecker (as they used to call it). Do you think any good thing in the world is a subsidy for Walmart simply because it's not being forced to pay for all of it? Because you're arguing against food stamps and Medicaid here, two good things.
> If you buy from Walmart, you're paying the Walton family, Blackstone, Vanguard and all the other shareholders (or capital owners).
BlackRock[0] and Vanguard don't "own capital", they manage retirement funds. The people who own the retirement funds own the capital. That would be you.
[0] not Blackstone. People on social media seem to confuse these two a lot, like with that totally false claim that houses are expensive because BlackRock bought them all.
> Also, Walmart is known for setting up in a town, selling their products at below cost to kill all local businesses and then jacking up the prices, if not leaving outright, creating a new food desert.
The evidence is fairly strong that food deserts are mainly caused by a confusing definition of "food deserts".
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskEconomics/comments/1cpp9yp/comme...