Its size, power, and low prices are what make Walmart so helpful to America. So why do some people think that Walmart is so bad for the American people? Many people believe that this is a true debate. Everyone has his or her own point of view. If you think about it, is Walmart really good for America? Walmart has made many changes since it was first opened in 1962, by Sam Walton. By August 31, 2014, there were 11,095, retail Walmart stores and there were 642 Sam’s Clubs. After going over all the facts, Walmart is good for America. Walmart is bad for America, as some say. The Globalization essay that was handed out in class had many good points.
It states that Walmart puts many smaller businesses out of service. But it’s clear that average wages fell. (Found off of a website on Google) Walmart workers do not get paid enough money either. The wages that Walmart employers are paid ranges from $7.50-$9.00 and that’s even when people have been working there for quite a while. (Found on Google) Wal-Mart wields its power for just one purpose: to bring the lowest possible prices to its customers. At Wal-Mart, that goal is never reached. The retailer has a clear policy for suppliers: On basic products that don’t change, the price Wal-Mart will pay, and will charge shoppers, must drop year after year. But what almost no one outside the world of Wal-Mart and its 21,000 suppliers knows is the high cost of those low prices.
Prices start at $12
Prices start at $11
Prices start at $14
Prices start at $12
Wal-Mart has the power to squeeze profit-killing concessions from vendors. To survive in the face of its pricing demands, makers of everything from bras to bicycles to blue jeans have had to lay off employees and close U.S. plants in favour of outsourcing products from overseas. So yes, Walmart is bad for America. Walmart is why America is so rich. It is one of the most popular stores, and many Americans love it. It gets greater and greater every year. Walmart employs at least 1.2 million people globally. (Found in Walmart Nation handout) Walmart offers its low prices to help people who cannot afford what they need, get the supplies the have to have for their homes. Some say that Walmart has helped hold down the nation’s inflation rate.
Abstract. The principal objective of this research paper is to demonstrate how several people have been impacted by the gigantic company Wal-Mart. This paper explores an argument in the favour of how the company has been performing its business and how thousands of individuals have beneficiated from it. The factors will be explained in detail which will be leading us to the conclusion that Wal-Mart is creating a positive environment throughout and every angle of society. Wal-Mart is Good for America Wal-Mart has been a huge part of America for a long time. The country would not be the same without the company, since many individuals have enjoyed the benefits it offers. One believes that the company has done its business with care and responsibility.
Many have recognized that Wal-Mart has a positive effect on communities. Progressively, Wal-Mart has achieved goals that much other business have not. The company has travelled internationally having great success around the world. By creating leadership through service, one believes that Wal-Mart is Good for America. History of Wal-Mart Wal-Mart was founded by Sam Walton; his belief was to provide “leadership through service.” This is the principle on which Wal-Mart was built; Sam Walton’s intentions were to sell quality products at low prices with exceptional customer service. Sam Walton was born in 1918, and at 24 years of age, he joined the Military. He was married to Helen Thompson in 1943.
Wal-Mart was started in 1962 as a discount store in Arkansas. The company began trading on the NYSE in 1972 after being traded on OTC Markets since 1970. The company quickly grew to over 270 stores in 11 states by the end of the decade. In 1983 and 1988, Wal-Mart opened its first Sam’s store and its first Wal-Mart Supercenter respectively. Wal-Mart became an international company in 1991, with the opening of its first Sam’s store near Mexico City. Wal-Mart employs 1.6 million people, services 138 million customers weekly, and claims $312.4 billion in annual sales. Since becoming a giant in the industry, the company has faced many legal issues and much criticism. These legal issues have spanned from underpaying employees to international trade disputes. Despite its global success, these problems have caused many businesses and consumers to ask just how good Wal-Mart is for America.
Wal-Mart purchases the majority of its products from China in order to keep the cost of goods down, which results in lower prices for the consumer. Wal-Mart alone is China’s eighth-largest trading partner. With over 70 per cent of Wal-Mart’s products made in China, it accounts for 10 per cent of our annual trade deficit with China. The cost of manufacturing goods in China is much less, so the goods can be sold in the United States for less. The labour laws in this country are very different from the US in many ways. Chinese factory workers are often underpaid, work in unsafe conditions, and are verbally abused. Wal-Mart and other suppliers take full advantage of these harsh working conditions and mistreatment of the factory workers. Wal-Mart pushes its suppliers to lower their costs, generating sweatshops in which young workers are forced to work long hours with very little pay. America as we know can’t afford to sustain a $200 billion annual trade deficit to China, but Wal-Mart drives that deficit.
