You can buy school supplies just as cheap at Target. I've been picking up items over the past few weeks for my daughter. She's not old enough for school yet, but she is quite the artists. Name brand 24 pack crayons for 10 cents. Markers for a quarter.

Same thing over at Office Depot.

I'm low income and I don't have to shop at Wal-Mart.

I've found that by comparing prices, other places are just as cheap (or cheaper). Cat food is cheaper at Petsmart (or Petco). My daughter's clothes and pull-ups are just as cheap at Target. So are her toys.

My only wish is that Target would start offering a full service layaway program like Wal-Mart does. I also wish their "women's size" department was larger. That is one area that Wal-Mart beats out both Target and K-Mart. Target has a tiny plus section area, and almost all of K-Mart's clothes are either very dressy or are athletic clothes. I want business casual or just regular 'ole casual.

This idea that "poor people" need Wal-Mart is for the birds. Compare the prices-- they're not as cheap as they seem. They have products specially made for them that are smaller, have less product inside the package, etc. but is in the same size box/container as the other stores. Their stuff is cheaply made and falls apart.

I wouldn't use the words dirty, confused, or under-educated to describe their workers. For starters, dirty is just plain wrong.

Many of these people are working there while they finish high school or college. I've had two sisters work there while going to school. Living in Texas, there aren't a lot of retail options available since Wal-Mart took over.

Sid and McBain,

Just remember that because WalMart is the nation's leading employer, it is going to lead the nation in many things. When evaluating WalMart vs. other large (and small) employers, we have to adjust things to a per-worker basis. So, for example, because Walmart employs more low wage workers than anyone else, they are certain to lead the nation in the number of workers who also receive food stamps.

It's far more convincing to compare WalMart's practices to other comparable employers (KMart, Target, Home Depot, Costco) and to local retailers, than it is to cite unadjusted statistics.

Paul--

Even when compared to companies such as Target and Home Depot, Wal-Mart is still way behind in pay, has more people receiving food stamps, etc.

Wal-Mart paid for health insurance on 45% of its work force. Full time people may be able to get it after 6 months, part time after two years. Costco covers 96% of its full and part-time work force. Full time people are eligible after 3 months, part time after six.

Wal-Mart employees must pay 33% of their health care costs. At Costco its much lower-- under 10% (in 2007 it will be 8%). They've refused to go higher because they realize it will mean some employees will have to drop their coverage.

Here's an example...

Ms. Caizza, for example, worked about 32 hours a week, making $8 an hour. Full-time employees make about $1,200 a month on those wages, meaning the $133 to $264 they are asked to pay for family coverage may not be within their reach. And even the cheapest plans come with a hefty out-of-pocket price for employees, where they may be on the hook for as much as $13,000 in medical costs for their families.

$13,000! Those people only make about $14,400/year before taxes.

I've seen what the per-worker stats were-- I've looked at so many pages of facts in fighting the proposed Wal-Mart here that I've forgotten where I found them. But the numbers were a lot higher than other employers. As a matter of fact, I didn't see any other employer who came anywhere close.

If I happen across them again in the next few days I'll let you know.

Wal-Mart artificially inflates its "average worker" pay by adding in the pay of executives, high paid regional managers, CEOs, etc. They'll tell you that they pay an average of $10, but after several years of working there you still won't be anywhere close to $10. Both of my sisters were in management positions and both made less than Oregon's state minimum wage (Texas uses the federal minimum wage).

Actually, my husband makes quite a bit more than people at Wal-Mart. He works at Office Depot and makes several dollars more an hour than a Wal-Mart employee with the same number of years of employment. He also receives excellent benefits-- they're even better than the insurance we had when I was working in a Congressional office. The only reason we're low income is because I have several health problems that keep me from working regularly. As such, there's only one income coming in for the entire household. Before starting our family we were in the middle class.

Once I start getting in some hours each month again we'll bump back up into middle class once again.

