Any opinions on whether Walmart has either hurt or helped the economy and business environment in the US?

Also, opinions on outsourcing to offshore manufacturing, programming, web design etc.. Is it good or bad for the US?

I have never and will never give a single dime to wal mart. I believe in capitalism, and I believe in my right to vote with my dollars. Wal mart can exist and I can choose not to shop there. On the other hand, I am upset by the corporate welfare that wal mart has found a way to extort from the tax payers in terms of health care subsidies. Once that loop hole is closed, if wal mart can continue to sustain itself and keep the low prices, then more power to them. I prefer to shop at my local small shops as much as possible. I try to buy american made as much as possible, although I had some difficulty recently. I wanted to get some red wing shoes and I had the worst time ever trying to find a store that even had the ones I wanted and once I did they were 150$ for some hiking shoes. Oh well ,sometime you can't help but buy nikes. I do ride a harley and drive a chevy though!

The Walmart topic has been bashed to death here, heh. I know you are interested in feedback, but can I suggest you scroll back through some of the threads and maybe understand if this does not generate a lot of replies.

Of course, folks may be inclined to repeat themselves.

Edit:

And Phel, I too ride Harley and drive American made cars, and prefer shopping the small corner business over the box. I would dearly love to see an in-depth analysis of the number of jobs created/wages paid versus the number of jobs lost/lost wages as a result of Walmart's business practices.

I always like the healthcare argument. Why does everyone think that all the jobs Walmart "takes away" were full time jobs with healthcare? They aren't. The precious "mom and pop" stores that Walmart "kills" had 2 or 3 full time employees. The rest were part time. No healthcare.

Redwings are a smaller, more expensive brand. Of course, my dad wears his Red Wing boots for about 10 years each. If you want cheap, go NIke.

All these things, in the end, are good for the U.S. Actually, not just good, necessary. If the economy stands still and nothing changes, that means your standard of living cannot go up. You cannot do better than your parents, and your kids cannot do better than you.

We took agriculture and manufacturing jobs from Europe. Now China takes them from us. 100 years or more from now, someone will take them from CHina.

Why does everyone think that all the jobs Walmart "takes away" were full time jobs with healthcare? They aren't. The precious "mom and pop" stores that Walmart "kills" had 2 or 3 full time employees. The rest were part time. No healthcare.


You might want to research this argument a bit more. Walmart's purchasing contracts have destroyed a number of businesses, who have found that once locked into Walmart's aggressive arrangements of steadily lower payment for goods received they have had to reduce workforces or outsource or fold, thereby putting untold numbers of folks out of work, many of whom were fulltime, long-term workers receiving full benefits. It is not just the local shops impacted, it is also the suppliers whose goods Walmart sells to the consumer.

Personally, I don't like the Wal-mart mentality. Increased standard of living? Not really. More like increased amount of throwaway junk people can afford to buy and pack the landfills with.

They may employ a lot of people, but does that really compensate for all of the businesses they've driven into the ground? I doubt anyone would work at Wal-mart, given the opportunity to work at a local outfit doing the same job. One job gained doesn't necessarily equal one job lost.

I get tired of the Walmart argument simply because everyone I know who harps on it and says "I don't like Target much either but I'll NEVER set foot in a Walmart" does as much of their shopping as they can online.

Which, you know, really supports their argument. They disagree, of course, when I point that out.

The Walmart topic has been bashed to death here, heh. I know you are interested in feedback, but can I suggest you scroll back through some of the threads and maybe understand if this does not generate a lot of replies.

Of course, folks may be inclined to repeat themselves.


there is also a part 2 of my question it concerns outsourcing jobs to overseas firms. Mostly I was wondering what the effect has been on the people that visit this board.

No big deal though, no one needs answer either.

Eh, as busy as my life generally is I'm glad I have a Walmart nearby.

I can hit all my shopping in one stop and get home to enjoy spending time with my son and on the weekends with my gf and our kids.

Fandros

there is also a part 2 of my question it concerns outsourcing jobs to overseas firms.


I am very much against outsourcing, as it has allowed many companies to renege on negotiated agreements with their employess in order to provide stock holders with better dividends. On a personal note, my family had had an AOL account for about 6 years, and after noticing it was not being used by anyone anymore, we submitted in writing the exact information specified by AOL to cancel the account; this was replied to by a postcard received approximately three weeks later stating that to cancel the account we would need to call a 1-800- number and provide the exact same information we had already provided. Upon calling the number, we were greeted by an extremely rude citizen of INDIA, who then kept us on the line for the next ten minutes with threats to keep the account active as long as he pleased. AMERICA ON LINE accounts controlled by minimum wage workers in INDIA is a good enough reason to say HELL NO to outsourcing.:p

I must have missed the health care issue with Walmart..... can someone briefly summerize how walmart is affecting health care?

citizen of INDIA, who then kept us on the line for the next ten minutes


I once called a software company for support and the worker at the Indian phone bank asked me to confirm my address in Penisylvania. Was great trying to explain the issue while trying not to laugh.

