Doug Miller wrote:
In article , "HeyBub"
wrote:

Jobs? Last year a Walmart opened across the street from Chicago. The
store had THIRTEEN THOUSAND applicants for 300+ jobs and 70% of the
applicants had Chicago ZIP codes! Most studies show Walmart creates
more jobs than are lost - and the jobs are of equal or better
employe value.

Sorry, I don't buy that. It may be true when looking *only* at retail
jobs
gained at Wal-Mart vs. retail jobs lost at their competitors. But
Wal-Mart
sells very little American-manufactured goods. Their insistence on
price-cutting has been a significant force in driving manufacturing
overseas,
and thus contributed to the loss of manufacturing jobs in the U.S. To
be sure,
Wal-Mart is not the only retailer responsible for this -- Home Depot,
Lowe's,
Target, and Sears, among others, share in the blame. But to say that
they
create more jobs than are lost, when they serve mostly as conduits for
marketing to Americans goods that are manufactured by non-Americans
-- goods
that used to be made in America, by Americans -- just doesn't hold
water.

It is GOOD that manufacturing jobs move overseas - provided they moved
because the foreign producer can create a product that has a higher
value/price ratio than the corresponding domestic product. When a foreign
supplier can produce something better/cheaper than his domestic counterpart,
each nation, in the aggregate, is better off.

Adam Smith settled this controversy in the 18th century with his book, "The
Wealth of Nations" (unfortunately, some people don't keep up with the latest
economic truths).