My youngest sister, though, is much worse off. She's well under the 100% poverty level, and even she can afford to not shop at Wal-Mart. We do our shopping together each month and she's able to get better quality products at Target for right about the same price (or often cheaper). And as soon as our Costco membership is ready (free from her employer), we'll be going there as well.

I've also had friends who worked at Target who also received good pay and great benefits. They stayed working there for many years because of how well they were treated. They only left because they decided to be stay at home parents or finished college and moved onto a professional job. Target has been recognized numerous times for how well it treats its employees-- recently it was recognized for treating employees who were in the Reserves and sent overseas better than most big companies in the U.S. They not only made up the difference in pay, but continued their benefits as well.

And the products I'm talking about are name brand-- Crayola, Mead, Fiskars, RoseArt, etc. All of the Crayola stuff I've bought from both stores say made in the USA. I'm sure there is some stuff that comes in from overseas. But I do know the clothes I buy at Target almost always say they're made in the U.S. I can't say that for Wal-Mart. I can't remember the last time I saw a piece of clothing at Wal-Mart that said it was made in the U.S.

Jenni, I'm not questioning those figures -- thanks for posting them. It's just when people post something like "WalMart has more employees that X than anyone else" or "WalMart imports more good from Y than anyone else", the social scientist in me says "WalMart is also bigger than everyone else.

Your figures are much more convincing.

(Just one note: I work for an educational institution and pay 50% of my health care costs; we also don't cover benefits for anyone employed under 20 hours. It doesn't look like the health premium is the issue at WalMart; it's the length of time required to get coverage.)

It's also the premium that is the issue. For the cheapest plan, a person would pay out $1,596 a year, just for the premiums. That plan also has high deductibles for doctor visits and such. For a person making $14,000 a year, that's a lot of money.

If they also cover their family, that could cost $3,168 a year.

That is awfully expensive for someone who is likely to be below 100% of the federal poverty level. The higher one is more than $100 a month more than we pay for our employee+family plan. We chose to have one of the top plans that Office Depot offers because I am unfortunate enough to have been born with a weak immune system as well as several hereditary conditions from both sides of the family. We could have had a plan that cost even less than $133/month for the entire family.

Other places may pay a higher percentage, but they also have higher wages. It's hard to pay for health insurance when you're only bringing in $200-250 or so a week. I mean, those amounts run from more than 10% of their before-tax wages to almosy 23% for the top package. And that's not including deductibles, co-pays, etc.

Jenni,

Again, just for comparison, my employer's plan costs $350 or $450/month for a family plan. Those are our two choices--one is Kaiser and the other is a preferred provider plan. I don't believe we have anyone earning $14,000/year, but I suspect some of our maintainance workers don't make much more than that. And my employer's overall benefit plan is actually quite generous.

My spouse worked for a while in the non-profit sector in Portland. Entry level salaries are routinely well under 20k with no pension or retirement kick and minimal health benefits.

The core problem here is not Walmart, it is the hollowing out of good, working class jobs that don't require a lot of training or education. Look at what custodial workers or groundskeepers used to earn, and what they earn today.

Jon--

Are you making $14,000 a year and having to pay out almost $3200 a year just in insurance premiums? It's not just the percentage that is the problem, although it is way out of line for comparitable retail shops. It's more than a $100 more a month than the insurance my husband receives. When my sister got onto the insurance, the co-pays and deductibles were very high, it didn't pay for a lot of routine things, etc. She ended up paying a lot of stuff out of pocket that I never have in all the years of my husband working retail.

It's the amount a person has to pay out per month for their insurance premiums. For a person with a family, it would cost a week and a half pay just for their insurance.

And I must say I've never met a Wal-Mart employee who made that much an hour. I've known dozens of employees there and not a single one made $10/hour. There's a large class action suit involving women suing Wal-Mart that shows the exact same thing. The actual Wal-Mart average for a cashier is something like $3 less an hour than the industry average for similar stores. I'd pull the exact numbers, but I have to run to take my sister to a doctors appointment.