Wow, how could someone possibly not be aware of the wal mart health insurance issue. Anyway, here it is. Complain about the site all you want, but it was the first to come up in a google search.



http://www.ufcw.org/worker_political_agenda/where_we_stand/health_care_reform/walmart.cfm

You can say what you want about Wal*Mart's health care, but they do indeed have no maximums; and maybe you all got a cooshy job with the county or something, but my healthcare coverage has gone to shit as well. My Assoc+Child coverage went up $800 this year AND I got an added $500 deductable AND I went to an 80-20 plan instead of a co-pay.

About half of Wal*Mart's 1.6M employees are covered by health insurance (that's total employees, not full-time), and like most employers, Wal*Mart pays about 60% of the cost of that health insurance and pays their employees above the national average. I'm not sure if Del Taco offers a similar plan deal.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I buy named-brand mostly-made-in-America goods from the Wal*Mart near me, because (a) they're 24 hours (like me!) and I can't get a case of Danasi or a Hanes t-shirt any cheaper anywhere else.

Someone's going to tell me to stop shopping at Ikea soon too, I can feel it.

EDIT: I meant to ramble on about having no maximums... ...it's a big deal, kids. I got caps on both ends of my "good" insurance from my "good" company.

Well, in my neck of the woods, Wal-Mart has gone to shit. Just like K-Mart did. The place is dirty and it smells funny. English is also a second language there. Not that I'm prejudiced or anything, I just feel funny when someone that walks past me, speaking a different language, laughing and pointing. I like to know what I'm being called so I can respond appropriately.

Fortunately for W-Mart, Target built a place right down the street. Now they have justification for building the Super W-Mart. Maybe the new store will smell better and I can learn Spanish again...

Well, in my neck of the woods, Wal-Mart has gone to shit. Just like K-Mart did. The place is dirty and it smells funny. English is also a second language there. Not that I'm prejudiced or anything, I just feel funny when someone that walks past me, speaking a different language, laughing and pointing. I like to know what I'm being called so I can respond appropriately.

Fortunately for W-Mart, Target built a place right down the street. Now they have justification for building the Super W-Mart. Maybe the new store will smell better and I can learn Spanish again...

Tranzure we must live in the same place. It's the same thing here. Where I live there are two Walmarts, two Kmarts, and two Targets. Both Walmarts and Kmarts are filthy and I am not kidding. There is shit all over the isles to the point of not being able to push a buggy through them. They are full of people whom I frankly keep my eye on when I am in there and the customer service is shit. The one closest to the city has been robbed at gun point twice this year. Allot of inner city folk take the bus to Wally World and Kmart, I'm not being predujice these are the facts of where I live.

I take my business to Target usually. It might be more expensive and further away but it's less crowded, clean, and I don't feel like I have to watch every person around me every second I'm in the store. There are times where the convienence of Walmart will suck me in but I do my best to avoid it.

I do however shop at SAMS, it's not that I have anything against Walmart I just don't like the cliental(sp) who shop there.

My biggest gripes are the fact they in my moms town of Cleveland, TN

They built the UBER walmart with EVERYTHING and 22 buisnesses shutdown within 18 months.

Also, Wal-mart had that huge "Buy American" and now because they force vendors to lower prices they have increase dramatically the number of outsourced jobs to other countries. Will try to find the article i was reading about NAFTA and how Wal-mart is just waiting for a couple small changes and then mexico will be the Mecca of textile manufacturign

Well, in my neck of the woods, Wal-Mart has gone to shit. Just like K-Mart did. The place is dirty and it smells funny.


In several of the towns I have worked in over the past years, including my hometown, when the store gets really filthy, they build a new one and move (wish I could afford to do that @ home - I'd never clean house!):p

it concerns outsourcing jobs to overseas firms.


From a tech support standpoint, this has become allmost unbelieveable. Call, get some help desk in another country, and spend the next 30 mins being asked "Is it plugged in? Is it turned on? etc..."

If I'm calling tech support, you can bet I have exhausted all the options, usually identified the problem and are calling to get a RMA to return something defective. It's aggrevating.

I do ride a harley and drive a chevy though!

And Phel, I too ride Harley and drive American made cars

Much <3!

Of course some of my clients look at me a bit strange this time of year when I stop, strip off the chaps, gloves, etc.. and walk into their server room ;) I guess if you ride, you aren't supposed to know anything about a computer :p

Phel, thanks for the link.... after reading it I can solve the problem.... if you don't like the Health Care there then ..... *drum roll* ... don't work there ! :)

Or work two jobs..... or work it out and make ends meet... I managed to do it as a married college student....making less than 12k a year (that was combined for both of us).

Why is it always someone elses fault?

Well, in my neck of the woods, Wal-Mart has gone to shit. Just like K-Mart did. The place is dirty and it smells funny. English is also a second language there. Not that I'm prejudiced or anything, I just feel funny when someone that walks past me, speaking a different language, laughing and pointing. I like to know what I'm being called so I can respond appropriately.

Fortunately for W-Mart, Target built a place right down the street. Now they have justification for building the Super W-Mart. Maybe the new store will smell better and I can learn Spanish again...

I smell Pennsylvania here. Same thing here where I am.

