I find it ironic that Wal-Mart, a retail enterprise that is often a source of employment for the unskilled and that has grown and prospered for almost 50 years by offering basic necessities at low prices to a largely lower-income clientele is berated and harassed by the left, who always claim to be champions of the poor. Of course, to justify opposing Wal-Mart, the left has to downplay the union angle and pretend that not offering full benefits to it's (mostly) part-time workers is a virtual crime against the poor and of course, the usual argument, apparently 'supported' by 'studies' (forgive my cynicism here) that Wal-Mart 'drives out 'neighborhood stores' that either don't really exist due to crime and the poor economy or simply are not competitive and, like any business, cannot sustain their high prices when competition arrives in the form of Wal-Mart. Gee, I thought that the left would be glad to see residents in poor neighborhoods have an opportunity to purchase needed goods at a lower price than the 'local' stores offer them.
However, just as the left opposes school vouchers and would rather see poor kids in failing schools than oppose the powerful teachers unions, so they oppose Wal-Mart to appease the retail unions and too bad if the poor people they pretend to care so much about get hosed in the process. That they can even convince some of these same folks to come out in the cold and protest Wal-Mart speaks volumes about the utter corruption of the political left in America and the hopelessness for those they pretend to 'help' by denying them the opportunity for a better life via saving what little they have by being able to buy necessities at Wal-Mart or obtaining a much-needed job there - or both, in most cases.
Walmart generally sells cheap crap. So that poor person MAY save a few cents on what they buy, but then they have to buy it again once it breaks.
Many of the items they sell are built to lower specs than the items the competitor is selling.