Barbara Ehrenreich Is Full Of It
She isn't the only journo to take a job at Wal-Mart, but Wired's Charles Platt tells a different story on BoingBoing than she did in her book Nickel and Dimed
The job was as dull as I expected, but I was stunned to discover how benign the workplace turned out to be. My supervisor was friendly, decent, and treated me as an equal. Wal-Mart allowed a liberal dress code. The company explained precisely what it expected from its employees, and adhered to this policy in every detail. I was unfailingly reminded to take paid rest breaks, and was also encouraged to take fully paid time, whenever I felt like it, to study topics such as job safety and customer relations via a series of well-produced interactive courses on computers in a room at the back of the store. Each successfully completed course added an increment to my hourly wage, a policy which Barbara Ehrenreich somehow forgot to mention in her book.My standard equipment included a handheld bar-code scanner which revealed the in-store stock and nearest warehouse stock of every item on the shelves, and its profit margin. At the branch where I worked, all the lowest-level employees were allowed this information and were encouraged to make individual decisions about inventory. One of the secrets to Wal-Mart's success is that it delegates many judgment calls to the sales-floor level, where employees know first-hand what sells, what doesn't, and (most important) what customers are asking for.
Several of my co-workers had relocated from other areas, where they had worked at other Wal-Marts. They wanted more of the same. Everyone agreed that Wal-Mart was preferable to the local Target, where the hourly pay was lower and workers were said to be treated with less respect (an opinion which I was unable to verify). Most of all, my coworkers wanted to avoid those "mom-and-pop" stores beloved by social commentators where, I was told, employees had to deal with quixotic management policies, while lacking the opportunities for promotion that exist in a large corporation.
Of course, I was not well paid, but Wal-Mart is hardly unique in paying a low hourly rate to entry-level retail staff. The answer to this problem seems elusive to Barbara Ehrenreich, yet is obvious to any teenager who enrolls in a vocational institute. In a labor market, employees are valued partly according to their abilities. To earn a higher hourly rate, you need to acquire some relevant skills.
As for all those Wal-Mart horror stories--when I went home and checked the web sites that attack the company, I found that many of them are subsidized with union money. walmartwatch.com, for instance, is partnered with the Service Employees International Union; wakeupwalmart.com is copyright by United Food and Commercial Workers International Union. Why are unions so obsessed with Wal-Mart? I'm guessing that if the more-than-a-million Wal-Mart employees could be unionized, they would be compelled to contribute at least half a billion dollars per year in union dues.
Subsequently I considered writing about my brief experience, but a book defending a company that has been demonized does not have a large potential audience, and the writer tends to be dismissed as either hopelessly naive or bribed by corporate America.
He goes on to tell the tale of a guy who entered a homeless shelter with $25, worked as a day laborer and then for a moving company, and in 10 months, had $2,500 saved up, plus a pickup truck and an apartment. That story is Adam Sheperd's, and his book about it is Scratch Beginnings: Me, $25, and the Search for the American Dream
Platt continued in the comments:
"Is there an incentive for this level of decision making by "sales-floor level" employees?"I spoke to a guy who took the initiative to order, I think, 100 tentlike carports during his first month on the job, just because he noticed that a sample of four of the things had sold out within a day, and several people then came in asking for them as a result of word-of-mouth.
His gamble was successful. As a result he was invited to some kind of annual Wal-Mart gathering at company HQ, he met the CEO, and of course was promoted. That's a very unusual story but, yes, I'd say there's an incentive!
The biggest sin at Wal-Mart is not to take initiative. It is to offend a customer. We were warned quite severely that each average Wal-Mart customer is expected to spend, as I recall, about $200,000 during the rest of their lives. If you terminally alienate one customer, you may have just lost the store almost a quarter-million dollars. The second-biggest sin might be to hurt yourself, since your reimbursed medical expenses will reduce the annual bonus for your coworkers.
Oddly enough, Wal-Mart reminded me of startups that I visited in Silicon Valley during the 1990s. Same informality, same devolution of responsibility to low levels, same gung-ho optimism, young-aged work force, willingness to innovate, emphasis on growth, and a sense of very smart management behind the scenes. But of course the work is MUCH more boring!
Also from the comments is another person's perspective that's in tune with mine:
"how can you raise a family on that money in a company town?"You probably can't. Starting a family is a decision that from a financial perspective should be delayed until one has a sizeable nest egg. Gratification can be delayed despite to protestation of young hormones otherwise. Most don't wait and that's their right but it doesn't give them any justification to complain that entry level employment doesn't cover the cost of maintaining a single family private dwelling with their one true love an a brood of entitled young ones. No legislation or labor union will ever prevent people from procreating themselves into poverty. Study hard, avoid unhealthy vices, keep your willy in your trousers or seated with a dime between your knees as the case may be and save up your money to start a family. Poor planning does not obligate Walmart to provide mitigation for bad decisions.
It's like the idea that health care is a right -- one other people should pick up the tab for, even if you're mentally healthy and capable of working to pay your own way. An old boyfriend of mine does liver transplants. He spent years and bazillions on his education, worked insane hours during his training, and continues to work insane hours now, at one of the country's finest hospitals. He makes a lot of money and the people whose lives he saves can tell you he deserves every cent.
via Kate Coe
I have never understood why people hate walmart. Yes, they carry some cheap and flimsy items, but what do you expect for that price? They are quite the American success story, so maybe that's why people hate them. A large segment of our society hates success.
They do treat their employees well. If you don't make enough as a stockboy, it's your fault and you need to do something to make yourself worth more!
momof4 at June 17, 2009 5:27 AM
People always go after #1. Whether it's Wal-Mart, McDonalds, or the good old USA.
It must be a jealosy thing.
David M. at June 17, 2009 5:50 AM
mom - it's simple.
WalMart represents suburban sprawl and capitalism. These are two things that the left hates.
Especially the "urban hipster" class. They prefer boutiques because they keep the rabble out. Wal-Mart allows the rabble to live pretty comfortable lives.
I mean, what good is getting that MBA so you can buy the big TV when the blue-collar schlub out in suburbia can buy just as big a TV at Wal-Mart? Where's the social differentiation?
brian at June 17, 2009 6:21 AM
Gotta say, I wish there was that kind of initiative and concern about customers at my local Wal-Mart. The stuff you want is never there, and when you ask staff when they might get more, they have literally told me (more than once) that the district warehouse sends what they think the store needs, and the store has no input....
jen at June 17, 2009 6:47 AM
To follow up on Brian's comment -
Compare yuppie attitudes to Ikea vs. Walmart - both are big, successful multinational corporations that sell cheap, flimsy necessities, only Walmart sells to fat suburban schlubs while Ikea sells to stylish hipster bobos.
Do you suppose Ikea's ever contributed to a Mom & Pop furniture or kitchenware boutique going under? But hey, who cares, Ikea's cool and European, and doesn't their stuff totally remind you of that neat, funky apartment you lived in during your junior semester abroad?
BerthaMinerva at June 17, 2009 7:20 AM
>> An old boyfriend of mine does liver transplants.
I love that line. It sounds so Bladerunner.
