To me it seems that all the companies that AREN'T Wal-mart are just mad that they aren't in the shoes Wal-mart is being the #1 retailer.
I don't know of any competitors that are "mad" about
Walmart. The anger you see is almost exclusively from people, not companies. Sure the competitors would rather not have the aggressive competition, and perhaps the competitors help people who have a moral objection to what Walmart represents, but all the inspiration and all the anger -- that's
from people, not from competitors. The competitors are companies themselves, and understand the reality very well, and generally operate in the best interests of their owners -- in other words, they don't let emotions, like anger, drive them. People have no such compunctions.
So fixing your comment to be directed at
people instead of at companies, I agree, there are a lot of people who are "mad" at Walmart for how it operates and the effect it has on their communities. I don't think that they would even deny that, so I'm not sure what your point is. People have a right to be upset about these things, don't they?
Personally, I don't think that that means that Walmart shouldn't be able to operate that way. I think people who are upset about Walmart's impact should be voting with their dollars and trying to get others around them to adopt the same philosophy, of buying American-made products even if it costs you more, of buying from retailers who pay their employees more even if it costs you more, etc. The only real
culprit, if there must be one, in all of this is those consumers who put their own personal financial security above that of others. However,
it is reasonable for them (including, of course, you, specifically)
to do that, isn't it?
Why would you choose to pay more for the same item?
See above for the reason.
No one forces people to work at Wal-Mart either, and our local Wal-Mart pays above minimum wage. If it's such a bad place to work then DON"T WORK THERE!
Again, without agreeing with those who hold this perspective, I think it is important to explain the point that you may have overlooked from their criticisms: It isn't that Walmart is an especially bad place to work, or that the jobs that the folks who work there do are more difficult than they should be, or lower paid than they should be, based on what those jobs are. The criticism is that Walmart is designed especially to foster lower-paying jobs at the expense of higher-paying jobs. In a way, the Walmart way is more efficient (from an operational standpoint), because they can accomplish the same end (sales) with less resources (lower wages). The negative impact on the value of labor, overall, in any region where Walmart operates, is
thereby depressed. In other words, Walmart's efficiency indirectly lowers base wages for unskilled workers, overall.
There is one other impact of this, which I alluded to in my earlier message: As a result of this efficiency, you are going to encounter less knowledgeable staff to assist you with your purchases, especially in the high-tech area. This is absolutely reasonable: If you're a smart sales person, and know the products, are you going to work for the store that pays you more, or the store that pays you less? The effect of that is buffered, though, by Walmart running all the other retailers out of business. That's another source of criticism.
Note again, please, that I'm just explaining these criticisms. I do not agree with them.
And as far as where all the profits are going?? Probably the same place that 99% of all profits of a company go...right into the pockets of the top 2% of management.
Utterly ridiculous. 100% of all profits from the company go to 100% of the owners of the company, in proportion to their ownership interest. That's the law. To suggest otherwise is just FUD.
Where is all that profit going?
Perfect response to a quote that could have come out of a "certain book". 
It's AMAZING to me that WM is the ONLY retailer that sells things made in China 
