Saturday, October 11, 2003

The Pragmatic Progressive Endorses John Edwards For President

Annenberg 2000 Election Study Measures Union Votes

Shows Labor Ties Win White Votes For Democrats



Table B -- Opinions on Issues, Union and Non-Union

Believe:



Federal government should spend more on public schools

Union Households 71%

Non-Union Households 66%

Total 67%

Federal government should provide tax credits or vouchers to help parents pay for private schools

Union Households 39%

Non-Union Households 44%

Total 43%

Federal government should spend more to cover people without health insurance

Union Households 69%

Non-Union Households 65%

Total66%

Federal government should ban abortion

Union Households 18%

Non-Union Households 22%

Total 22%

U.S. military should be used in foreign civil wars

Union Households 25%

Non-Union Households 26%

Total 26%

Loss of jobs to foreign competition is an extremely serious problem

Union Households 30%

Non-Union Households 25%

Total 26%

Federal government should try to reduce income differences between rich and poor

Union Households 51%

Non-Union Households 47%

Total 48%

Federal government should make greater effort to protect the environment

Union Households 63%

Non-Union Households 64%

Total 64%

Federal government should make greater effort to restrict gun purchases

Union Households 63%

Non-Union Households 64%

Total 64%

Federal government should make greater effort to stop job discrimination against women

Union Households 53%

Non-Union Households 53%

Total 53%

Federal government should make greater effort to stop job discrimination against blacks

Union Households 42%

Non-Union Households 43%

Total 43%

Federal government should make greater effort to stop job discrimination against gays and Lesbians

Union Households 41%

Non-Union Households 39%

Total 39%

Trust Federal government to do what is right all or most of the time

Union Households 29%

Non-Union Households 29%

Total 29%

When I look at these numbers I see that the majority of Americans Union or Non-Union are with the Democrats on the issues. Why does the GOP win? They are communicating better with voters. How do we win back the White House? Our candidate must be able to connect with voters as well as or better than George Bush. I think many in the field can do this. I think John Edwards is by far the best communicator, has substance combined with charm, and I know he has the best chance to communicate better than Bush, head-to-head.

John Edwards is trailing in the national polls, but leading in South Carolina by 9 points, (see link below). I truly believe that Edwards is honest, cares deeply about ordinary Americans, is extremely bright, and I sense genuine concern for the issues that I care about. The biggest gripe about Edwards is that he’s too inexperienced. I think Edwards has the capacity to do a fantastic job as President. I haven’t always agreed with John on all the issues, but on the vast majority I do, and even more importantly, I trust John to do the right thing. John Edwards is a pragmatic progressive.

I think America has an opportunity to elect a very special President in 2004, I think it will be John Edwards. I am endorsing John's candidacy for President.

John Edwards would be the best advocate for working Americans, the best communicator to spread the values and beliefs of the Democratic Party, (which as you can see from the Annenberg study are the values of ALL Americans), and has the greatest potential to be the best President. When you elect a President you elect a branch of government and an executive cabinet. Edwards will surround himself with the most highly skilled experts in the world, but make no mistake, the buck will always stop with John Edwards.

The Edwards campaign is in a stasis, I think he can make a stand in South Carolina and win this thing. His campaign team is going to have to step it up a few notches, but this is a marathon and not a race.

I like many of the current candidates and my endorsement of Edwards is by no means a knock at them. I fully intend to support my party’s nominee no matter whom we nominate. I also will not tarnish any other Democrat in the race. The goal is to unseat George Bush and put America back on the right track. All Democrats need to remember that all the dirt we spray on our canidates can and will be used against the nominee by Karl Rove and Co. Pointing out policy difference is fine, but keeping it out of the mud is an imperative this season if we hope to win back the Presidency.

John Edwards may not be the most popular or chic choice right now, but my gut tells me he’s the best person for the job and the best person to win the general election. Politics has always taught me to trust my gut. My gut says Edwards.

Please take a look at his site: John Edwards 2004

John Edwards was born in Seneca, South Carolina and raised in Robbins, North Carolina, a small town in the Piedmont. There John learned the values of hard work and perseverance from his father, Wallace, who worked in the textile mills for 36 years, and from his mother, Bobbie, who ran a shop and worked at the post office. Working alongside his father at the mill, John developed his strong belief that all Americans deserve an equal opportunity to succeed and be heard.