Eric at June 17, 2009 7:48 AM
The stuff you want is never there,
I have often called shopping at Walmart going on a grocery scavenger hunt. What is ordered is a question of what they can get a deal on, so you take the brands and products that they choose or go someplace else.
I have also gotten horrible service at Walmart, which is the reason why I don't shop there. I would rather Grocery Game at HEB or Kroger than fight the masses to get the last 12 pack of toilet paper in my brand and have to fix the computer system when I get to the checkout at Walmart.
I don't understand why people will take one job that doesn't pay their bills, file for assistance, and do nothing else. I've worked low wage jobs, and in the end they made me more stolid in my goal to better myself so that I could earn more.
I do know that sexual harassment and pregoo discrimination suits have been won by employees of Walmart. They aren't all sugar and spice...
-Julie
-Julie
Julie at June 17, 2009 8:08 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/06/barbara-ehrenre.html#comment-1654104">comment from BerthaMinervaDo you suppose Ikea's ever contributed to a Mom & Pop furniture or kitchenware boutique going under? But hey, who cares, Ikea's cool and European, and doesn't their stuff totally remind you of that neat, funky apartment you lived in during your junior semester abroad?
Great point.
Amy Alkon
at June 17, 2009 8:08 AM
Julie:
FYP.
brian at June 17, 2009 8:38 AM
Oh, and as far as grocery lottery goes, every time I go to the local megamart (Stop & Shop in this case) I'm virtually guaranteed that one item I need will be out of stock.
Wal-Mart isn't the only one that has this issue.
brian at June 17, 2009 8:40 AM
WalMart is a boon for the rushed consumer. Not just low prices, but time saved. Time is money? One stop shopping. You could literally get everything under one (expansive) roof, no hopping in and out of the car with cranky kids chasing all over town for oil filters, hardware, groceries, new socks and underwear, makeup, and a goldfish to replace the one that you flushed that morning. Meijer's Thrifty Acres back in Michigan/ the Midwest is the same way, but it has been around much longer. In fact, rumor has it (in "Michiana" anyway, you might hear differently in Bentonville, Arkansas) that Mr. Walton heavily "sampled" Mr. Meijer's business model.
A Purple Cow Float from the creamery and a penny ride on the Bucking Bronco at the end of a Meijer's shopping trip; the perfect bribe to get a kid to behave for the duration.
Juliana at June 17, 2009 8:43 AM
BRIAN
FYP
Huh? I don't know this one.
Oh, and as far as grocery lottery goes, every time I go to the local megamart (Stop & Shop in this case) I'm virtually guaranteed that one item I need will be out of stock.
Boy Brian, you are on a Walmart propaganda bent today, huh? I live in a very large city, so I haven't had this problem with other stores. In a 3 minute drive I have 3 major store chains. In any of them, the prices are comparable, the inventory is more robust, the computer systems work, and the customer service is better. At Walmart I have problems with each of these items.
Why shop at Walmart when I have so many better alternatives? If Walmart compared favorably with other stores in the area, I would shop there. It doesn't, so I don't. That is the free market system at it's finest.
-Julie
Julie at June 17, 2009 8:54 AM
I'm a "liberal" and I love capitalism. Sorry to wreck your stereotype, Brian. Your arrogance is repulsive.
I loved the people I have worked for in radio— I was paid shit wages to start, but was able to negotiate for more as my ratings proved I was keeping listeners for the station, and the advertisers loved me.
The two men who took the risk to build the station I worked for— they were legends in their own time. They'd show up at the station and do on-air stuff, come to company parties, be rock stars. I was happy to work my ass off for those guys and help them earn all the money they possibly could. After all— THEY TOOK THE RISK.
Then, they sold the station cluster to Citatdel. All the rules changed, the sales staff got their commissions and benefits cut, and they fired people making too much per hour. Guess who that was?
I don't mind Doc and JJ selling the station and making bazillions— they deserve it. It's unfortunate that the staff was left holding the bag of work-more-for-less, and Citadel didn't do much to engender loyalty.
What I mind is the idea that capitalism is benign. It is not— capitalism is pernicious by nature, and needs to be regulated. We need the bright business minds of this nation to harness the energy generated by capitalism, and funnel it into its perpetuation. Captialism will otherwise morph into an oligachy — a capitalist economy tends to concentrate capital. Duh. If it gets concentrated into too few places, we get what we're dealing with now.
Deirdre B. at June 17, 2009 9:00 AM
"What I mind is the idea that capitalism is benign. It is not— capitalism is pernicious by nature, and needs to be regulated. We need the bright business minds of this nation to harness the energy generated by capitalism, and funnel it into its perpetuation. Captialism will otherwise morph into an oligachy — a capitalist economy tends to concentrate capital. Duh. If it gets concentrated into too few places, we get what we're dealing with now."
I cannot decide which is worse, the breathtaking sweep of the statements or the wholly unwarranted certitude of the speaker.
Spartee at June 17, 2009 9:10 AM
I don't do much brick-and-mortar shopping anymore. Stuff is so easy to get online, and so many places offer great shipping deals. Still, most of my dorm-room and first-apartment gear came from Wal-Mart. These days, I prefer small stores not because of anything to do with the rabble, but because I can afford more-interesting things. In the end, I have less stuff, but I really like the stuff I have.
MonicaP at June 17, 2009 9:13 AM
It isn't just "urban lefties" who hate Wal-mart. My family on my mother's side lives and works in a rural, economically depressed part of the midwest, and they resent WM for putting the many of few local businesses out of business. Sure, they shop there now, but that's because they no longer have other viable choices.
deja pseu at June 17, 2009 9:13 AM
The major problem with Pratt's story is that Ehrenreich's book came out in 2001, reflecting her working experiences in 1999 and 2000. Since then, Walmart has either lost or settled numerous wage-and-hour and discrimination lawsuits, and has changed a lot of policies as a result. Just because Pratt had a different experience a decade later doesn't indicate that Ehrenreich was "full of it" when she wrote her book - just that Walmart has made some prudent decisions and has cleaned up the practices that were (quite rightfully) getting it into a lot of trouble.
CB at June 17, 2009 9:20 AM
No. We got here because of Progressivism, aka modern liberalism. Concentration of capital happens because of government intervention which skews the opportunity costs of capital in crazy ways. Don't buy into the myth of the Robber Baron.
On Walmart. I love the place! I get good chocolate at cheap prices. I recently bought some tasty mangos for 75 cents a piece. Mmm.
I'm healthy, but Walmart saves people over $1 billion on prescription drugs. That's a very, very, very good thing.
Jeff at June 17, 2009 10:00 AM
> After all– THEY TOOK THE RISK.
I like that story, and I like the way you tell it. I've been through a couple stories like that... In fact, I've been through two of them this year! Just yesterday I tried to flirt with a producer who'd just been through a corporate bloodbath, but she was smart enough to know it was nothing personal. She gets a payout, too: If I sweet-talk her well enough, there may be a burrito and a cup of coffee in it for me.
I think most people want to believe that when they're on the losing end of a political exchange like this, they've been brutalized by treachery and cleverness... But you're right, being the one who risks capital, and not just effort, is really important.
