Media bias--the Wall Street Journal
According to a study done in December 2005 by a political scientist at UCLA, the Wall Street Journal is more liberal than the New York Times, LA times, CBS and the rest. See article in UCLA News. Surprised? Well, look at today's news stories:CONSUMER PRICES FALL, BUT. . .
WHY IT TAKES A DOCTORATE TO BEAT INFLATION.
E BAY PROFIT RISES, BUT. . .
UPHILL HIKE FOR REPUBLICANS
OIL PRICE DROP CHALLENGES OPEC UNITY
SUPPORT FOR CONGRESS SLIDES FURTHER
HOW H-P KEPT TABS ON A WSJ REPORTER
WAL-MART SLOW-DOWN
DOW HITS 12000 FOR FIRST TIME IN HISTORY, BUT FELL SHORT AT CLOSING
INSURERS BASK IN SUN AND PROFITS AFTER NO HURRICANES
MORE HOME LOANS GO SOUR
IRS IS CRACKING DOWN ON POPULAR DEFERRAL STRATEGY
ELI LILY HAD A HAND IN DRUG GUIDELINES
I always enjoy reading this paper, but its social science slant in the basic news stories really bugs me. There is never good economic news for the ordinary citizen, the middle class American. The investor in a pension plan. No. Only the grubby, greedy rich. And poor? The sob stories the WSJ
Their anti-Wal-Mart stories are frequent. Today's superimposed a rectangle over the map of Manhattan to show that Wal-Mart covers 17.88 sq. miles of floor space with 3,289 stores (not counting Sam's Club), and that its 1.3 million employees could fill every major league stadium. Is this even relevant? Does this graph mean anything to someone outside NYC? George Wills, on the other hand, says it a bit differently: Wal-Mart is the most prodigious job creator in history; by lowering consumer prices, it adds 100 jobs for every 50 competitors lose; Wal-Mart saves consumers more than $200 billion a year, dwarfing food stamps and earned income tax credits; and of course, Chicago didn't want Wal-Mart inside the city, so the suburbs are getting the business taxes and the employees' jobs.
Pro-business could be pro-American, unless you work for the Wall Street Journal. It's called biting the hand that feeds you.
Wall Street Journal
media bias
Wal-Mart
Posts
4 comments:
You know, this was 13 headlines...
Interesting ones too. Even for me, the forreigner :-)
"George Wills, on the other hand, says it a bit differently: Wal-Mart is the most prodigious job creator in history; by lowering consumer prices, it adds 100 jobs for every 50 competitors lose; Wal-Mart saves consumers more than $200 billion a year, dwarfing food stamps and earned income tax credits; and of course, Chicago didn't want Wal-Mart inside the city, so the suburbs are getting the business taxes and the employees' jobs."
The Chicago City Council basically told Wal-Mart that CostCo and other big box stores in Chicago can pay a living wage and benefits -- why can't Wal-Mart?
They didn't have an answer.
Yes, it's true that they've created a lot of jobs and saved consumers a lot of money, but that's because they pay low wages to the majority of their workers, force out local competition and import most of their goods from Red China, sacrificing American manufacturing jobs.
They also cost the communities and states where their stores are located billions in increased health care and even food stamp (!) costs due to their lack of adequate benefits and low wages.
To do business with Communist nations that sacrifice American manufacturing jobs, force local small businesses to close, and compel your hard-working employees to use emergency rooms for health care doesn't impress me as the best way to make things better for our country.
There's no free lunch: We're paying a very high price in the long run for lower Wal-Mart prices now.
"import most of their goods from Red China, sacrificing American manufacturing jobs."
I can go into any high priced retailer and pay $100 for a pair of shoes or $200 for slacks, look at the tag, and it will be from China. Anti-Wal-Mart whining is about trying to destroy a successful American business.
Costco isn't paying what they wanted Wal-mart to pay. It's the unions that are unhappy, not the employees.
"I can go into any high priced retailer and pay $100 for a pair of shoes or $200 for slacks, look at the tag, and it will be from China. Anti-Wal-Mart whining is about trying to destroy a successful American business."
Of course you can, but that doesn't change my original point: We are paying a price down the road for doing business with Red China. In fact, right now, China is lending us money to keep our economy viable. We need to start making things in this country again, for our own survival.
"Costco isn't paying what they wanted Wal-mart to pay. It's the unions that are unhappy, not the employees."
CostCo pays much higher wages and benefits than Wal-Mart and it has excellent employee retention rates, compared to Wal-Mart. It's top officers also make no more than 20 percent more in salsry than the lowest-paid employee. That has nothing to do with any union, and it met the Chicago standard.
Excuse me, but do you work for Wal-Mart, Norma?
Post a Comment