Although I don't ride a Harley, in fact, I don't ride anything, I'm told I look like I do. I suppose it's the burns, goate and pony tail...

Excuse me Ma'm, yes...take the floppy out and hit the space bar. Next!

What I think about Wal-mart. JibJab (http://www.jibjab.com/Home.aspx)

Click on the Big Box Mart.

I am not a Wal-Mart fan. I do, however, give them credit where credit is due. They are making improvements to my local Wal-Mart, including a nail salon, additional aisle spaces, upgraded displays and shelves/rounders, banking, a good swabbing of the deck, a Nathan's Hot Dogs/Subway,...it really is much better than it was six months ago. I still shop at Target, unless it's 2am...:p

Is Wal-Mart (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walmart) better for the US economy? I think you can answer that yourself.

I smell Pennsylvania here. Same thing here where I am.
Tranzure we must live in the same place.
I live in a small town in California just south of Fresburgh.

We have a large Hispanic population (which is why I should learn Spanish). This is not necessarily why the W-Mart is filthy. It's filthy because the slack-jawed yokles that work there are too f**k'n lazy/unmotivated/retarded to do a decent job cleaning. They also need to realize that after 10 years of people spilling shit on the carpets, they should replace them.

Instead, they are going to just build a Super W and abandon the turd hole. I'm sure someone will put yet another $1.00 store in it's place...

Speaking of up and moving when one gets trashed.

They are trying to do that here. In fact they are hoping to build a huge Super Center in my township in what is a corn field. The people here are fighting it tooth and nail, there are signs hanging from barns and in yards no one wants it.

We have a large Hispanic population (which is why I should learn Spanish). This is not necessarily why the W-Mart is filthy. It's filthy because the slack-jawed yokles that work there are too f**k'n lazy/unmotivated/retarded to do a decent job cleaning.I visited the Wal-Mart while in Cancun, and although the store looked to be about 5 years old, it was in remarkably good shape, especially considering the amount of traffic they had at the time. And it wasn't in the middle of tourist heaven either, it was downtown Cancun where you have to tip the cabbies extra to take you. And I am fairly certain I was the only tourist in the entire place.

So I checked out the prices thinking I'd be able to buy some super dirt cheat stuff. Nope. Roughly the same price on everything after the exchange rates, and there were tons of custorms there in the middle of the day. It was like one of those mad rushes we have right before it snows where it's a law you have to go buy bread and milk before it's all gone - that many customers.

I visited the Wal-Mart while in Cancun, and although the store looked to be about 5 years old, it was in remarkably good shape, especially considering the amount of traffic they had at the time. And it wasn't in the middle of tourist heaven either, it was downtown Cancun where you have to tip the cabbies extra to take you. And I am fairly certain I was the only tourist in the entire place.

So I checked out the prices thinking I'd be able to buy some super dirt cheat stuff. Nope. Roughly the same price on everything after the exchange rates, and there were tons of custorms there in the middle of the day. It was like one of those mad rushes we have right before it snows where it's a law you have to go buy bread and milk before it's all gone - that many customers.

Sounds like my experience in Nice, France with a store called Auchan (I think, Anterak can correct me). I swear to God it doesn't matter what time of day that place is frigging packed. There were like 70 checkouts and the store was huge. It reminded me of Walmart only cleaner, larger, and maybe even a mall. I have never figured out whether it was a mall with a grocery store or just a grocery store attached to a mall. It's huge.

Here's a pic I found, it's like 3 levels if I recall correctly.


http://www.auchan.fr/Images/28_71594.jpg
I think the walmarts here would be ok if they held a different standard for keeping the place clean. Just as someone mentioned above, the floors are....gross....sticky....and the place smells.

Well, in my neck of the woods, Wal-Mart has gone to shit. Just like K-Mart did. The place is dirty and it smells funny. English is also a second language there. Not that I'm prejudiced or anything, I just feel funny when someone that walks past me, speaking a different language, laughing and pointing. I like to know what I'm being called so I can respond appropriately.

Fortunately for W-Mart, Target built a place right down the street. Now they have justification for building the Super W-Mart. Maybe the new store will smell better and I can learn Spanish again...

Give me a break man, you can't speak the language they are, so you automatically assume they are talking bad about you? That's ignorance AND prejudice. Trust me, 99% of the Spanish speaking population in America has better things to do than make fun of the non-Spanish speaking population.

Shorty, dial down the righteous indignation a bit, I think Tranz is making a funny.

Phel, thanks for the link.... after reading it I can solve the problem.... if you don't like the Health Care there then ..... *drum roll* ... don't work there ! http://ayonae.ro/images/smilies/smile.gif

Or work two jobs..... or work it out and make ends meet... I managed to do it as a married college student....making less than 12k a year (that was combined for both of us).

Why is it always someone elses fault?

So if I don't work at Walmart, I will suddenly, magically not have to pay government taxes to support funding the healthcare of the people that DO work at walmart and don't pay for it?

