Evil Wal-Mart

cowtipn's picture

Here is an excerpt from a story I was reading about Wal-Mart rescinding their application from the FDIC:
“ILCs also are opposed by smaller community banks that would face a giant competitor if Wal-Mart offered full service banking. Bankers fear the retailer will set up full-service bank branches in its 3,800 U.S. stores. Without the need for new brick-and-mortar branches, they say, Wal-Mart could force local banks out of business by offering lower loan charges and paying higher rates on deposits.”
Besides the usual union / healthcare / small business banter, isn’t this a good thing? Wouldn’t we all benefit from higher credit interests, lower loan rates, and most importantly: lower fees with credit card companies? How have the banks lobbyists and anti-Wal-Mart groups convinced the public and a republican-run government to fight this and the other 11 ILC applications on file with the FDIC? Wouldn’t this lead to lower prices, stem inflation, and boost the economy?

cowtipn's blog | login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
cowtipn's picture
Submitted by cowtipn on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 6:43pm.

I guess I'm more bewildered about how the public has been duped into siding with the bank lobbyists and opposed to creating more wealth for ourselves and not fight this. I guess; as a society, we're so far leveraged that 1 or 2 more credit interest points wouldn't make a difference.

maximus's picture
Submitted by maximus on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 6:41pm.

Of course more competition in banking would be good, but the same economic ignorance that makes people think that wal-mart competing with grocery stores, hardware stores, appliance retailers, etc, is bad for the community think the same thing about this.

Our standard of living increases when resources are allocated properly throughout the economy. If we can get rid of a bunch of unnecessary banks and reallocate the labor and energy to something more useful, we will have a stronger economy.

cowtipn's picture
Submitted by cowtipn on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 6:58pm.

I think we've given into our ignorance and let others tell us what to think about Wal-Mart - ie: big business. Darn that SouthPark!
It's not that I'm a fan of Wal-Mart, it's that they have their place as a positive force in this economy. I thought one of the tenets of our foundation was the abolishment of mercantilism and that government should abstain from free market intrusion. Of course; as we've discussed here before, we have come to take great hope and comfort in the ever increasing government intrusion into our lives and have befriended the rape-baby of the commerce clause that dictates it.

Git Real's picture
Submitted by Git Real on Sat, 03/17/2007 - 1:21pm.

it's that they have their place as a positive force in this economy.

That's right Cow Tipper. I guess being the largest importer and warehouser for the Chicom government must be "a positive force in someone's economy". I'm just not sure who really benefits in the long run. But I guess I can't entirely blame the Chinese, Walmart or our government for all those offshore jobs. Especially considering people in this country refuse to be productive and work these days. Guess someone's got to make our stuff so we can play with our technological gadgets.

cowtipn's picture
Submitted by cowtipn on Sat, 03/17/2007 - 2:31pm.

And we exacerbate the problem by continuing to borrow money from the Chinese to buy more of their products. Historically, Wal-mart's place has been to help keep inflation at bay while we continue to get our free lunch. I'm just not sure how hindering their efforts with an ILC benefits the American consumer and why the public has come to side with the lobbyists. Some day, the Chinese will call in their debts; where will we be then?

maximus's picture
Submitted by maximus on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 7:12pm.

Ah yes, the old commerce clause. Politicians and big government types have always fallen back on that much abused section when they want more control of our lives.


Submitted by McDonoughDawg on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 2:14pm.

Until Walmart got big enough to start dictating what the interest charges would be. I don't think it is out of the realm to think it could happen. That's their way, freeze out the little guy, by opening giant stores and charging less until the competitors are gone. Walmart's prices vary widely from store to store, based on the amount of competition left in the area. They can absorb losses from Store X for quite a while to put the hammer on the local guy.

I don't blame folks for shopping Walmart, but I've seen what they can do to a small town. I avoid them myself. In the Atlanta area, it's not such a drastic effect as it can be in smaller towns.

Submitted by dollaradayandfound on Fri, 03/16/2007 - 1:57pm.

Do you have any idea how many republicans, conservatives, either own the existing banks or serve (a loose word) on their boards of directors because they bought the original stock (will hold five years until sold to a chain for 100 times the purchase price, or sit on the chain's board?)
We are talking big bucks lost here by bank Presidents, managers, etc., for simply loaning money and collecting interest.
With WalMart----the janitor would open the bank, gather up the loan requests, and forward them to the Home Office in Bentonville.
They would sell their CDs, etc., over the TV and internet.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.