Hi, I’m looking for information about the topic of “creative destruction”/unemployment the plight of the small “mom and pop” store that gets put out of business by the evil, big retailer like Walmart, etc. Always hearing from socialists how the profit motive is so evil, it puts people out of business and unemploys poor folks who can’t compete with the big chain, etc.
Can anyone point me to some rebuttals of this, perhaps “The Anti-Capitalistic Mentality” or some articles?
Don’t consider this a full response, but I may make some valid points.
The goal of a business (other than profit) is efficiency. This is why unemployment isn’t quite a blight on society as it is so often portrayed. Efficiency is achieved by the least amount of input (man-hours) resulting in the greatest quality/amount of output (goods/services). An “evil, big retailer” driving a mom-and-pop store out of the market indicates, usually, greater efficiency in the former. The big-box chain model minimizes expenses, provides higher quality goods and services for less, and is frighteningly organized. These are the aspects of this efficiency.
The victimization aspect is completely untrue - no community will lose out from possessing a large retailer. This host community, in fact, benefits in several ways. Higher quality products are sold for less, jobs are created, and the existence of such as store is more stable than say, a one-shot grocery store.
I may not have answered all questions, and this certainly won’t change a socialist’s mind, but I hope it helps you in your debates.
See specifically the section on Jobs.
How much of an effect (approximately) do zoning and other municipal-government machinations have on this?
To hell with “mom and pop” stores. The obsession over those is based on “buy local” protectionism.
Netflix put Blockbuster out of business.
Like others have said it is all about efficiency and increased productivity. If we use this protectionist argument (brought about through government coercion) then lets forbid the use of mechanized farming equipment so that we can hire millions of “Mom and Pop” crop pickers for the sake of giving them a job. Will their quality of life and standard of living improve? Hardly! Or how about we put an end to the trucking industry and hire millions of people to use their own vehicles for transporting goods all over the country. Would that be efficient or productive? No. Would it increase living standards? No, it would hurt living standards. It amazes me these people usually call themselves “progressives” yet they show in arguments like this just how back asswards they really are.
The future is big chain stores complaining that internet stores are stealing their customer’s away, that finding exactly what you want on Amazon and having it delivered to you with free shipping is too convenient and effecient, and their profits should be siphoned off for the greater good.
The “mom and pop” shops and big chain stores sell the same products, generally. The difference is the atmosphere of the two (or more) stores, and the price the products are sold for. This goes for any store. Something that I noticed is that the attacks are on retail and other businesses who don’t actually produce anything, only sell what everyone else does. I seldom hear about someone complaining that their roofing or painting business can’t compete with one that’s established nation wide, or that a small time software designer can’t compete with a larger one.