We can’t afford to subsidize the health care cost of the largest employer in the country. According to The Washington Post: Wal-Mart also exploits taxpayers, for it is what Ronald Reagan would denounce as the leading corporate welfare queen. It’s estimated that Wal-Mart’s government subsidies total a whopping $2.7 billion, or $2,100 per employee. An internal memo to the board leaked recently reported that “our [health care] coverage is expensive for low-income families, and Wal-Mart has a significant percentage of associates and their children on public assistance.” In fact, nearly one-half of the children of Wal-Mart employees are either on Medicaid or have no insurance at all. In 1992 Wal-Mart’s stock plunged and the company started importing merchandise from China with a high mark-up. The margins were 60%-80% on imported low-cost Asian imports. Wal-Mart then advertised these goods at a lower price point than its competitors.
The low price points are the bait to lure customers into the store. Not all of their items in that particular department are the lowest price in town. This price point strategy was extremely effective and helped move Wal-Mart to the top of the retail food chain. Arthur Charles Fishman, a local business owner in Lodi, California believes that Wal-Mart had a drastic effect on the way he and other small business owners conduct business. He refers to this as the “Wal-Mart Effect”: When Wal-Mart comes to town, bringing its lower prices, it forces its competitors to lower theirs. Wages at these businesses must drop in order to compete. Buying habits are changed, and once viable businesses are now in jeopardy. Because of its sheer size, it is able to force its will. There is often a sense of foreboding that comes with this new retailing.
The Wal-Mart economy describes the nagging sense that there might be some unseen but terrible cost to be paid for “always low prices.” The Wal-Mart economy is a place where the jobs are traps: low wages, miserly benefits, stultifying work, no respect, no future. In the Wal-Mart economy, we as consumers often buy too much just because it’s cheap. We are slaves to our own impulse for a bargain (Fishman 9-10). Problems & Politics. Wal-Mart is responsible for driving down wages and increasing public health care costs while its CEO and owners are lining their own pockets. The Walton family, one of the richest in the world uses their private wealth, power, and influence to donate millions to politics. The majority of their donations go to Republicans who cultivate their low-road policies. They are the leading contributors to the voucher movement seeking to privatize education.
They are opposed to any policy that would streamline efforts to link trade access to the right to organize, environmental protection or even crackdown on sweatshops. The iron-triangle between Wal-Mart, the government, and China is made of steel. Americans are beginning to realize that Wal-Mart’s triumph could be the downfall of middle-class America. If Wal-Mart sets the pace, Americans will pay the price, in the form of declining wages, rising health care costs, longer work hours, and rising personal taxes to offset the increasing corporate subsidies. A trade complaint was filed charging the Chinese with dumping high-end televisions on the American market selling them below free-market cost. China was pricing their products in a manner contrary to the obligations it undertook when joining the World Trade Organization. In the hearings organized by the World Trade Organization Wal-Mart testified against the United States.
Why would Wal-Mart, an American based company, testify to support China? It is because Wal-Mart and China are joint-venture. China uses Wal-Mart to break into the US market; Wal-Mart in turn uses Chinese factories to produce goods to sell at low prices. Currently, costs are shifted to the public while profits accumulate in the Walton family bank account. The challenge for American companies to compete in the domestic and international arenas is to develop systems that assign these costs to the corporations that create them, thus turning Wal-Mart’s “really low prices” into really accurate prices. American businesses need to also demonstrate and identify that they are socially responsible in production, and consumption. Companies should show they take an active part in the local community to try and gain their support. This will prove to Wal-Mart and other big-box retailers that it will take more than a few low-priced goods to sustain the communities continued financial support.
Good or Bad? Is Wal-Mart Good for America? Overall, my conclusion is Wal-Mart does more harm than good. The larger superstores often have a devastating effect on the economy in the small towns they inhabit. The superstores dominate the market, concentrating too much retail in one area, hurting property values, causing traffic problems, and eventually harming the businesses that do not benefit from their presence. Wal-Mart drives the trade deficit between American and China and is more focused on profit for its shareholders and owners than on the people that purchase their goods. Their greedy, low-cost high-profit way of doing business is slowly destroying the economic stability of the American consumer base. Unbeknownst to its consumers, Wal-Mart is causing higher taxes to offset corporate subsidies and increasing health care cost to cover their own underpaid employees. Wal-Mart has become one huge vending machine for China, and in turn, is dispensing a large part of America’s economy with it.