Stance or no stance on the issue, someone missed the point.

http://www.cei.org/gencon/025,04992.cfm

Anything with an 'Executive Summary' is more than I have time to read in full now, but I found three things interesting...
This is nothing new:The current public debate surrounding Wal-Mart fits within a historical context of democratic responses to changes in the retail sector. From Sears Roebuck and the emergence of the mail order industry in the late 19th century to the various chain stores that emerged during the 1920s, the American public has proven wary of retail innovations. Wal-Mart, as the largest retailer in America and the pioneer of the large discount chain store, is currently experiencing this same public wariness regarding its business practices and its role in the American economy. This report attempts to place Wal-Mart within the context of economic change and democratic protest that has replayed itself many times in retail history and to ask whether or not its business is good for America.

Huge companies need to justify themselves:Today’s large corporations, especially those who represent entire sectors of our economy, cannot forge ahead to do the business of America without first justifying themselves to the people they serve. Effective communication between American business and the American people eases the anxiety that many experience as the next phase of economic change displaces the last. This is a lesson that many different companies and industries have had to learn. As this report details, those companies that fail to engage with the public and inform them of how they benefit the consumer often engender public distrust which can lead to onerous government regulation.

And lastly:We all relate to the economy not only as consumers seeking the best value, but also as citizens with protected rights and political beliefs. Businesses need to recognize this duality to American life and realize that “making friends and making customers are two different jobs—separate but related.” Wal-Mart is succeeding like few other businesses before it in appealing to and supporting the needs of consumers by offering the lowest prices and demanding efficiency in all aspects of its business. An analysis of Wal-Mart’s business demonstrates that it is capable of this level of efficiency while still supporting its employees with wages and benefits on par with the rest of the retail sector. Moreover, Wal-Mart brings great advantages in price and selection, especially to consumers who are most in need of low prices, and maintains high productively across the U.S. economy. Where the company is failing is in its belated recognition of its obligation to engage in open communication with citizens about its business practices and as to why it ultimately provides a benefit to American consumers and to the broader American economy.

I think the discussion we're having about the dirty aisles and piss poor customer service falls under this 'creating friends' area.

Huge companies need to justify themselves:...yeah, to their stockholders, and.... ....yeah, pretty much their stockholders.

Shorty, dial down the righteous indignation a bit, I think Tranz is making a funny.

If he is, I apologize. But that type of attitude is very prevalent in many places. That comment caught me at a bad time because I was just reading an email about how 31 latinos were arrested this morning in a neighboring town because they were trying to get some day labor jobs near Home Depot (who actually built them a sheltered area with port-a-potties so they could wait for jobs). Apparently women in the area were calling the police saying that these men were making rude comments to them in Spanish, but since they didn't speak Spanish themselves, they didn't know exactly what they said. Gimme a fucking break.

Regarding Wal-Mart, I used to work for the company myself at the Athens Sam's Club and I can say for certain the left hand has no idea what the right hand is doing when it comes to their company. My biggest problem with Wal-Mart is the how wasteful they are and the effect it has on local economies and other small businesses. When they get tired of a building, they don't just fix it up, they abandon it and leave the smaller businesses in the strip center to fend for their own. Where I used to live, Wal-Mart tore down a building and built a brand new one a couple lots away only to abandon that one and build again a few miles down the road, all in the span of 5 years.

We've got the same setup outside of every Home Depot in Phoenix near a spanish community (which is most of them). At the edges of the Home Depot parking lot are, depending on time and day, 10-20 day laborers looking for work. Lawn, construction, interior (flooring, etc.), you name it. It isn't much of a secre that here in Phoenix, large numbers of these day laborers are undocumented -- illegals, taking these jobs because "real" jobs require paperwork that they don't have.

They're not regularly arrested because they are hispanic. Because they're hispanic, targetting them in such a way would be racially motivated....go figure. A popular local Mexican carne asada buritto chain got raided - and the ACLU came to their defense, saying they were targetted because they were hispanic. Well...yeah...

Oh well... My Wal*Mart's pretty clean.

25% of their gross income for Wal-Mart’s family health insurance

Thank goodness for my cooshy job with the county! ;)

If he is, I apologize.
Apology accepted. Yes, it was an attempted funny. I think my feelings towards the “hard working” Latino individuals out there are fairly well documented on these boards. Possibly here (http://forums.ayonae.ro/showthread.php?t=6932).

Maybe I should have added that a 6'4" 300'ish pound biker'ish looking fellow, tends to illicit more than one comment or two...that it is entirely possible that they are pointing and laughing at me if they aren't moving their children aside with concerned looks.

I might add that in general, most people tend to get out of my way no matter what race they belong to. Which is why I've yet to change my persona to a more socially accepted form.

"Hey, you're a biker? You wanna buy my old lady for a pack of smokes?" "No, sorry. Got one and she bugs the crap out of me when I'm trying to build web pages...but I could use a pack of smokes." "Here, sorry..." "Thanks...now RUN!" "AaAAAaahhhh!"

Yes, I live a rich fantasy life, thank you.

Here's an interesting article that mentions a couple of effects Walmart has on the economy. There's a link to the academic papers on Walmart that the article refers to:

"Is Walmart the Answer to France's Problems?"
http://finance.yahoo.com/columnist/article/economist/1752

I read somewhere the exact effect (in percentage points) Walmart has on inflation, but I can't find that number right now.