A proud product of public schools, John became the first person in his family to attend college. He worked his way through North Carolina State University where he graduated with high honors in 1974, and then earned a law degree with honors in 1977 from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

For the next 20 years, John dedicated his career to representing families and children hurt by the negligence of others. Standing up against the powerful insurance industry and their armies of lawyers, John helped these families through the darkest moments of their lives to overcome tremendous challenges. His passionate advocacy for people like the folks who worked in the mill with his father earned him respect and recognition across the country.

In 1998, John took this commitment into politics to give a voice in the United States Senate to the people he had represented throughout his career. He ran for the Senate and won, defeating an incumbent Senator.

In Congress, Senator Edwards quickly emerged as a champion for the issues that make a difference to American families: quality health care, better schools, protecting civil liberties, preserving the environment, saving Social Security and Medicare, and reforming the ways campaigns are financed.

As a member of the Select Committee on Intelligence, Senator Edwards has worked tirelessly for a strong national defense and to strengthen the security of our homeland. He has authored key pieces of legislation on cyber, bio, and port security.

Senator Edwards and his wife, Elizabeth, whom he met when both were law students at Chapel Hill, were married in 1977. They have had four children, including: their eldest daughter, Catharine, a student at Princeton University; five-year-old Emma Claire, and a three-year-old son, Jack. Their first child, Wade, died in 1996.

Friday, October 10, 2003

From Discipline Global Mobile:


!Online Launch of The Vicar Chronicles!

The enigmatic music producer has finally agreed to reveal all to his
followers, by posting his books The Vicar Chronicles, online on the dgm
site www.disciplineglobalmobile.com/thevicar.

This is not the same as the diary, which many of you will have read. It
is an online whodunnit, exposing the sordid interior of the music
industry. The Vicar's much maligned and downtrodden assistant, Punk
Sanderson, is posting half a chapter a day, whilst also responding to
readers' comments - essential reading for anyone needing a daily fix of
indulgence, entertainment and updates on the real interior of the world
of music.

!Spinal Tap meets Sherlock Holmes live on the DGM site!

A few choice quotes from existing readers :

* You're all over the place, Mr. Sanderson, and I love it. The
Chronicles just get screwier and screwier. Please continue to
entertain me in the style to which I've grown accustomed

* Somewhere, on some parallel plane of existence, you're kicking The
Sopranos' ass.

* Who wants some boring old facts presented in the same boring old way?
Clapton fans, that's who. Is The Vicar a Clapton fan? For that matter,
is The Vicar Clapton?

* more....must have...more...chronicles....

* You are the master of the Cliffhanger

* My interest in the Vicar Chronicles knows no bounds. As an ex-record
company employee I read it in the manner of someone observing their
500th car accident. Keep up the good work on the spy-thriller.


Witness The Process: The Third Chronicle Online

Once the first two chronicles are revealed, Punk will be writing The
Third Chronicle live online; letter by letter and word by word,
including errors, expletives and all legal edits.

Book Three promises another engaging insight into a world which is
increasingly obsessing the public - from The Osbournes to Pop Idol - in
which, according to The Vicar, lead players are simply "big people with
big egos and even bigger erections".

Who is The Vicar?

This is the question asked by most visitors to Punk's Corner at
www.thevicar.com. A few of the suggestions include Robert Fripp, Brian
Eno, Daniel Lanois, Peter Gabriel, David Sylvian, Debbie Harry, a
Hawkwind drummer, Monica Lewinsky and even Tony Blair.

From his writings, the Vicar is a contrary, manipulative, self-obsessed
but generous and very English hero. No-one knows his true identity,
only that the chronicles are written by a major figure from the music
industry who jealously guards his privacy.

The Vicar - his books and his music - represent a major part of the
creative future for DGM. Read for yourself today at www.disciplineglobalmobile.com/thevicar
and have your say at thevicar.com


Well written stuff from The Vicar, worth checking out.

Thoughts on Game 2, Boston-NY Yankees: Yankees by 4.

Jose Contreras has a brilliant Mr. Splitty, a cutter, a poorly controlled fast ball, and fears no man.

Rivera leads the Majors in broken bats relative to innings pitched. His cutter hits 90, no one else gets it that hot. Maximum control pitcher.