As the biggest seller in history, it’s not a surprise that Walmart is the target of both vicious attacks and gushing appreciation. According to its own site, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. runs more than 8,000 stores, uses more than 2.1 million individuals, and sells more than $400 billion worth of goods every year. Though this bulk frightens those who fear the practicality of “mother and pop” sellers, Walmart’s great strength is that it dedicates its significant power to American consumers. Its size enables it to provide services that other sellers can not, and it has deservedly ended up being an integral part of the modern American economy. Criticisms of Walmart’s impact on small retailers fall flat since of Americans’ function because of effect. Usage is the only democratic element of the corporate world: small merchants stop working due to the fact that Americans choose Walmart.
Walmart provides less expensive, better, more available services than its competition. While competing shops’ closings produce touching hard-luck stories, the shift to Walmart is useful for society, since Walmart is much more effective at every stage of its service. The benefits of this effectiveness are less personal and more broadly spread than the costs to smaller rivals, but such dissemination of worth shows among the best qualities of Walmart– its egalitarianism. Walmart supplies a good that is accessible to practically all Americans. The 2006 book The Walmart Impact estimates that 97% of Americans live within twenty-five miles of a Walmart, and Walmart’s low prices guarantee that the shop is also financially available. As long as customers continue to select Walmart (for easy to understand factors), the onus is on little sellers to find much better methods to compete.
The second primary argument versus Walmart deals with its effect on providers. Because Walmart has such tremendous purchasing power, it carries fantastic influence with producers. Luckily, Walmart utilizes its significant bargaining power in the interests of American consumers by requiring ever-decreasing costs. Though makers frequently grumble about this pressure, it forces consistent development, which ultimately benefits consumers. Walmart has much to teach American businesses. Despite its size, Walmart is a paragon of corporate efficiency. It has compiled the largest sales data-set of any American retailer and analyzes this data using the second largest supercomputer in the world (trailing only the Pentagon). Aided by this number-crunching, Walmart excels at knowing what its consumers want. Walmart’s purchasing decisions thus reflect American preferences. In short, Walmart is a driving force in the American economy leading to smarter, more streamlined production, and (as always) lower prices for consumers.
The benefits of Walmart’s efficiency are not only economic, as illustrated by the company’s response to Hurricane Katrina. Walmart’s response to the hurricane was lauded even by its critics: it donated more than $20 million worth of merchandise, including food for 100,000 meals, and it promised jobs for all of its displaced workers. But what I wish to extol is not Walmart’s largesse, which bore immediate public relations benefits, but rather the utility of their efficient distribution system. The first supply truck to arrive at the Superdome after the hurricane came from Walmart, not from FEMA. The administrative particulars of Walmart’s response to the hurricane, detailed in a study by Steven Horwitz, are both fascinating and inspiring. Walmart’s existing distribution chain was – and is – able to deliver needed goods faster and more efficiently than a government agency, which (besides being inept) had no existing infrastructure to respond to the disaster.
The Coast Guard, another organization praised for its post-Katrina efforts, was great for rescuing people from flooded houses, but it was incapable of providing them with sufficient supplies afterwards. Without the aid of Walmart, the aftermath of the hurricane would have been even more catastrophic. Regardless of its reputation or its value to society, Walmart is here to stay. Consumption drives our daily lives and accounts for some 70% of America’s GDP. As long as Walmart continues to increase the accessibility and quality of consumption, it will remain America’s top retailer and continue to grow. Whether or not you choose to shop at Walmart, everyone
should appreciate it as an outstanding American institution.
With suppliers located in China, Vietnam and Cambodia, Wal-Mart is able to provide consumers with products priced at a far lower rate as compared to their product counterparts from manufacturers based in the U.S.(CBC Documentary, 2009). This situation is in part due to the far lower labour cost, material cost and business incentives that production in regions such as Asia brings. What this means for U.S. based consumers is the ability to buy products at a lower rate than they otherwise would have been able to result in significant savings over the course of a year (CBC Documentary, 2009).
As the world’s largest company and retailer, Wal-Mart has come to be a representation of a distinct shift in the balance of market power wherein retailers instead of manufacturers take a dominant role in today’s economy (Petrovic & Hamilton, N.D.). This is in part due to the effects of globalization wherein the procurement strategies of retailers are no longer limited to a local or regional basis but rather take into account the reality of a global supplier base (Petrovic & Hamilton, N.D.). Yet it must be questioned whether such savings actually helps American shoppers and in a larger context it must be asked whether Wal-Mart is truly good for America or is it detrimental towards the development of the American economy?
It must be noted that consumer spending is the driving force behind the American economy. People spending money on products keeps a local business functioning which in turn provides jobs in the local economy giving people the ability to spend. In essence, it is a cycle of spending that encourages economic growth and stability. When Wal-Mart came into the picture it presented consumers with the ability to purchase products at a far lower cost per product ratio as compared to other shopping centres (CBC Documentary, 2009). This was done by reducing the pay scale of employees to the bare minimum which as result enabled the company to lower the cost of operations enabling it to lower the price of the products it sold (CBC Documentary, 2009).