Crid [CommentCrid@gmail.com] at June 17, 2009 10:06 AM
Julie:
Propaganda? Within 5 minutes of my house, I have two supermarkets, a Wal-Mart, and a Target. The Wal-Mart is perpetually understaffed, and except in rare circumstances never has anything I went to the store for. The Price Chopper is filthy. The Stop & Shop doesn't carry half of the brands I want. And Target tends not to have a very good selection - if they even carry the items I want.
When I lived in Bristol, one town over, their Wal-Mart was better, their Stop & Shop was better, their Price Chopper was filthier, and there was no Target.
Given the choice between Wal-Mart, Target, and Sears, I go to Sears.
Oh, and FYP means "Fixed your post."
Dierdre B.:
And your failed reading comprehension is repulsive. I said "the left". If you are a "liberal" in the classical sense of the word, you are not of the "left". If you are of the "left", you hate capitalism by definition. Read and comprehend before you insult.
Oh, and what you described isn't capitalism, it's corporatism. There's a big difference. Corporatism is the last stop before fascism.
brian at June 17, 2009 10:10 AM
I'll cop to the hysterical misunderstanding of "left". I apologize for the "repulsive" jab.
Deirdre B. at June 17, 2009 10:30 AM
"Captialism will otherwise morph into an oligachy — a capitalist economy tends to concentrate capital."
I disagree with this statement completely. I've seen too many stories (ahem) just like yours to believe otherwise. A company gets started by some bright, passionate people and does well because its customers like doing business with it and its employees enjoy working for it. When these places get too big and bureaucratic is when they start to suck. They become overrun with corporate H.R. types who care more about keeping the company from getting sued than anything to do with getting and keeping good talent. Pretty soon all your employees are just cube-dwelling lifers who value job security over everything else. Might as well be a union shop at that point.
I believe this is the reason no company ever stays in the Top 50 for more than a few weeks. Smaller, better competitors come in and steal their best customers and employees, until they themselves become awkward and unwieldly, and are then cleaned out by yet another new competitor. It's only when the goobermint, in all its infinite wisdom, deems the old dinosaurs "too big to fail" that you end up with the kind of concentration you are speaking of. And that doesn't happen in a system that is truly capitalist.
This article is worth reading on the subject:
http://www.reason.com/news/show/133807.html
Pirate Jo at June 17, 2009 10:31 AM
It's my experience that MBA types are rarely lefties. My MBA is from UC Berkeley even, and even there -- few lefties.
But if you want to know why middle America and left America dislike WalMart, read the case study we read during our MBA of Snapper lawn mowers and Walmart, or of the $2.97 pickles and Walmart (which can be found linked from the first article).
http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/102/open_snapper.html
Walmart and its thirst for ever lower prices intentionally destroyed much of American commerce, and then, at the time, paid ever low wages such that its workers health care had to be subsidized by the community.
To put it another way, Henry Ford made sure his workers could afford his products, a car at time when a car was a relative luxury. A Walmart town could afford only Walmart products, and they couldn't afford health care.
The original Walmart was buy America. The Walmart of the 90s and 00s is buy foreign, for always lower prices. That's a strategy that hurts middle America and all of America.
I'll close once more by pointing out Brian's inconsistency. If the definition of a lefty is someone who hates capitalism by definition, it's going to be pretty hard to find a lefty MBA.
jerry at June 17, 2009 10:39 AM
Heh.
Uh huh. But, Diedre B. fails to distinguish bureaucratic management vs. entrepreneurial management.
The thing that gets people is the idea of "excessive" or "abnormal" profits. In a sense, all profit is abnormal. Profit results from imbalances in supply and demand. The entrepreneur brings supply back in line with demand. As soon as he does this, the profit disappears. He must then seek profit elsewhere.
That's why human diversity (a fact often spoken of but rarely analyzed) is so important. If things never changed, all profit would eventually disappear as all supply comes to equilibrium with all demand. The socialist/communist would realize their dream of equality only in a society that eliminated human diversity. Most people instinctively recoil in horror from such an idea.
In the diverse world of changing tastes, preferences, and circumstances, the entrepreneur seeks profit. That is the only rule needed for private citizens: seek profit. It leads everyone to satisfy consumers, everywhere reducing shortages and easing gluts.
Government is not profit seeking. It does not respond to prices, because it can coerce. That's why bureaucratic management is appropriate for government, but not for business and vice versa.
Diedre B.'s claim that "capitalism is pernicious by nature" is false. Progressive government acts as though it were profit-seeking, as though it brings supply into equilibrium with demand, as though it it is entrepreneurial -- none of that is true. Progressive government pretends to be what it is not, what is can never be. That's pernicious.
Anything beyond laws against theft and fraud is just the government selecting cronies as winners, regardless of consumers preferences.
Walmart encourages entrepreneurship at all levels. Walmart is one of the best entrepreneurial companies in the world. They employ capital with supreme efficiency to satisfy consumers. Good on them. Good for us.
Jeff at June 17, 2009 10:52 AM
jerry:
What the hell are you drinking? This sentence makes no sense at all. What does having an MBA have to do with it, anyhow?
I mean, how did you get to this? Or is it just any excuse to try and attack me?
brian at June 17, 2009 11:01 AM
Although I will say that the MBA is probably the most dangerous educational degree ever crafted. MBAs are responsible for the destruction of more capital than any group other than government.
brian at June 17, 2009 11:02 AM
It's your own rantings brian, you should read them sometimes.
"WalMart represents suburban sprawl and capitalism. These are two things that the left hates.
Especially the "urban hipster" class. They prefer boutiques because they keep the rabble out. Wal-Mart allows the rabble to live pretty comfortable lives.
I mean, what good is getting that MBA so you can buy the big TV when the blue-collar schlub out in suburbia can buy just as big a TV at Wal-Mart? Where's the social differentiation?"
So you start off with your two minute hate against the left. Then you examine a subset of the left, the "urban hipster". And then you distinguish the subset of urban hipsters with MBAs, all as part of your rant against lefties.
It's quite an incoherent piece of whargarbl, but it's yours and you should be proud.
Hope that helps.
jerry at June 17, 2009 11:13 AM
Jeff at June 17, 2009 11:20 AM
Repost, to avoid misattribution. My closing tag was improper.
Not true, and it's a common belief. Business people are usually the worst capitalists. Here's why.
Capitalism is a system based on private ownership of capital.
In our current progressive system, private companies can use government to coerce other economic actors. This ability to coerce gives some companies an authority far beyond the mere ownership of their capital.
Since access to this kind of government-sponsored coercion gives obvious economic benefits against competitors, for-profit actors scramble to get it. I call it the "scramble for government cheese."
The problem is that government sells it's coercive power to the highest bidder. Businessmen, and even MBAs, happily participate in that system. It's not a capitalist system because it goes far beyond mere private ownership of capital.
Jerry, you have improperly conflated the political ideology of Capitalism with the practical exigencies of business administration. Again, businessmen are usually the worst capitalists, if they are capitalist at all.