Not to derail but...

Give me a break man, you can't speak the language they are, so you automatically assume they are talking bad about you? That's ignorance AND prejudice.

I roomed with a guy in college who had come out of the military as a korean interpreter.

Around a lot of the math and engineering buildings, it wasn't uncommon to hear folks speaking in other languages, often asians (Auburn had a large Asian population and most seemed to be in the mathmatics or a related field). I never thought twice about it until he and I hit several classes together.

Amazing how "red faced" folks would get when they rambled on in another language about the people around them when someone pipes up in their language and they know they got busted. This was the norm, not the exception.

In other words, don't jump so fast to defend.

I KNEW IT!! :D

And Zogby loses all credibility...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20051208-092510-1537r.htm

When the national press devoured a new union-sponsored poll released last week by uber-pollster John Zogby claiming that a majority of Americans believe that "Wal-Mart is bad for America," not reported were serious ethical issues which call into question the integrity of the much-ballyhooed survey.
Perhaps because Mr. Zogby has such a sterling reputation -- which has enabled him to snare contracts with several top media outlets, including Reuters, NBC, and the Wall Street Journal -- his findings were reported largely unchallenged.
But what no journalist would have known without digging is that Mr. Zogby cannot be considered an objective third-party when it comes to Wal-Mart. Without the presumption that the pollster was working solely to gauge scientifically the attitudes of the public, the poll loses much of its luster and becomes just another cog in Big Labor's coordinated campaign against the retailer.
In recent years, Mr. Zogby has pocketed roughly $90,000 to serve as an expert witness for individuals suing Wal-Mart, according to testimony he gave in a deposition last year in an Arizona case. Nowhere is Mr. Zogby's prior work on behalf of plaintiffs mentioned in the press release announcing the poll results.
During a 45-minute phone interview for this column, Mr. Zogby willingly acknowledged when asked about his work on behalf of the various plaintiffs. He repeatedly requested that the column reflect his honesty, which shows that he understands the relevance of his past work.
Which raises the question: If he implicitly concedes that his testifying for people suing Wal-Mart is relevant, then why wasn't that disclosure in the announcement of the poll results?
Though Mr. Zogby insisted that being paid tens of thousands by people suing the retailer did not compromise his objectivity, he was careful to note that the press release announcing the poll results was drafted by the client, Big Labor-backed WakeUpWalMart.com. But when reached the following morning, Mr. Zogby conceded that his staff "heavily edited" the release and even posted it on the group's Web site and put the release out over its wire.
As any pollster can attest, trust is the key issue, as polling -- no matter how transparent or scientific it purports to be -- hinges on the credibility of the wizard behind the curtain. Pollsters are masters of subtle manipulation, and small changes in wording can -- and often do -- yield substantially different results. Or questions can be asked in such a way that produce ambiguous results that can be interpreted in many different fashions.
Precisely because trust is so important, WakeUpWalMart.com hired Mr. Zogby to give its poll bashing Wal-Mart extra panache and an air of instant credibility. In a phone interview, WakeUpWalMart.com spokesman Chris Kofinis adamantly maintained that the poll was beyond reproach because Mr. Zogby is "an independent." Which, not coincidentally, is exactly how the pollster described himself -- again and again and again.
But how "independent" is it to, as Mr. Kofinis described it, draft poll questions "in consultation with" WakeUpWalMart.com, even though the reason Zogby polls are held in higher esteem is because they perceived to be more objective, more "independent?" And by Mr. Zogby's own admission, WakeUpWalMart.com wrote the press release that he put his company's name on and subsequently sent out. Mr. Kofinis knew this wouldn't look good, and he didn't fess up that his group wrote the Zogby press release until he was told that Mr. Zogby admitted it.
The Wal-Mart poll is not the first time Mr. Zogby has taken money from one party and conducted polling where his objectivity ostensibly would be compromised. According to a November 2000 Village Voice article, the pollster collected "$54,000 in payments from the 1997 Giuliani campaign after polling the race for the [New York] Post, and picking up another $5000 this year from the State Republican Committee while polling the Senate race."
Of course it's entirely possible that Mr. Zogby could take significant cash from people suing Wal-Mart and then turn around and conduct an objective poll. There's no reason to believe that was the case, however, based on anything other than faith. And such faith is diminished when the potential bias is conveniently clipped from the press release.
Without the Zogby magic dust sprinkled on the poll, most would see it as yet another grenade lobbed at Wal-Mart by the unions, who have, thus far, failed to push the retailer's million-plus employees into their ranks. The tantalizing prospect of landing billions in new compulsory dues has sprung Big Labor into action, crafting a campaign to give Wal-Mart a black eye and, they hope, forcing the retailer into submission.
Near the end of phone interview, Mr. Kofinis became quite agitated and yelled, "You can't say that the poll isn't objective!" But given the facts, it would seem better to ask: How can anyone say it is?