Matsui AKA Godzilla has a much better glove than we expected. A smart hitter who isn't trying to hit home runs, instead concentrating on getting hits. I’m convinced that he has the coolest looking bat in the majors, it looks like white metal, very sharp.

Posada, a switch hitting Catcher who hits for power and average and calls a brilliant game. Still the best catcher in NY.

Andy P. fantastic cool last night. Didn't get fazed by early trouble, settled into a slick groove.

Soriano and Giambi need to start contributing.

Nick the stick, he's going to be a great pure hitter very soon.

Aaron Boone is playing a fine 3B. I’d love to see that stroke and speed his showed in Cincy.

Bernie Williams seems to be arriving at his special post season ‘place’. Grady Little under estimated him at his own peril.

Kevin Millar still has that thing on his face. David Ortiz still has that thing on his face. They all still have those things on their faces. They can shave their heads, they can grow wacky beards, sport Mohawks, shave their asses, whatever. At least they could act like they’ve been “there’ before.

We want Pedro.

Wednesday, October 08, 2003

As a life long Yankee fan, I’m watching this New York-Boston Series with rapt attention. Some thoughts after Game 1, Boston – 5 New York – 2.

What's up with the BoSox facial hair expression art? Kevin Millar? David Ortiz? I know they're anti-Yankee clean shaving, we get it, but Kevin Millar is shouting,

"Hey! I'm wearing a handle-bar moustache and a soul patch! I am FABULOUS!"

David Ortiz what's with the very thin never-ending sideburn situation? Isn't there leather bar in the Castro missing a couple of bartenders?

Everyone on that team has at least a goatee. 1992 called, they want their grunge back in one piece or Socks the cat gets it. Why don't The Red Sox just jog out in flannel uniforms with the ass cut out tomorrow? I think that's what the team is really progressing to. Just hurry up and get there already.

I’m not excusing Jeff Nelson, he looks like the fuhr with that thing on his face.

PS

Yankee middle-relief is a joke. I don't want to see anyone but Jose Contreras and Mariano Rivera touching the ball after the starting pitcher.


I think Wakefield could go another 50 innings, I suggest the Sox just leave him in.

Note to Derek Jeter, diving IS scary, but if you didn't come to play, than stay on the pine. Meat.

Alfonso Soriano, what do you see? Not the ball evidently.

Giambi, you’re a big disappointment and I think you know it.

Posada you’re fine. Nick Johnson. Slow down.

Godzilla, you’re OK.

Aaron Boone, what are you DOING?

Bernie, put the guitar DOWN!

Juan, it’s not your fault, but you suck.

Looking forward to Game 2.



Tuesday, October 07, 2003

The California GOP Coup Map.

Well done, GOP. Slick as hell.
Wal-Mart and the Hourglass Economy

The hourglass economy, what I feel is an accurate description of the fundamentally dysfunction of the American economy, is a condition where the US has an increasingly fat top end, small sized middle-class, and fat bottom end. An economy without a robust and growing middle-class doesn’t properly propel capitalism because there aren’t enough families that have non-credit driven funds for the procurement of higher-end manufactured goods. Individual debt is skyrocketing, savings are dwindling, and such trends are indicative of an economy that doesn’t pay its workers enough to buy that which they make. Manufacturing and now service industry jobs continue to be sent to markets where the price of labor is as inexpensive as possible. The result has been 6%+ unemployment , decreased personal fiduciary liquidity and folks even more so than before living paycheck to paycheck. In fact the mark by which we measure middle-class continues to decline, when it should be rising.

Consumer demand is still relatively high. The problem is Americans are charging, or in other words, borrowing at high rates of interest, in order to buy that which the commercial market positions as ‘needs’ and not simply ‘wants’. The combination of a decrease in high wage middle income jobs, and increased credit debt is leading to a ‘perfect storm’. There is a point where credit debt catches up with inability to pay off principle on a large scale that leads to economic catastrophe.

The reasons for this hour glass economy are many. Wal-Mart is just one, but a big one.




From Business Week:


Is Wal-Mart Too Powerful?
Low prices are great. But Wal-Mart's dominance creates problems -- for suppliers, workers, communities, and even American culture


In business, there is big, and there is Wal-Mart. With $245 billion in revenues in 2002, Wal-Mart Stores (WMT ) Inc. is the world's largest company. It is three times the size of the No. 2 retailer, France's Carrefour. Every week, 138 million shoppers visit Wal-Mart's 4,750 stores; last year, 82% of American households made at least one purchase at Wal-Mart. "There's nothing like Wal-Mart," says Ira Kalish, global director of Deloitte Research. "They are so much bigger than any retailer has ever been that it's not possible to compare."

