The evidence keeps accumulating. Wal-Mart is good for the poor and good for America, so reports Dan Drezner. Prof. Bainbridge responds with what I take to be the better argument against Wal-Mart, the aesthetic one, since the economic argument is so obviously false. But then at NRO, where I found all of this, Jonathan Adler responds to the argument that "Wal-Mart kills organic communities":
On Bainbridge's other point, I yield to no one in my love of organic urban communities, but the idea that Wal-Mart has been a significant contributor to urban decline -- rather than an indirect beneficiary of the decline brought on by disastrous government policies and other social trends -- I find highly implausible.
Recent Comments