Usually, businessmen will happily curry favor with regulators to kill the competition (Teamsters), create whole markets where none was wanted (tiny cars), artificially reduce demand (luxury taxes), inflate supply (ethanol). That's not capitalism. Government control of the means of production is called something else, mate.
The Walmart healthcare thing, I don't get. If progressives encourage the development of public healthcare programs, it's good. If progressives encourage eligible people to use those programs, it's good. If Walmart does those things, it's bad. Doesn't make sense to me, really.
Jeff at June 17, 2009 11:21 AM
Ah. I don't know what's inconsistent about it.
The few MBAs I know supported Obama, believe in Global Warming, support Universal Health Care. Sounds pretty lefty to me.
Although there is a difference that I didn't bother to elucidate. There's the "true believer" leftist, and there's the "Urban Hipster" leftist.
The first kind hate capitalism because it is preventing the imposition of the dictatorship of the proletariat.
The second kind don't hate "capitalism", so much as they hate "capitalism for the masses". Kind of a "conspicuous consumption for me but not for thee" thing, with a lefty justification.
But both groups will tell you the same thing - Wal-Mart is bad because it hurts worker's rights, it promotes overconsumption which is bad for the environment, etc.
If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's sure as shit not a fish.
brian at June 17, 2009 11:22 AM
Too true.
Jeff at June 17, 2009 11:25 AM
My older brother lives in a small town in the South. The Wal-Mart Super center there caused pretty much every hardware store, all of the grocery stores except one Piggly-Wiggly, most of the clothing stores that don't cater to black tastes, and a bunch of other niche merchants to go out of business. These businesses are never coming back, and the decent incomes these families earned running their small businesses are gone forever, too. Wal-Mark impoverishes small communities while selling them cheap goods.
Wal-Mart's purchasing power is so great that they exert tremendous leverage over suppliers; over time, fewer and fewer American businesses can compete because they can't make things as inexpensively as Chinese or Indonesian sweat shops.
Wal-Mart may provide cheap stuff, but they do it in a way that destroys American businesses. Wal-Mart is bad for our economy because their business model only values for Americans as consumers, not as producers.
Cheezburg at June 17, 2009 11:40 AM
Cheezburg -
You do understand that the same thing can be said of Home Depot, Lowe's, Target, K-Mart, Sears, Macy's, Best Buy, etc. etc. etc.
There is a critical disconnect between what people are willing to pay to buy things, and what they are willing to be paid to make things.
So long as the American worker wants to be paid more to make things than they are willing to pay to buy things, then we have to have someone else make them.
This is going to be true of anything where labor is the largest input, which just happens to be most small consumer goods.
In other words, if you want to live a life full of stuff, then you need Wal Mart (etc). If you want to live a life without Wal Mart (etc), you need to live with less stuff, and accept that only the very wealthy will actually HAVE stuff.
brian at June 17, 2009 11:51 AM
> I love that line. It sounds so
> Bladerunner.
Word! Cute little guy in Chinatown! Amusing pidgin speech patterns, pride of craftsmanship, dry-ice fog, lots of foot traffic.
Crid [CommentCrid@gmail.com] at June 17, 2009 12:21 PM
Got any stats to back up that assertion?
Generalizing based upon a small sample size is a bad habit to get into.
By the way, Wal-Mart's got a fair number of MBAs working for it.
And the townspeople who flocked to W-M to take advantage of its lower prices and wider selection had nothing to do with it?
Conan the Grammarian at June 17, 2009 12:22 PM
^ Brian, your whole post up there is a concise assessment of what I perceive to be one of the fundamental challenges that face our society today. To what lengths are we willing to go for more stuff, and to what extent does that more stuff serve to enhance our happiness and well being?
Cheezburg at June 17, 2009 12:24 PM
For Conan:
Not stats, but an interesting article on MBAs - http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article5821706.ece
CB at June 17, 2009 12:40 PM
I think I'll start by agreeing with Brian and Jeff, businessmen are the worst capitalists. But I don't blame them because the door is wide open. They wouldn't be doing their jobs if they didn't walk right through it.
I blame the electorate. When the GM and bank bailouts were announced, did people protest? Did they scream about being robbed? I mean look at Deirdre's posts. We don't even know the difference between capitalism and fascism/corporatism. We're accepting this crap. We're letting politicians and huge corporations turn a once well functioning liberal (and I mean classical) economy into some kind of weird cross between a fascist and socialist one. We've become a bunch of lazy, spoiled children who think everything should be handed to us. It's to be expected then that things are going to hell.
Charles at June 17, 2009 1:00 PM
According a survey, WalMart was, for many people, the first place they'd ever worked with someone of a different race. Mom and Pop can be raging Klan members, and if they've got the only hardware store in town, they're not too likely to staff up outside their own kind.
I agree that the guy's experience was after Barbara's but she recently had a NYT op-ed in which she revisited her old cronies from WalMart. One of them had gotten a raise, but still, times are tough. Ehrenreich seems to think anyone who's not a disabled drug addict is cheating.
And while yes, WalMart and its ilk have forced manufacturing overseas, energy costs and energy regulations also made local factories far less attractive to many small cities and towns--everyone wants jobs, no one wants pollution. And people who've gotten even an AA degree don't want an assembly line job.
Locally made boutique pickles are a great idea--try setting up a little business like that in California and see how cumbersome, expensive and insane the inspection process is. Even New York is more business friendly than CA is--witness all those local Brooklyn foodstuffs.
KateC at June 17, 2009 1:01 PM
And the townspeople who flocked to W-M to take advantage of its lower prices and wider selection had nothing to do with it?
Of course, that had everything to do with it. Whether the people made wise decisions in buying those cheap goods isn't clear to me, however. And from talking to folks back there, I think they're not certain, either.
If low prices and lots of stuff are the only things that matter, Wal-Mart wins every time. But we can't pretend that their cheapness comes for free - it comes at a cost of a lot of American jobs, a lot of pollution (that we don't see), a less diverse U.S. economy, a bigger trade deficit, and more. Currently people appear to think this is a good bargain; I'm not so sure.
Cheezburg at June 17, 2009 1:38 PM
Interesting article, CB.
Of course, anything that tweaks Harvard and its overblown reputation is delightful reading in my book.
Too true.
This article deals with MBAs from major schools, mostly Harvard. Far too many of the graduates of these "top" business schools have never spent any time in the trenches, have a planning horizon that does not extend beyond their next review, and eschew "grunt" work in favor of projects that will enable them to get noticed.
A professor of mine told a story of working for a mid-level retailer which hired a group of "top" school MBAs in Feburary to upgrade its management image. They came in and insisted on making changes and "modernizing" the way things got done in the company. Not one of them had ever worked retail before...so they didn't understand that over 50% of the year's revenue is earned in 6 weeks in Nov-Dec. And they wouldn't listen to anyone who tried to tell them that. You can guess the result.
But remember, the vast majority of work being done by MBAs these days is being done by folks who did not go to a "top" business school and who have some experience doing real work instead of drawing flow charts and writing white papers for McKinsey.
Conan the Grammarian at June 17, 2009 1:40 PM
"Whether the people made wise decisions in buying those cheap goods isn't clear to me, however."