At Wal-Mart, "everyday low prices" is more than a slogan; it is the fundamental tenet of a cult masquerading as a company. Over the years, Wal-Mart has relentlessly wrung tens of billions of dollars in cost efficiencies out of the retail supply chain, passing the larger part of the savings along to shoppers as bargain prices. New England Consulting estimates that Wal-Mart saved its U.S. customers $20 billion last year alone. Factor in the price cuts other retailers must make to compete, and the total annual savings approach $100 billion. It's no wonder that economists refer to a broad "Wal-Mart effect" that has suppressed inflation and rippled productivity gains through the economy year after year.

However, Wal-Mart's seemingly simple and virtuous business model is fraught with complications and perverse consequences. To cite a particularly noteworthy one, this staunchly anti-union company, America's largest private employer, is widely blamed for the sorry state of retail wages in America. On average, Wal-Mart sales clerks -- "associates" in company parlance -- pulled in $8.23 an hour, or $13,861 a year, in 2001, according to documents filed in a lawsuit pending against the company. At the time, the federal poverty line for a family of three was $14,630. Wal-Mart insists that it pays competitively, citing a privately commissioned survey that found that it "meets or exceeds" the total remuneration paid by rival retailers in 50 U.S. markets. "This is a good place to work," says Coleman H. Peterson, executive vice-president for personnel, citing an employee turnover rate that has fallen below 45% from 70% in 1999.

Critics counter that this is evidence not of improving morale but of a lack of employment alternatives in a slow-growth economy. "It's a ticking time bomb," says an executive at one big Wal-Mart supplier. "At some point, do the people stand up and revolt?" Indeed, the company now faces a revolt of sorts in the form of nearly 40 lawsuits charging it with forcing employees to work overtime without pay and a sex-discrimination case that could rank as the largest civil rights class action ever. On Sept. 24, a federal judge in California began considering a plaintiff's petition to include all women who have worked at Wal-Mart since late 1998 -- 1.6 million all told -- in a suit alleging that Wal-Mart systematically denies women equal pay and opportunities for promotion. Wal-Mart is vigorously contesting all of these suits.

Wal-Mart might well be both America's most admired and most hated company. "The world has never known a company with such ambition, capability, and momentum," marvels a Boston Consulting Group report. On Wall Street, Wal-Mart trades at a premium to most every other retailer. But the more size and power that "the Beast of Bentonville" amasses, the greater the backlash it is stirring among competing retailers, vendors, organized labor, community activists, and cultural and political progressives. America has a long history of controversial retailers, notes James E. Hoopes, a history professor at Babson College. "What's new about Wal-Mart is the flak it's drawn from outside the world of its competition," he says. "It's become a social phenomenon that people resent and fear."

Wal-Mart's marketplace clout is hard to overstate. In household staples such as toothpaste, shampoo, and paper towels, the company commands about 30% of the U.S. market, and analysts predict that its share of many such goods could hit 50% before decade's end. Wal-Mart also is Hollywood's biggest outlet, accounting for 15% to 20% of all sales of CDs, videos, and DVDs. The mega-retailer did not add magazines to its mix until the mid-1990s, but it now makes 15% of all single-copy sales in the U.S. In books, too, Wal-Mart has quickly become a force. "They pile up best-sellers like toothpaste," says Stephen Riggio, chief executive of Barnes & Noble (BKS ) Inc., the world's largest bookseller.

Wal-Mart controls a large and rapidly increasing share of the business done by most every major U.S. consumer-products company: 28% of Dial (DL ) total sales, 24% of Del Monte Foods (DLM )', 23% of Clorox', 23% of Revlon (REV )'s, and on down the list. Suppliers' growing dependence on Wal-Mart is "a huge issue" not only for manufacturers but also for the U.S. economy, says Tom Rubel, CEO of consultant Retail Forward Inc. "If [Wal-Mart] ever stumbles, we've got a potential national security problem on our hands. They touch almost everything....If they ever really went into a tailspin, the dislocation would be significant and traumatic."