Have the poll's results been replicated? Not citing possible conflicts of interest is poor form, but Mowbray (who writes for Townhall.com and other conservative sites) doesn't make much of a case without finding where the conflict of interest meant something. Zogby's failure to disclose doesn't necessarily impugn the poll itself. Mowbray writes:
Of course it's entirely possible that Mr. Zogby could take significant cash from people suing Wal-Mart and then turn around and conduct an objective poll. There's no reason to believe that was the case, however, based on anything other than faith.
Here, he assumes manipulation of results with only circumstantial evidence to offer. What did Zogby's testifying consist of? Was he simply citing results of his own polls? Examples are given of other instances in which Zogby was paid for his services, but no evidence presented to suggest bias in action.

Zogby's rep may be bruised (I'll give him a negative hit myself if he signs up on the forums), but without actual evidence of bias in his work I'd stop short of declaring "all credibility" lost.

What Thor said ^^


These pollsters conduct scientific collection of data.

I would be more impressed with a credible attack on his data collection methods than some attack on who he was piad to testify for. Show his process is flawed or shut the fuck up. Because anything else is irrelevant.

I am in total agreement with both of the above posts. Nothing was contained in the article to demonstrate any manipulation of the poll results. Granted, people have been condemned on circumstantial evidence before, but usually there was at least more of it than this sparse attack.

Show his process is flawed or shut the fuck up.

Typical.

Show his process is flawed


L2 is absolutely right here. The article as it is written is nothing more than a planting of seeds of doubt, a veiled "swift boating" of Zogby. Seed planting is a classic sales tactic and in this case is bought into by those who have already made up their minds that the favorite discount store of the Nascar crowd is more American than a Vietnam vet with 2 purple hearts and a silver star.

Heres some valuable info, Walmart does more for the economic welfare of China than it does for the USA. The next time you wave the stars and stripes and feel proud that you have been just a bit more patriotic than the Target shopper, think again, you just added to the GNP of China.

Give me a break people. You bitch and harp about Foxnews' reputation and impartiality at the drop of a dime on this board, but this doesn't raise an eyebrow for any of you. 'Show me the process or shut the fuck up' LOL.

As long as the judge, pollster, or news outlet fits your already existing view, it's cool. Alrighty then.

Give me a break people. You bitch and harp about Foxnews' reputation and impartiality at the drop of a dime on this board, but this doesn't raise an eyebrow for any of you. 'Show me the process or shut the fuck up' LOL.

As long as the judge, pollster, or news outlet fits your already existing view, it's cool. Alrighty then.

I think that everyone is aware that ALL political parties use the "Planting a Seed" tactic in order to create doubts about the other side.

The problem that those considered as Democrats, Middle Grounders and true Independents have with a few of the things that come from the "Right" like this are: There is no shame as to what extents a large majority of Republican candidates and office holders have gone to discredit their opponents. Lets take the case of John Kerry and the "Swift Boat Vets".

The facts are this: Kerry did serve in Vietnam. He did receive 2 Purple Hearts. He did receive the Silver Star. His actions were truly heroic under fire. One of the best tactics that were devised and implemented succesfully in the Riverine warfare campaign against the Vietcong was the brainchild of John Kerry.

Kerry did come back from Vietnam and don't forget this: Exercised his RIGHTS as an AMERICAN CITIZEN to question the actions of THE GOVERNMENT and the MILITARY LEADERS with respect to their conduct in fighting the war. The concerns Kerry raised were legitimate and correct. Did he outright trash the American troops? No in my opinion. What he did was point to the FACT that many accepted practices such as "free fire zones" were not only against the articles of the Geneva convention (of which we were supposedly adhering to) but were also detrimental to our forces and the goal of liberating the people of South Vietnam from the Viet Cong insurgency.

The scenarios that he raised in the Senate hearings were WELL WITHIN HIS RIGHTS TO DO SO. After all, were we not supposedly sending American troops to fight for this very basic right to question the very questionable acts of a government?

It is this "swift boating" tactics that I think are most bothersome, Zogby had the right to testify on whatever side his statistics supported. See the article in question simply plants the seed, but it is not in any way, shape or form able to give REAL information that would leave the reader KNOWING that Zogby's polls are corrupt.

The "swift boat" tactic might re-inforce the core of the right but it simply demotivates and disgusts the majority of Americans to the point of not wanting to take part in the electoral or even in the debate process. The "swift boat" tactics that you hold in such high esteem were unfortunately not based on any factual information, but simply on heresay.

I hope this shows you the the "process" that so infuriates the general populace.

Give me a break people. You bitch and harp about Foxnews' reputation and impartiality at the drop of a dime on this board, but this doesn't raise an eyebrow for any of you. 'Show me the process or shut the fuck up' LOL.

As long as the judge, pollster, or news outlet fits your already existing view, it's cool. Alrighty then.
Heh, akipt, I don't know what Zogby's poll said in this Wal-Mart thing (other than some vague generality about people not liking them), just like I don't know what his polls said when they were done on behalf of Republican causes (for which he was also paid, per the article you linked). What I do know is that reason for bias does not indicate bias. I said straight out that Zogby should have disclosed. But as long as you can find a way to smear someone or assault their character -- the modus operandi for the current administration against their critics -- even circumstantial evidence is confirming evidence. Alrighty then.