In fact, it's really none of your business. You don't get to decide, on behalf of everyone else, what constitutes a "wise" decision, and then make people comply. Please read Brian's very good comment above: "There is a critical disconnect between what people are willing to pay to buy things, and what they are willing to be paid to make things."
Pirate Jo at June 17, 2009 1:52 PM
"If low prices and lots of stuff are the only things that matter, Wal-Mart wins every time."
Low prices and lots of stuff are the hallmarks of a better standard of living - you don't have to pay a lot of money for necessities.
Pirate Jo at June 17, 2009 1:56 PM
It wasn't just cheap goods that did in the local guys. It was a plentiful and diverse selection.
The little shops helped in their own demise with low inventory levels, no diversity in products carried, early closing hours, and rigid adherence to an antiquated business model.
The shopowner who carries one brand of detergent because that's what he uses is going to lose business when someone else opens nearby carrying six brands.
The old model of "I can order it for you" doesn't work anymore. I've got the internet. I can order it for myself. I need it now.
The shop owner who closes his store at five so he can get home to the family is going to lose business to the guy who's still open. I walk by two office supply stores every day. One, the local one, closes at six. The other, Staples, is open 'til nine. When I am stopping for office-type supplies after work, which one do you think gets my business?
I was reading a defense of big box stores recently by a woman who went into her local hardware for rat traps. The owner told her he didn't carry rat traps because his wife thought them cruel. So, she broke her rule of only shopping at local purveyors and went to Home Depot, where she found she was not enslaved to the owner's wife's squeamishness.
Urbanites (even suburbanites) who have a diversity of stores from which to choose too often fail to understand that folks in the sticks often had to make do with Joe's Bait Shop and Liquor Store. And whatever Joe wanted to charge was what they paid because they had nowhere else to go.
Sam Walton understood this and, unlike the higher ups at Ben Franklin (to whom he reportedly pitched the idea of a rural super store), saw opportunity. He stayed open later, took a smaller mark-up, and carried a variety of brands and products. And he beat his competitors.
Conan the Grammarian at June 17, 2009 2:06 PM
In fact, it's really none of your business. You don't get to decide, on behalf of everyone else, what constitutes a "wise" decision, and then make people comply.
It's my business insofar as my family's life is my business, but I don't have any power or desire to make people comply with my wishes. However, it is clear that on the whole, the presence of Wal-Mart has lowered - not raised - the standard of living in this small town. And some of the ones that I have talked to have questioned its role in their community. As you drive around and look at all the shuttered buildings, it's obvious the town is slowly dying. And the big box is part of what's causing that.
It wasn't just cheap goods that did in the local guys. It was a plentiful and diverse selection.
Yeah, that too. I'm not arguing against that. The point of my post, that seems to be eluding you, is that yes - Wal-Mart and its brethren effectively meet their shoppers' needs as consumers - but they do a ton of damage in the process to our communities and our economy. If want to continue down the road of ever-cheaper and ever-more crap, then they're the path we should follow. But that means our country also continues on a path of deficits, destruction of manufacturing, increasing dependence on long supply chains that are subject to all sorts of disruptions and require cheap and plentiful petroleum products, and the continued loss of small businesses across the country. Wal-Mart's cheapness is expensive in many ways, they're simply external to the cost you pay at the register.
Cheezburg at June 17, 2009 2:56 PM
People should have thought of that before they demanded $40 an hour to assemble cars.
brian at June 17, 2009 3:35 PM
People should have thought of that before they demanded $40 an hour to assemble cars.
Yes. I thought the whole reason for bankruptcy of GM and Chrysler would be to trash the onerous UAW contracts and break that union's stranglehold on the industry. Not doing so was an epic fail.
Cheezburg at June 17, 2009 3:40 PM
You'd think that, if you lived in a country that valued due process and rule of law.
But if you lived in a fascist nation, the government would step in, set aside 300 years of precedent, vacate the bondholders, and transfer half of the holdings to the very union whose contracts contributed to the collapse in the first place.
Good thing we don't live there, eh?
brian at June 17, 2009 4:27 PM
Hah! Yeah.
Cheezburg at June 17, 2009 4:49 PM
> an interesting article on MBAs
The reason more isn't made of Bush's MBA is that it so obviously failed to imbue him with any broader ideology about value creation, yet obviously succeeded in teaching effective managerial technique.... At the very least, it cracked his mind open wide enough that even in an alcoholic haze, he learned much from close observation of the Reagan administration (and perhaps others). The Gipper had no finer student.
Crid [CommentCrid@gmail.com] at June 17, 2009 5:22 PM
I tend to side with Cheezy about Wal-Mart; I've heard that in the midwest, every Wal-mart staffer creates a $12,000 annual drag on state services for health care, etc. That number is about five years old, and I haven't a clue where I read it.
Sam Walton wasn't an entirely nice man.
On the other hand, lots of economic activity is predatory. That's not the end of the world.
Two important points:
First, it's been said that Wal-Mart's pitiless insistence that suppliers tie into their computer databases (for just-in-time and all that other 1980's silliness) did more to foster the microcomputer revolution than Bill Gates ever dreamed of doing.
Second, I went on vacation in Fiji once. One night after diving, a new friend and I decided to walk from the resort to take a look at that quaint little general store we saw by the airport. (Approximately here. Don't worry about noise from the airstrip... There were only a couple of flights a week. And if you scan to the east, you'll see Malcolm Forbes island.)
When we wandered in, we saw that it was anything but cute. It was a tightly-run family business, essentially a monopoly. If you were one of the 9,000 residents on that island of coconut farmers, and you wanted own something, you could either buy it in that store or buy a plane ticket to a bigger island, buy it there just a little cheaper, and pay to bring it back again. That cost a lot of coconuts.
I saw similar things on New Britain in Papua New Guinea. Most pathetic was that these stores –large, inelegant operations serving unsophisticated populations– would dress themselves up in vaguely western ways. The one in PNG had a large, red, italic K on it, indistinguishable at first glance from K-mart.
If only! In this century, we need to make sure that these huge operations aren't rending our social fabric too deeply. But in another time, and even today in other places, the arrival of a big, tightly-run and predatory retailer is a tremendous blessing. We tend to imagine Mom & Pop stores as warmly-spirited places of gentle pricing and thoughtful credit, with lots of Andy Griffith-type characters behind the cash register. I don't think it's true.
While I twitched earlier when Deirdre mentioned the importance of "regulated" capitalism, she's on to something important. We do something here in the modern west to move all this stuff to each other. It's hard to say what it is, but we should be glad we have it, just as we're sorry that others don't.
Crid [CommentCrid@gmail.com] at June 17, 2009 6:18 PM
Crid - The MBA doesn't deal with value creation. He deals with micro-managing others and taking credit for any value that happens to get created around him.
You want to know how the MBA fucked shit up? I'll tell you, because I've seen it first hand.
The MBA will trot into a factory, knowing precisely dick about the products or processes, and proceed to "streamline" shit. He'll tell the engineers how to do their jobs. He'll give the line managers shit for not being team players. He'll bring in his own "consultants" that fuck things up even worse.