Even so, Wal-Mart appears to be in no imminent danger of running afoul of federal antitrust statutes. The Robinson-Patman Act of 1936 was passed in large part to protect mom-and-pop grocers from the Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., the Wal-Mart of its day. But contemporary antitrust interpretations eschew such David-and-Goliath populism. Giants like Wal-Mart have wide latitude to do as they wish to rivals and suppliers so long as they deliver lower prices to consumers. "When Wal-Mart comes in and people desert downtown because they like the selection and the low prices, it's hard for people in the antitrust community to say we should not let them do that," says New York University law professor Harry First.

CEO H. Lee Scott Jr. and other Wal-Mart executives are aware of the rising hostility the company faces and are trying to smooth its rough edges in dealing with the outside world. But they have no intention of tampering with its shopper-centric business model. "We don't turn a deaf ear to any criticism. We're most sensitive to what the customer has to say, though," says Vice-Chairman Thomas M. Coughlin. "Your customers will tell you when you're wrong."

Wal-Mart cites customer preferences as the reason it does not stock CDs or DVDs with parental warning stickers and why it occasionally yanks items from its shelves. In May, it removed the racy "lad" magazines Maxim, Stuff, and FHM. A month later, it began obscuring the covers of Glamour, Redbook, Marie Claire, and Cosmopolitan with binders. Why did Wal-Mart censor these publications and not Rolling Stone, which has featured a nearly naked Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera on two of its recent covers? "There's a lot of subjectivity," concedes Gary Severson, a Wal-Mart general merchandise manager. "There's a line between provocative and pornographic. I don't know exactly where it is."

Wal-Mart was the only one of the top 10 drug chains to refuse to stock Preven when Gynetics Inc. introduced the morning-after contraceptive in 1999. Roderick L. Mackenzie, Gynetics' founder and nonexecutive chairman, says senior Wal-Mart executives told his employees that they did not want their pharmacists grappling with the "moral dilemma" of abortion. Mackenzie was incensed but tried to hide it. "When you speak to God in Bentonville, you speak in hushed tones," says Mackenzie, who explained, to no avail, that Preven did not induce abortion but rather prevented pregnancy. Wal-Mart spokesman Jay Allen says "a number of factors were considered" in making the Preven decision, but he denies that opposition to abortion was one of them. "If anybody of any belief reads any moral decision [into] that, that's not right," he says.

CULTURAL GATEKEEPER
There is no question that the company has the legal right to sell only what it chooses to sell, even in the case of First Amendment-protected material such as magazines. By most accounts, though, Wal-Mart's cultural gatekeeping has served to narrow the mainstream for entertainment offerings while imparting to it a rightward tilt. The big music companies have stopped grousing about Wal-Mart and are eagerly supplying the chain with the same sanitized versions of explicit CDs that they provide to radio stations. "You can't have 100% impact when you are taking an artist to a mainstream audience if you don't have the biggest player, Wal-Mart," says EMI Music North America Executive Vice-President Phil Quartararo.

This year alone, Wal-Mart hopes to open as many as 335 new stores in the U.S.: 55 discount stores, 210 supercenters, 45 Sam's Clubs (UBS ), and 25 Neighborhood markets. An additional 130 new stores are on the boards for foreign markets. Wal-Mart currently operates 1,309 stores in 10 countries, ranking as the largest retailer in Mexico and Canada. If the company can maintain its current 15% growth rate, it will double its revenues over the next five years and top $600 billion in 2011.

That's a very big if -- even for Wal-Mart. Vice-Chairman Coughlin's biggest worry is finding enough warm bodies to staff all those new stores. By Wal-Mart's own estimate, about 44% of its 1.4 million employees will leave in 2003, meaning the company will need to hire 616,000 workers just to stay even. In addition, from 2004 to 2008, the company wants to add 800,000 new positions, including 47,000 management slots. "That's what causes me the most sleepless nights," Coughlin says.

At the same time, Wal-Mart will have to cope with intensifying grassroots opposition. The company's hugely ambitious expansion plans hinge on continuing its move out of its stronghold in the rural South and Midwest into urban America. This year, the company opened what it describes as "one of its first truly urban stores" in Los Angeles, not far from Watts. Everyday low prices no doubt appeal to city dwellers no less than to their country cousins. But Wal-Mart's sense of itself as definitively American ("Wal-Mart is America," boasts one top executive) is likely to be severely tested by the metropolis' high land costs, restrictive zoning codes, and combative labor unions -- not to mention its greater economic and cultural diversity.

