After reading the article and seeing the two opposing points of view I would have to say that the more accurate one of the two comes from the Democratic Staff of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce. The Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation asserts that the entry of Wal-mart stores into southern California would be beneficial to the local economy from the point of view that since Wal-mart offers such competitive, low prices the savings would be redirected toward other parts of the local economy which, in turn, would create more jobs locally in excess of what Wal-mart would also bring with it. It also claims that the negative effects of
Wal-mart's entry into the local economy would be negligible compared to the benefits, especially since it would take a long time for Wal-mart to develop a considerable market share and along with the idea that Wal-mart's negative impact on other grocers' ability to operate would turn out to be positives for their consumers and the overall taxpayer from the extra sales taxes that the stores would generate for the area. But this opinion on
Wal-mart's impact does not look very deep into how these newly introduced low prices are obtained which if introduced to the local market could have devastatingly different effects from what they are predicting.
The Democratic Staff of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce claims that the introduction of Wal-mart stores in southern California would have a destructive result on the local economy, particularly from the intense competition that they would bring to the area that would break the backs of other grocers and stores that specialize in goods that Wal-mart carries and also on how their treatment of their workers would have a neg ...