And then he'll cash in his options while the company burns to the ground.
Case in point: General Motors. The MBAs wanted "efficiency". But they weren't talking about engineering, or production, but financial efficiency.
The end result is a bunch of cars that are clones of one another because it's cheaper that way. We get the engineers abused into doing nothing new, or exciting - because that's financially risky.
And you end up with product that is bland. And when your competition is doing a more reliable and cheaper bland than you, you lose.
Say what you will about Japanese companies, but they aren't run by MBAs. They are run by businessmen. And businessmen know when to get the fuck out of the way.
brian at June 17, 2009 6:25 PM
Must you be so reasonable?
brian at June 17, 2009 6:28 PM
> Say what you will about
> Japanese companies....
Don't mind if I do! Their economy has been in the toilet for twenty years because of an essentially criminal alliance between incompetent bankers and incompetent borrowers. There are things to admire about Japanese culture, but on balance, we do free enterprise better over here.
> but they aren't run by MBAs.
Everything I've read about the 'salaryman' of Japan suggests that he's found no escape from the technocratic perils of any culture. The experiences I had a year or two ago at the American HQ of a major (ahem) manufacturer of Japanese automobiles was unimpressive in this respect. They like to save money in all respects. They're to be admired for keeping salaries under control in the upper rungs, but that certainly costs them talent, too.
Still, I'm the only one of my mother's children without an MBA, and am proud to be a member of the Rebel Alliance, proudly wearing an Oak Leaf Cluster for Freelance Assignment on my tunic.
Financial services is, as of May 2008, the largest sector of the US economy.
OK? Got that?
Financial services is, as of May 2008, the largest sector of the US economy.
Yes, something's wrong. There's no way all those people are creating enough value to sustain their lifestyles.
But it's simplistic to say the problem is MBA's. Besides, we're in America... People can do whatever they want to –or whatever they need to– with those degrees. (i.e., did you want fries with that, or are you good to go with just that chocolate shake?)
Crid [CommentCrid@gmail.com] at June 17, 2009 7:22 PM
"Say what you will about Japanese companies, but they aren't run by MBAs. They are run by businessmen. And businessmen know when to get the fuck out of the way."
That's pretty funny. The Toyota Way? Six sigma? All that stuff? The stuff the Japanese use to create quality and add value and beat the pants off of American firms?
Product of an American Engineer, Edward Deming who went to Japan to try to resuscitate it after WWII. He's now revered by, taught to, studied by all American MBA students.
"William Edwards Deming (October 14, 1900 – December 20, 1993) was an American statistician, professor, author, lecturer, and consultant. Deming is widely credited with improving production in the United States during World War II, although he is perhaps best known for his work in Japan. There, from 1950 onward he taught top management how to improve design (and thus service), product quality, testing and sales (the last through global markets)[1] through various methods, including the application of statistical methods.
Deming made a significant contribution to Japan's later reputation for innovative high-quality products and its economic power. He is regarded as having had more impact upon Japanese manufacturing and business than any other individual not of Japanese heritage. Despite being considered something of a hero in Japan he was only just beginning to win widespread recognition in the U.S. at the time of his death"
You guys often very funny. Brian especially.
jerry at June 17, 2009 8:05 PM
In the tradition of Gog M. For you brian the most frigtening words for you are not
"I am a engineer/Government, I am here to help"
it is
"I am a MBA, and I here to help".
John Paulson at June 17, 2009 8:41 PM
"Wal-Mart may provide cheap stuff, but they do it in a way that destroys American businesses. Wal-Mart is bad for our economy because their business model only values for Americans as consumers, not as producers. "
True, so much so that Wal Mart independently is a major trading partner of China.
"Wal-Mart and its brethren effectively meet their shoppers' needs as consumers - but they do a ton of damage in the process to our communities and our economy."
And they have done a ton of good to those same families in those same communities whose sons will never go off to a war between the US and China that will never happen now because our economies are so entwined - the "Chimerican economy" Niall Ferguson has called it. WalMart is a big part of the reason we have not had a Cold War between America and China. No small benefit. The straggler shop keepers who couldn't keep up are a small price to pay.
Jim at June 17, 2009 9:45 PM
Jerry - I know all about Dr. Deming. He went there after GM and Ford told him "why would we need to change anything we're doing?"
And you'll notice that he was NOT A FUCKING MBA.
Engineers know how to make shit. Businessmen know how to sell it. And they know how to get the engineers to stop. For an interesting story about what happens when you leave engineers to their own devices, read about Mars.
What do MBAs bring to the table?
Oh, and thanks for assuming I'm an idiot. Wrong again.
brian at June 17, 2009 9:49 PM
Crid, it might be simplistic, but it does a pretty good job of explaining the system.
The MBAs are creating pyramid scheme after pyramid scheme, and nobody ever calls them on it. After all, they've got an MBA, they must be smart, right?
brian at June 17, 2009 9:53 PM
Jerry, just because the big Japanese corporations got their Q/A start from Dr. Deming does not contradict Brian's point. I would add this:
The Japanese tend to promote people from within their company. I remember reading about places where even a highly-educated guy on the fast track would still be required to work for years at various jobs in the factory, where the stuff is made. I totally agree about MBA's. Unless it's accounting, I say that degree is worthless, worthless, worthless (maybe it can get you more money, but I mean worthless for the hirer).
While the Japanese executive in an injection-molded plastics plant, for example, knows a whole lot about actually making the parts, and what machines are used, and what the quality problems can be, the US executive was formerly working for a bank or something. He is supposedly trained to "manage", period. That is total bull.
"Deming is widely credited with improving production in the United States during World War II, although he is perhaps best known for his work in Japan." Nice to know you know how to use Wikipedia, but why don't you read the gist of it, Jerry? This guy didn't get the kind of interest in his theories/methods in the US than he did in Japan. But, the US manufacturing might was something the rest of the world could not dream of back then, so our MBA's (probably ;-) did not want to hear of Deming's ideas.
"You guys often very funny. Brian especially." Ah so, you funny too, Jerryson.
Dave Lincoln at June 17, 2009 9:58 PM
I don't assume you're an idiot, the null hypothesis is that you're not an idiot. I have to admit that you're kind of an overachiever in producing the empirical evidence needed to reject the null hypothesis, so you got that going for you.
Anyway, my experience as engineer and mba is that Deming is taught far more often in mba-land than in the engineering curriculum. And I think you are doing Deming a disservice to write "he was not a fucking mba" as though he would have any embarrassment in discussing his management theories, management books, or association with mba programs.
jerry at June 17, 2009 10:07 PM
Yes, Dave, well the point wasn't that Americans didn't dismiss Deming, the point was that the Toyota companies we know and admire for their brilliant products and ways to market them have a great deal of management science behind them.
Not brian's romantic view of businessmen somehow getting out of the fucking way.
jerry at June 17, 2009 10:12 PM
Management science? What kind of nonsense is this?
Deming didn't need to teach engineers, because WE ALREADY KNOW WHAT HE'S SAYING.
