Re "Voting 'No' on Low Prices and Good Jobs," by Jay Nordlinger, Commentary, April 9: Do you suppose that a year working at Wal-Mart, at $9 an hour and lousy health benefits, would teach Nordlinger anything about real worker exploitation? Very unlikely. Mentalities like his are voids, spouting mantras like "American enterprise" as if they were noble truths.
Re "Wal-Mart to Push Southland Agenda," April 8: So Wal-Mart is defeated in Inglewood after trying to circumvent local government by instituting an initiative and attempting to buy an election. Its spokesman, Robert McAdam, states, "It's not that big of a deal. We're going to find ways to build stores." What's next, smiley-faced mercenary armies occupying city halls in local government coups? Hey, Wal-Mart, "no" means no!
If Wal-Mart was only up to providing good jobs and low prices, why would it need to skip environmental reviews, traffic studies or public discussion? Why would it need to sidestep elected officials by using the initiative process? Plantation owners of pre-Civil War America could also claim to be providing jobs, but that says nothing about the quality of life most Americans yearn for. I am frankly surprised, but also pleased, that Inglewood voted against letting Wal-Mart bypass regulations put in place to ensure that citizens are safe and their concerns are attended to.