[KontanKarite]

So. The debate so far.

It was an easy battle.

Their arguments were pretty topical.

Walmart provides goods to the poor.

Walmart makes local economies poor by putting smaller businesses out of business, effectively causing thousands to go unemployed.

Walmart has rules against unions because people abuse unions and it lowers productivity.

A union's goal is to ensure that their industry is not abused and that it's fair. A union is a means of introducing democracy into economics. It's not the cause of lazy workers. A union's goal is also to assure a healthy and productive industry because if they weren't doing that, there'd be no industry to work at... if the union was just a means of being a lazy worker.

Walmart is the leading employer of immigrants.

Those immigrants are usually illegal and aren't protected under the US Labor Laws. Walmart has no obligation to treat these workers like people.

Walmart is a place that kids can go to hang out after school.

Before Walmart, kids had arcades, soda shops, burger joints, malls, bookstores, and electronic stores to hang out at.

Walmart helps the poor save money so that they can save for their kids' college tuition

Not entirely true. When Walmart privately consolidates a majority of the local economy in a town, those unemployed workers must work at Walmart, usually for cheaper pay and less hours.

That's pretty much where it's at right now. I'm kicking their asses and haven't really brought out the big guns or touched on the idea of what capitalism was originally meant to be in terms of how the Enlightenment understood it and that Adam Smith actually believed that a state or the people should step in and regulate industry IF a business was actually going too far and putting their private happiness over that happiness of the people.

They're trying to dismiss most of my points about Walmart being abusive because "everyone else is abusing everyone else" so it doesn't matter. It's just a part of life.

Obviously, that can be easily shot down.