MBAs on the other hand, think thye know everything, and start barking out orders to change shit.
Yes, I have seen this with my own eyes. And yes, those MBAs get laughed out of the room and the engineers go off and do it right anyhow.
Deming did a great many things. And statistics were just one tiny piece. His biggest contribution, in my opinion, Just-in-time. It's something that ought to be casually obvious, and an engineer can grok it. But getting management to support it is not easy.
You'll notice that the most successful retailers (like Wal-Mart) have adapted the JIT concept to store inventory. Higher turns, lower cost.
The trick is getting all your vendors on board. And that's like herding cats. But I've seen that done too.
And it is still accomplished by getting out of the engineers' way. The businessmen run the business, the engineers run design and production, and the accountants can go play with themselves in the corner until we need them.
brian at June 17, 2009 10:23 PM
Here's why I despise Wal-Mart: Censorship by a monopoly. They come into an area, force every small store to shut down, and then decide what the people who live there should read, hear, wear, etc. I always cheer a little when a band refuses to issue a "family friendly" version of a CD to sell at Wal-Mart. With a new book coming out, and I bet a provocative one at that, it seems like this should concern you most of all Amy. (At least Wal-Mart did away with its ban on the morning after pill, which, in areas with no hospital or other pharmacies, had huge ramifications for women.)
JulieA at June 17, 2009 10:31 PM
Jerry, I am not sure of everyone's definition of "businessman" here. I personally think of small businessmen, whom I admire. I think small business gets the shaft in this country by all kinds of government (not necessarily by Wal-Mart, BTW), and they don't have the money for lobbyists like big business.
If by "businessman", you mean big corporate honchos only, then I think they are in the way a lot, and many would be worth more to the company if they played computer games all day for the same salary and just stopped developing new programs, strategies and paperwork.
I don't know about Management Science. I personally think the Jap. execs. just use common sense by realizing that they ought to have managers that understand what the heck the company does (not this paperwork and this plan and this management matrix and crap like that - just, look we make cars, or we make machine tools).
Dave Lincoln at June 17, 2009 10:36 PM
Damn, Brian, we're about on the same page. Do you think Crid is an idiot also?
Back to Wal-Mart. I hate to see local hardware stores and other small stores close, too. Think about this: if everyone felt that way and put their money where their pie-hole was than those stores would still be in business. Obviously, a lot of people in those towns where Wal-Mart about shut down the business district went to Wal-Mart, and they bought a lot of stuff.
BTW, I speak as a former Wal-Mart shopper. 4 years ago, I went to buy 2 small items. I heard an announcement over the P/A that was in Spanish, and I don't live in Miami or LA. I got a manager and told her that these two items were the last things I would ever buy at Wal-Mart due to this fact alone. I told her my estimate of at least $150/month that I spent there. She was actually pretty understanding and not too PC about my point. Way up top, someone mentioned how they take that type of thing seriously. I hope so, but who knows as I haven't been in there to hear any more announcements on the P/A.
Target is fine, and they definitely have prettier girl shoppers during the week.
Dave Lincoln at June 17, 2009 10:43 PM
Brian, I've worked for and with engineers. What they know about business wouldn't fill a postcard. What they think they know about business would exceed a thousand copies of War and Peace in voluminous excess. Doctors are the same way.
Business managers who know what they're doing don't get in the way of the engineers. Left to own devices, however, engineers would build a fantastic product with cool features the customer didn't ask for that, because of the feature creep, would cost more than it could be sold for.
Business is a much more complicated process than was in Adam Smith's day. We've gone from the Production Concept (can we build it) to the Sales Concept (can we sell it) to the Market Concept (what do people need) in which businesses actually have to make products people want at the price they want to pay.
That's what the engineers running GM failed to understand. They're still stuck in the 19th century Sales Concept, building the product in the expectation that someone will buy it. Problem is, the market has evolved. They haven't.
If they had, they'd drop to two main product lines (like the Japanese and German companies) instead of keeping five and expecting the market to still be segmented like it was in the 1950s.
Your own experiences notwithstanding, good business managers (even MBAs) do add something to the process. As do engineers. When one discipline exerts too much control over the process, the products suffer, the customers suffer, and the business suffers.
MBAs didn't destroy the economy. They did business within the regulatory constraints imposed upon them by lawmakers...a group composed predominantly of lawyers and entirely of politicians.
Competing accusations of destroying the country made against the backdrop of economic uncertainty sounds a little too much like the last days of the Weimar Republic to me.
Conan the Grammarian at June 17, 2009 11:08 PM
Conan the Grammarian:
See the bit about Mars I linked above.
There's a world of difference between a "good business manager" and an "MBA". The bulk of the MBAs that are being churned out of diploma mills can't find their ass with both hands and a map. They've never actually DONE anything, but they think they know how to find inefficiencies in the process.
It is easier to teach an engineer to think like a manager than it is to teach an MBA to think like an engineer.
That's a whole other kettle of fish. But don't think that their bullshit had nothing to do with the upsurge in MBAs. Remember, Congress is largely to blame for this country's credentialism fetish.
brian at June 18, 2009 4:44 AM
> Do you think Crid is an idiot also?
Why must you be spiteful? Don't you understand that I have feelings too? I'm just a man Dave... Flesh & blood, just like you....
Crid [CommentCrid@gmail.com] at June 18, 2009 7:00 AM
Crid, once in 5 comments, you write something that makes sense and adds something to the discussion (like one above about the retails stores on Fiji and New Britain. That post had a topic, it related to what previous people had said, and you didn't write like you're some type of beat poet from the 50's or something.)
The other 80% of the time, it's like "Word! Cute little guy in Chinatown! Amusing pidgin speech patterns, pride of craftsmanship, dry-ice fog, lots of foot traffic." Look, I understand you are trying to sound cool, and be really descriptive etc. However, most of the time in your posts there is no logic. I think you should write in your 80 % style when you write a book. You have a "way" with words that might sell very well to certain kinds of people (probably not at Wal-Mart, BTW).
It's getting to where I'm skipping your posts all the time, and the names are at the bottom!
Dave Lincoln at June 18, 2009 7:18 AM
"Competing accusations of destroying the country made against the backdrop of economic uncertainty sounds a little too much like the last days of the Weimar Republic to me."
speaking of which, they've got a sale on wheelbarrows at Wal-Mart right now.
Dave Lincoln at June 18, 2009 7:47 AM
> That post had a topic
I like redheads as much as anybody, but one of the main reasons I come to Amy's blog is that she'll let us talk about whatever we want. In thousands of visits over five years, I've never, ever seen her interrupt without severe misconduct on the part of a commenter... Merely being an asshole, as you demonstrate today, doesn't earn any supervisory attention. I wish Seipp and many other bloggers had been as thick-skinned and sensible.
And here you are in nice wool suit and your neatly combed hair to tell us what the topic is! But as it turns out, nobody cares what you think the topic is. Amy understands that we're here for exchange, not for lecture. We'll say whatever we want. And if you don't like it, you can go read something else. It's the internet, bay-bee! Talk is cheap.