Zogby polls are science.
They are 100% reliant on math and the computation of numbers.

2+2 =4 No matter if Rush Limbaugh or Al Franken is adding them.

I know its tough for you Conservatives, who live in the magical world of Intelligent Design and Science ='s Opinion.... but in the real world, science is a process that can be proven or disproven simply by repeating the steps and checking the math.

I know its not as simple to understand as "God/George Bush wills it" but it really works.

As long as .999 = 1, it's ridiculously naive to claim that a poll must be objective just because it's based on math. The same set of numbers can be massaged into very different conclusions.

Either way, I doubt anyone's questioning the math behind the poll. The mock polls my fifth grade government class conducted were mathematically sound. The problem with polls is who you poll and how you phrase the questions.

If Wal-Mart were to pay me a hundred grand, you can be damn sure that I could set a poll up here with choices that guaranteed a pre-determined outcome. That's trivial, assuming your polling pool isn't explicitly aware that you're trying to swing the results.

Zogby polls are science. They are 100% reliant on math and the computation of numbers. ..science is a process that can be proven or disproven simply by repeating the steps and checking the math.

LMFAO. That's why they're always right with no margin of error, huh?

In a pure impartial world, devoid of human corruption, your statement would be dead on right, but alas, given the fact that Zogby has allowed this work to be tainted with unethical circumstances and conduct that he had full control of, this poll is worthless to me and others now.

If you can't see the difference between Guiliani paying for a survey to see where he stands in the polls before an election, and the Unions paying for a poll, typing up the press release, and then scheduling Zogby to attend one of several anti-WalMart court depositions later the following week, you're hopeless.

What exactly was the unethical conduct that tainted the poll results, just out of curiosity?

I do not disagree that his failure to disclose his prior testifying can be viewed as not being forthcoming with all pertinent information, but that would seem to be more a problem of the folks that hired him for the poll, as it would have been up to them to vett him properly.

Still, unless something can be shown whereby the poll was manipulated via questions or samples, I am not seeing how the poll was tainted because of his prior affiliations.

You all might want to start here.
http://www.zogby.com/about/index.cfm
The FAQ is particularly enlightening.

What you have here is hundred million dollar business with literally hundreds of people working on the creation, supervision and administration of the entire process.
Now Sanchek is suggesting that for a few bucks Zogby is willing to destroy his entire business.
What evidence or proof of this corruption is brought forth? As far as I can see the only proof seems to be he came back with results that some people dont like. A pollster is his reputation. If one poll is knowingly falsified than his entire business will collapse as all his polls become meaningless.
Like I said, attack his process... but since you cant, I guess the only option is to attack him for running an intentionally skewed poll, with zero evidence.
Whose is the naive one? The person who recognizes and understands the set of circumstances and responsibilities which make this corperation catering the results of polls virtually impossible, or the guy whose understanding of it is about the same as a 5th grade student council election.

If Wal-Mart were to pay me a hundred grand, you can be damn sure that I could set a poll up here with choices that guaranteed a pre-determined outcome.
Besides insight into your character, this tells us nothing.
Is 100 grand enough for Zogby to risk destroying his entire business? Not only that, but for his entire staff to go along with it, knowing full well that any corruption of the data will be immediatly detrimental to them.
This is deserving of a chapter in Freakanomics. Never mind evidence, or proof, there just isnt proper motivation for corruption.

Did you even read the article? He, Zogby, took $90,000 to serve as an expert witness for plaintiffs suing Wal-Mart last year. This year, he releases a poll paid for by the unions that takes the same stance as the suit he was previously involved in, without disclosing that's he's a paid witness for the parties funding the poll.

That's simply poor ethics on his part. If he had just disclosed his prior involvement willingly, I doubt anyone would've raised a fuss at all.

Have you even read this thread at all? I'm against Wal-Mart. I want the poll to be accurate. Even so, I'd have to be blind to ignore the circumstances surrounding it.

The situation is exactly analogous to the Cheney/Haliburton one. Money ahead of time, conflict of interest afterward. All of the extremist liberals, like yourself, play judge, jury, and executioner to Cheney without ever proving any tangible link driving current decisions. Yet, when the same thing arises here with Zogby, you think the burden of proof suddenly lies with the accuser instead of the accused.

That's what Gass was pointing out, and he's exactly right. You can't reasonably talk about someone else's character while flaunting that level of hypocrisy.

I think if you do a bit of research you'll find that Joel Mowbray is not quite that objective of a writer. In fact you just might find he is paid to write "favorible" articles for those organisations that lean so far to the right they have a verticle tan line across their tits.

This has nothing to do with Cheney.
We arent talking about Zogbys opinions. It has zero to do with what he thinks or what he wants.
lets let the man speak for himself
ZOGBY: Wal-Mart survey was fair, balanced.

Joel Mowbray’s opinion piece in today’s (12/9/2005) editions of the Washington Times charging that I crossed some ethical boundary in conducting a poll for a client is just that – his opinion – but he ignores important facts.

His insinuation that, because Zogby International conducted a survey for a client that opposes Wal-Mart, and because I have provided expert testimony in lawsuits against Wal-Mart, I must certainly have an anti-Wal-Mart agenda and surely “cooked” the poll against the retailer, is as far off the mark as one can be.