A ZERO-SUM GAME?
Certainly, Wal-Mart will be hard pressed to continue censoring its product lines using the justification of customer preference. The market for profanity-laced hip-hop may be tiny in Bentonville, Ark., but it is big in Los Angeles. Overseas, the company does not presume to impose a small-town, Bible Belt moral agenda on shoppers. "We adopt local standards," says John B. Menzer, CEO of Wal-Mart's international division. Why, then, should Los Angeles be any different?

The fact is, Wal-Mart doesn't know for certain how the majority of its customers feel about Maxim, or any other magazine, for that matter. It appears that the company makes no scientific attempt to survey shoppers about entertainment content but responds in ad hoc fashion to complaints lodged by a relative handful of customers and by outside groups, which are usually but not always of the conservative persuasion.

On the other hand, the company seldom submits to community groups that oppose its plans to build new stores. The number of such challenges has increased steadily and is now running at about 100 a year. Wal-Mart's "biggest barrier to growth is....opposition at the local level," says Carl Steidtmann, Deloitte Research's retail economist. The Stop Wal-Mart movement has been bolstered of late by a series of academic studies that have debunked the notion that a new big-box store boosts employment and sales and property-tax receipts. "The net increases are minimal as the new big-box stores merely capture sales from existing business in the area," concludes a new study of Wal-Mart's impact in Mississippi. "I see it pretty much as a zero-sum game," says co-author Kenneth E. Stone, an economics professor at Iowa State University.

The most hotly contested battleground at the moment is Contra Costa County, near San Francisco. In June, county supervisors enacted an ordinance that prohibits any retail outlet larger than 90,000 square feet from devoting more than 5% of its floor space to food or other nontaxable goods. Wal-Mart promptly gathered enough signatures to force a referendum, scheduled for March. Complains County Supervisor John Gioia: "Local planning should be done by our locally elected board and not by a corporate office in Bentonville, Arkansas." Robert S. McAdam, Wal-Mart's vice-president for government relations, says corporate-sponsored referenda, which Wal-Mart has promoted elsewhere in California, are "a perfectly legitimate part of the process."

SUPERCENTER NATION
Meanwhile, the United Food & Commercial Workers union is stepping up its long-standing attempts to organize Wal-Mart stores, with current campaigns in 45 locations. For UFCW locals that represent grocery workers, the issue is nothing less than survival. The Wal-Mart supercenter -- the principal vehicle of the company's expansion -- is a nonunion dagger aimed at the heart of the traditional American supermarket, nearly 13,000 of which have closed since 1992.

Patterned after the European hypermarket, the supercenter is a combination supermarket and general merchandise discounter built to colossal scale. Wal-Mart didn't introduce the supercenter to America, but it has amassed a 79% share of the category since it moved into food and drug retailing by opening its first such store in 1988. Today, Wal-Mart operates 1,386 supercenters and is the nation's largest grocer, with a 19% market share, and its third-largest pharmacy, with 16%.

Wal-Mart plans to open 1,000 more supercenters in the U.S. alone over the next five years. Retail Forward estimates that this supercenter blitzkrieg will boost Wal-Mart's grocery and related revenues to $162 billion from the current $82 billion, giving it control over 35% of U.S. food sales and 25% of drugstore sales. Market-share gains of such magnitude in a slow-growth business necessarily will come at the expense of established competitors -- especially the unionized ones, which pay their workers 30% more on average than Wal-Mart does, according to the UFCW. Retail Forward predicts that for every new supercenter that Wal-Mart opens, two supermarkets will close, or 2,000 all told.

To the low-price, low-cost operator go the spoils. Isn't that how capitalism is supposed to work? Certainly, the supercentering of America can be expected to result in huge savings at the cash register. On average, a Wal-Mart supercenter offers prices 14% below its rivals', according to a 2002 study by UBS Warburg.

