Two new research papers challenge that view. Using creative new methods, they find that the costs Walmart imposes in the form of not only lower earnings but also higher unemployment in the wider community outweigh the savings it provides for shoppers. On net, they conclude, Walmart makes the places it operates in poorer than they would be if it had never shown up at all. Sometimes consumer prices are an incomplete, even misleading, signal of economic well-being.
Their conclusion: In the 10 years after a Walmart Supercenter opened in a given community, the average household in that community experienced a 6 percent decline in yearly income—equivalent to about $5,000 a year in 2024 dollars—compared with households that didn’t have a Walmart open near them. Low-income, young, and less-educated workers suffered the largest losses.
Locally owned stores would see the profits earned reinvested in the community, as the owners would also be local and buying goods in the same area.
These mega corps siphon the profit from the area to elsewhere. So none of the surrounding businesses get supported by Walmart doing well. Also they pay next to nothing, so even the employees aren’t able to bring any wealth to the area.