Zogby International is an independent vendor that conducts public opinion research for clients, regardless of their agenda. Their agenda does not become our agenda. We poll for pro-life clients and pro-choice clients, for Republicans and Democrats, for business and organized labor. We are independent, and have grown to be one of the world’s most respected polling firms because quality, not ideology, is our mantra.

We have even polled for the Washington Times, but the Washington Times didn’t own us lock, stock, and barrel.

Mowbray’s assertion that our poll for WakeUpWal-Mart.com was slanted because I have testified as an expert witness in cases against Wal-Mart is ludicrous. In his opinion piece, he boasts of his extensive research, but he fails to tell readers that my testimony had nothing to do with Wal-Mart’s business practices, but rather was focused only on the efficacy of polling – which is my expertise.

Mowbray’s extensive research also failed him on another point, as he leaves the reader with the impression that, in 1997, I was polling the New York City mayoral race for the New York Post at the same time I was working for candidate Rudy Giuliani. It would have been ethical for Mowbray to have pointed out that my work for the Post had concluded before the work for Giuliani began. There was no overlap. There was no ethical breach.

In short, Zogby International is not an advocate for any of its clients. Our point of view is that we believe in good polling, and in this case, WakeUpWal-Mart.com got good polling. Nothing more.

John Zogby, President
Zogby International
Utica, New York

I have never accused of Cheney anything other than showing favoritism to Haliburton in the form of No Bid Contracts. I dont think anyone can make any sort of case that his affiliation had anything to do with war decisions. Find your strawman somewhere else.
If you were to make a more accurate comparision.. the right one would be against people who thought Diebold made rigged machines to help Bush win in Ohio. An arguement NOBODY here placed even a shred of credibility in.. For the exact same reasons reasonable people know that the Zogby survey is unbiased.

But let me get this straight.. you say the analogous comparision is between this and Cheney, then you say the reasoning in the Cheney case was invalid, but then go on to validate it in this instance? Racking up the dishonesty points today arent you?

extremist liberals, like yourself,
Care to back up that statement?
Unless the going definition of an extremist liberal is someone who doesnt think Bush is much of a president.
Id actually define myself as an extremist moderate, tyvm.

No one's claimed that the results are or aren't accurate. I don't think even the Washington Times piece made any real claims there. Without access to who they polled, what questions, and the raw results; no one can make a reasonable argument for or against. That's not the point at all. It never was.

The point is: That lack of transparency in the process makes it awfully suspicious when the unions buy a favorable poll from someone they've paid for testimony in the past.

You're so eager to find a contrary position to argue from, you're missing what we're actually talking about.

Expert witnesses are paid for the knowledge base, and testify on both sides of issues all the time. In this case, Zogby came forward and stated his positions and answered the charge.

To my knowledge, Cheney has never come forward to respond to the critics of his actions while CEO of Halliburton dealing with Iran, violating UN and US sanctions, and possibly giving aid and comfort to the enemy, which is usually the definition of treason. (Personally, I am still waiting for the investigation into this, to see if Halliburton was involved in Iran putting together it's nuclear program)

Zogby polls people for opinions. Cheney ran a multibillion dollar company doing business with a country that supported terrorist actions against the US, and now as Vice President has been involved in a number of questionable decisions related to that same company.

Interesting that this comparison was chosen. It seems to be on such equal footing.:rolleyes:

"Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!" ~ Homer Simpson

Sanchek, when was the last time any company/person paid for a poll to be conducted without the intention of it to be favorable to their cause? Does it make sense that someone would pay to have a poll done that was unfavorable to them?

That's exactly the point.

It would make sense to have a poll taken that would give objective information.

The situation is exactly analogous to the Cheney/Haliburton one. -Sanchek
Interesting that this comparison was chosen. -Bylimet
I believe what Sanchek was shooting for is how they both show a potential conflict of interest.

Does Halliburton damage Cheeney's credibility? Yes.

Does Zogby's omission of prior history vs. Wal-Mart damage his credibility? Yes.

Does that mean that the poll was tainted? /shrug

It was a poll. Polls aren't necessarily indicative of actuality. I think people put to much stock in them anyway.

87% of folks polled recenty stated they find polls misleading...


film at 11...

Fandros

^what he said

As long as .999 = 1, it's ridiculously naive to claim that a poll must be objective just because it's based on math. The same set of numbers can be massaged into very different conclusions.
There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics. Benjamin Disraeli (http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Benjamin_Disraeli/)
British politician (1804 - 1881)
It's simple to create a biased poll. How about have your pollster open with "I'd like to ask you a few question about your hate for Wal*Mart, if you have time."
Would you describe Wal*Mart, as (a) Not terribly evil, (b) mostly evil, or (c) the living incarnation of evil?
100% of respondants reported that Wal*Mart was no better than "Not terribly evil."

And it doesn't have to be as blatant as that. Confine your polling to specific regions, cultures, known-favorable demographics.

...and, on a side note, .999 doesn't equal 1. But .999~ (repeating) does. (http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/55748.html)