However, those everyday low prices come at a cost. As the number of supermarkets shrinks, more shoppers will have to travel farther from home and will find their buying increasingly restricted to merchandise that Wal-Mart chooses to sell -- a growing percentage of which may be the retailer's private-label goods, which now account for nearly 20% of sales. Meanwhile, the failure of hundreds of stores will cost their owners dearly and put thousands out of work, only some of whom will find jobs at Wal-Mart, most likely at lower pay. "It will be a sad day in this country if we wake up one morning and all we find is a Wal-Mart on every corner," says Gary E. Hawkins, CEO of Green Hills, a family-owned supermarket in Syracuse, N.Y.

For suppliers, too, Wal-Mart's relentless pricing pressure is a mixed blessing. "If you are good with data, are sophisticated, and have scale, Wal-Mart should be one of your most profitable customers," says a retired consumer-products executive. Unlike many retailers, the company does not charge "slotting fees" for access to its shelves and is unusually generous in sharing sales data with manufacturers. In return, though, Wal-Mart not only dictates delivery schedules and inventory levels but also heavily influences product specifications. In the end, many suppliers have to choose between designing goods their way or the Wal-Mart way. "Wal-Mart really is about driving the cost of a product down," says James A. Wier, CEO of Simplicity Manufacturing, a lawn-mower maker that decided to stop selling to Wal-Mart last fall. "When you drive the cost of a product down, you really can't deliver the high-quality product like we have."

Critics also argue that Wal-Mart's intensifying global pursuit of low-cost goods is partly to blame for the accelerating loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to China and other low-wage nations. "It's hard to tease out, but Wal-Mart is definitely part of the dynamic, and given its market share and power, probably a significant part," says Jared Bernstein, a labor economist at the liberal Economic Policy Institute. The $12 billion worth of Chinese goods Wal-Mart bought in 2002 represented 10% of all U.S. imports from China.

For obvious reasons, Wal-Mart has de-emphasized the "Made in America" campaign that founder Sam Walton started in the mid-1980s to great promotional effect. "Where we have the option to source domestically we do," says Ken Eaton, Wal-Mart's senior vice-president for global procurement. However, he adds, "there are certain businesses, particularly in the U.S., where you just can't buy domestically anymore to the scale and value we need." In recent years, Wal-Mart increasingly has sought additional cost advantages by bypassing middlemen and buying finished goods and raw materials from foreign manufacturers. By contracting directly with a handful of denim manufacturers in Southeast Asia, the company has driven down the retail price of the George brand jeans it sells in Britain and Germany to $7.85 from $26.67. Says Eaton: "The mind-set around here is, we're agents for our customers."

"THE WAL-MART PHENOMENON"
Wal-Mart's philosophy doesn't cut any ice with Wilbur L. Ross Jr., a financier and steel tycoon who soon will close on the purchase of beleaguered textile manufacturer Burlington Industries Inc. Ross contends that Wal-Mart is costing Americans jobs "not only as a business strategy, but as a lobbying strategy" -- that is, by using its influence in Washington to oppose import tariffs and quotas and promote free-trade pacts with Third World countries, including the Southeast Asian countries that supply Wal-Mart with denim. "Everybody is now scurrying around trying to find the lowest price points," Ross complains. "It's the Wal-Mart phenomenon."

High on a wall inside Wal-Mart headquarters is a paper banner with a provocative question in big block letters: "Who's taking your customers?" Beneath it, "Wanted" poster style, hang photos of the CEOs of two dozen of America's largest retailers -- Target (TGT ) Kroger (KR ) Winn-Dixie Stores (WIN ) Walgreen (WAG ), and so on. None looks very happy, perhaps because they know that the only way to get off the wall is to fail utterly. Although Kmart (KMRT ) is reorganizing under the federal bankruptcy code, a photo of its CEO continues to hang in Wal-Mart's rogues' gallery and no doubt will remain there for as long as Kmart operates even a single store.

Growth will only add to the clout that the Bentonville colossus now wields. There might well come a time, though, when Wal-Mart's size poses as much of a threat to the company itself as it does to outsiders. "Their biggest danger is just managing size," observes a longtime supplier. Adds Babson College's Hoopes: "The history of the last 150 years in retailing would say that if you don't like Wal-Mart, be patient. There will be new models eventually that will do Wal-Mart in, and Wal-Mart won't see it coming." Right now, though, Wal-Mart's day of reckoning seems a very long way off.