> Look, I understand you are
> trying to sound cool, and
> be really descriptive
That's a spectacularly weird thing to say. I'm here to be amused and amuse in turn. Isn't everyone? It's like you're going into a church and pointing out all the people whose heads are ducked in prayer, or going to a 7-11 and pointing at all the people standing in line for cigarettes. What exactly do you think this is about? This ain't a legal preceding.
> However, most of the time
Without specific rhetorical purpose (as in your very next sentence), it's a mistake to begin a rebutting sentence with a single word and a comma. It gives the reader the impression that you think merely offering the point to follow imbues that point with argumentative power... But of course, it doesn't. Don't be too ashamed! When she's not being professionally edited, Maureen Dowd makes that mistake, too.
> in your posts there is no logic.
Smarter than you and funner besides!
> I think you should write
> in your 80 % style
Why should I care? I think you should go piss up a rope.
> It's getting to where I'm skipping
> your posts all the time
Apparently not! Apparently not. Admit it: You're transfixed by every word!
And you fucking well ought to be.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at June 18, 2009 8:56 AM
This one's for you, Brian.
A shepherd was herding his flock in a remote pasture when an expensive SUV advanced out of a dust cloud and pulled up to him. The driver, a young man in an blue shirt and slacks hopped out and asked our shepherd: "If I can tell you exactly how many sheep you have in your flock, will you give me one?"
The shepherd looks at him, then at his peacefully grazing flock and calmly answered "sure." The young man whipped out his notebook computer, connected it to a cell-phone, surfed to a NASA page on the Internet where he called up a GPS satellite navigation system, scanned the area, opened up a database and four Excel spreadsheets with complex formulas, and ran several complex data models. Finally he turned to the shepherd and says: "you have here exactly 1,586 sheep!"
"This is correct. As agreed, you can take one of the sheep," said the shepherd. He watched the young man make a selection and bundle it into his SUV.
Then the shepherd said: "Say, if I can guess you do for a living, will you give me my sheep back?"
The young man thought about it for moment. "Okay, why not?"
"You're an MBA," said the shepherd.
"This is correct," said the young man, "how did you know?"
"Easy" answered the shepherd. "You showed up here although nobody called you. You want to be paid for the answer to a question I didn’t ask and to which I already knew the answer. And, after all that, you still don't know anything about my business. Now can I have my dog back?”
Conan the Grammarian at June 18, 2009 9:08 AM
Oh good. I need a loaf of bread.
Conan the Grammarian at June 18, 2009 9:36 AM
Crid, I don't have a wool suit or combed hair. Why do you make stuff up like this? I get off topic plenty of times, but I just wanted to explain why I think your posts are mostly idiotic. You can write whatever you want, and I was not writing to you before anyway.
As for your posts, I looked back up top for examples of idiocy, Guess what? I found them. (that's what I pasted in, in the one instance.)
"Without specific rhetorical purpose (as in your very next sentence), it's a mistake to begin a rebutting sentence with a single word and a comma. It gives the reader the impression that you think merely offering the point to follow imbues that point with argumentative power.."
Possibly, that is a good point. (haha, joke, Crid, but I had to say that, as I think you wouldn't get it.) I usually write the way I talk, and that could be a problem. I don't aim to write like Maureen Down, that's for sure.
Transfixed as always,
Dave Lincoln
Dave Lincoln at June 18, 2009 10:10 AM
Conan, that's what I meant, too.
Dave Lincoln at June 18, 2009 10:12 AM
This one particular helicopter, a Robinson R-22 was flying over the Puget Sound area one day and got a bit low on fuel. To make things worse, the whole area had gotten socked in by fog while the pilot and passenger had been elsewhere. Things were getting a bit dicey, and the only option seemed to be to land at the heliport at one hospital, but the pilot could not find it.
Lo and behold, one tall office building was sticking out of the clouds and their were people on the roof, but it was not suitable for landing, just a built-up roof. The pilot hovered at 5 ft. above the rooftop and got the passenger to yell out a question to one of the people on the roof. "Hey, where are we?" yelled the passenger. "You're in a helicopter", yelled back the passenger.
The passenger turned white as things looked bad, but then the pilot smiled, and swung the chopper onto a 230 deg. heading and pushed the cyclic forward to get going. To his confused passenger, the pilot said "We're good!. The guy answered my question, but told me nothing that I needed to know. From that, I know that he is a computer geek, so we know this building is at Microsoft. The hospital is 5 miles SW. We'll be there in 3 mins. Buckle up."
Dave Lincoln at June 18, 2009 10:21 AM
Correction, it was an old Hughes 269, not a Robinson R-22, sorry. (frickin lame-stream media!)
Dave Lincoln at June 18, 2009 10:31 AM
"I always cheer a little when a band refuses to issue a "family friendly" version of a CD to sell at Wal-Mart."
Yeah, it always seemed like a weird company culture to me. Kind of bible-thumpery. I think that has changed a little since the old man passed away.
My primary beef with the company has to do with their abuses of eminent domain.
Pirate Jo at June 18, 2009 11:33 AM
> I don't have a wool suit
> or combed hair.
You thought I was being literal?
Listen, if you already know what everyone else is supposed to be saying and how they're supposed to say it, why do you come here at all? Why get out of bed in the morning? It's your planet! Relax... And sit quietly.
> Transfixed as always,
Without me, you're nothing!
Crid [CommentCrid@gmail.com] at June 18, 2009 11:46 AM
Soooo, the wool suit is a metaphor? For what, again? How about the hair? I can comb it, if that works better for your writing style.
I only wish it were my planet, Crid. But, no dice. Gaia belongs to us all, for our mineral-extracting pleasure.
Can you put "Crid" at the top of your posts, just for me, so's I can skip quicker and save some of my time? Come on, do me a solid.
Dave Lincoln at June 18, 2009 12:04 PM
If Crid put his name at the top of his posts, I would tempted to skip TO them, and would miss a lot of other good ones. So Crid please keep your posts as they are.
Pirate Jo at June 18, 2009 12:46 PM
Julie -
I won't buy CDs at Wal-Mart because of their policy. If the disc as released by the artist isn't good enough, then they can not carry it. But to impose their "family friendly" policies on artists by virtue of their sales volume is obtuse at best.
Jo - They didn't abuse Eminent Domain. They merely took advantage of it. If the local governments didn't have a hard-on for stealing people's land, it wouldn't be an issue.
brian at June 18, 2009 1:14 PM
My own experience was different from Platt's, but that could be a function of being at a different Wal-Mart. The one I was at basically expected me to pick up on everything instantly, and I was eventually canned for not following rules that nobody had told me about.
When I was on the "intake" team, I was expected to stock shelves. So far, so routine. Unfortunately, the people stocking the "pick carts" we were working from often didn't seem to know or care what was actually needed on the shelves, preferring to throw everything on that they didn't feel like storing in the bins. And, to top it off, I was expected to deal with a cart in no more than fifteen minutes, no matter what, despite the fact that this was often physically impossible.
Technomad at June 19, 2009 10:31 PM
Technomad -
Asshole bosses exist in every walk of life. It's built in to the system.
brian at June 20, 2009 6:05 AM
Leave a comment