By Anthony Bianco and Wendy Zellner
With Diane Brady, Mike France, Tom Lowry, Nanette Byrnes, and Susan Zegel in New York; Michael Arndt, Robert Berner, and Ann Therese Palmer in Chicago; and bureau reports


Monday, October 06, 2003

Britney's (Spears) Guide to Semiconductor Physics

Sunday, October 05, 2003

From Greg Palast, (The Guardian)

Arnold Unplugged - It's hasta la vista to $9 billion if the Governator is selected
Friday, October 3, 2003

It's not what Arnold Schwarzenegger did to the girls a decade back that should raise an eyebrow. According to a series of memoranda our office obtained today, it's his dalliance with the boys in a hotel room just two years ago that's the real scandal.



The wannabe governor has yet to deny that on May 17, 2001, at the Peninsula Hotel in Los Angeles, he had consensual political intercourse with Enron chieftain Kenneth Lay. Also frolicking with Arnold and Ken was convicted stock swindler Mike Milken.



Now, thirty-four pages of internal Enron memoranda have just come through this reporter's fax machine tell all about the tryst between Maria's husband and the corporate con men. It turns out that Schwarzenegger knowingly joined the hush-hush encounter as part of a campaign to sabotage a Davis-Bustamante plan to make Enron and other power pirates then ravaging California pay back the $9 billion in illicit profits they carried off.



Here's the story Arnold doesn't want you to hear. The biggest single threat to Ken Lay and the electricity lords is a private lawsuit filed last year under California's unique Civil Code provision 17200, the "Unfair Business Practices Act." This litigation, heading to trial now in Los Angeles, would make the power companies return the $9 billion they filched from California electricity and gas customers.



It takes real cojones to bring such a suit. Who's the plaintiff taking on the bad guys? Cruz Bustamante, Lieutenant Governor and reluctant leading candidate against Schwarzenegger.



Now follow the action. One month after Cruz brings suit, Enron's Lay calls an emergency secret meeting in L.A. of his political buck-buddies, including Arnold. Their plan, to undercut Davis (according to Enron memos) and "solve" the energy crisis -- that is, make the Bustamante legal threat go away.



How can that be done? Follow the trail with me.



While Bustamante's kicking Enron butt in court, the Davis Administration is simultaneously demanding that George Bush's energy regulators order the $9 billion refund. Don't hold your breath: Bush's Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is headed by a guy proposed by … Ken Lay.



But Bush's boys on the commission have a problem. The evidence against the electricity barons is rock solid: fraudulent reporting of sales transactions, megawatt "laundering," fake power delivery scheduling and straight out conspiracy (including meetings in hotel rooms).



So the Bush commissioners cook up a terrific scheme: charge the companies with conspiracy but offer them, behind closed doors, deals in which they have to pay only two cents on each dollar they filched.



Problem: the slap-on-the-wrist refunds won't sail if the Governor of California won't play along. Solution: Re-call the Governor.



New Problem: the guy most likely to replace Davis is not Mr. Musclehead, but Cruz Bustamante, even a bigger threat to the power companies than Davis. Solution: smear Cruz because -- heaven forbid! -- he took donations from Injuns (instead of Ken Lay).



The pay-off? Once Arnold is Governor, he blesses the sweetheart settlements with the power companies. When that happens, Bustamante's court cases are probably lost. There aren't many judges who will let a case go to trial to protect a state if that a governor has already allowed the matter to be "settled" by a regulatory agency.



So think about this. The state of California is in the hole by $8 billion for the coming year. That's chump change next to the $8 TRILLION in deficits and surplus losses planned and incurred by George Bush. Nevertheless, the $8 billion deficit is the hanging rope California's right wing is using to lynch Governor Davis.



Yet only Davis and Bustamante are taking direct against to get back the $9 billion that was vacuumed out of the state by Enron, Reliant, Dynegy, Williams Company and the other Texas bandits who squeezed the state by the bulbs.



But if Arnold is selected, it's 'hasta la vista' to the $9 billion. When the electricity emperors whistle, Arnold comes -- to the Peninsula Hotel or the Governor's mansion. The he-man turns pussycat and curls up in their lap.



I asked Mr. Muscle's PR people to comment on the new Enron memos -- and his strange silence on Bustamante's suit or Davis' petition. But Arnold was too busy shaving off his Hitlerian mustache to respond.



The Enron memos were discovered by the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, Los Angeles,
Consumer Watchdog.org