Their strategy of cutting costs through any means possible in order to keep the price of products low has resulted in local manufacturing jobs slowly but surely disappear from the landscape of the U.S. (Paruchuri et al., 2009). This of course creates problems for consumer spending resulting in a slowdown of the U.S. economy due to fewer people having jobs. This resulting situation has more people choosing the affordable and cheap products that Wal-Mart provides and as a result, this starts a new cycle where instead of continuous economic growth and prosperity there is a slow but sure deterioration of the U.S. economy (Elliot and Powell, 2003).
The procurement strategies employed by Wal-Mart are actually a boon for the economies of several countries. The global outsourcing industry has actually fueled the growth of countries such as China resulting in resurgence and growth in their economies. The jobs that were once based in the U.S. are now in the hands of foreign workers which has fueled and increased consumer spending in their respective economies causing a sudden spike in their growth rates. Within the past 20 years, this method of lowering costs has encompassed the global outsourcing industry where products for sale within Wal-Mart are no longer exclusively produced in the U.S. but rather are sourced from multiple international locations.
Wal-Mart is not alone in this particular procurement strategy with multiple companies doing the exact same thing however it is due to the size of the superstore with 4,200 locations in the U.S. alone which causes it to have a greater impact on the economy (Palmer et al., 2003). The reason why Wal-Mart has such a profound influence on both the U.S. and international economies is due to its sheer size and purchasing power which greatly influences the flow of products and services around the world. As such, though the strategies employed by Wal-Mart are in fact detrimental to the growth of the U.S. economy they are in fact rather beneficial towards the growth of several countries in the global economy.
Currently, Wal-Mart has 4,227 stores in the U.S and 3,210 internationally. Wal-Mart is the largest retailer in the world. In 2004 Wal-Mart accounted for 6.5 per cent of the retail sales. In 2004 Wal-Mart had 1.3 million employees (Emek Basker). Sam Walton, a former JC Penney employee, started a small store named Walton’s in Bentonville, Arkansas in 1945. It grew into a multi-million dollar retail company known as Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart has done great things for consumers by keeping their prices low and affordable. They helped China create a middle class in its economy because most of the goods sold at Wal-Mart are manufactured in China. Although those things are good, they come at a price. They have created a more competitive market for retailers and manufacturers which caused a lot of smaller retailers to close and go out of business. Wal-Mart also manipulates its suppliers by forcing them into unfair contracts and Wal-Mart provides very little chance for growth and promotion for their employees.
In order for Wal-Mart to keep their prices low, they have to find the cheapest goods. Those goods are usually purchased from overseas manufactures. This business model has created a drop in manufacturing jobs in the US. Many believe that Wal-Mart is responsible for the loss of America’s production industry. Wal-Mart set the standard for most retail businesses. In order to keep income flowing, most retail stores have modelled their stores after Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart offers a wide variety of merchandise in all their stores. They call them supercenters. You can find everything including but not limited to groceries, medicine, tires, pet supplies, music, electronics, clothing, books, office supplies, beauty products, sporting equipment, and gardening tools.
The philosophy behind Wal-Mart was for customers to be able to find everything in one store for a cheap price. Since Wal-Mart has become so popular, more and more stores have taken the same approach to retail. Emek Basker quoted Target’s chairman in his study saying, “Target is the world’s premier student of Wal-Mart”. Target has now become a supercenter offering everything in one store. Since more retailers have adopted Wal-Mart’s business model, consumers have more options for lower prices. The only way Wal-Mart can stay competitive in this market is to cut back on labour, cut employee benefits, and continuously find cheaper manufactures. Suppliers are forced to lower prices in order to secure contracts with Wal-Mart and other retail stores. This in turn forced them to lay off hundreds of people in order to remain profitable. Manufacturers needed cheaper labour so they moved most of their factories overseas. They also found that US labour laws were too restrictive and that other countries did not have that problem. When Wal-Mart and other retail stores saw that it was cheaper to manufacture products overseas, they sent their suppliers over to China.
They were able to get their raw materials cheaper and have Chinese workers assembled their products for a lot cheaper than they would have to pay workers in the U.S and not give them benefits. That allowed them to keep their prices down. Because a lot of manufactures ran to China for cheap labour, the Chinese started demanding more money. After a while labour in China got higher and it was no longer that much cheaper to manufacture in China. Once the Chinese were being paid more their living standard rose and they were able to buy in the market. Whereas before the Chinese workers didn’t make enough money to be able to live decently. When they started making more money they were able to create a better life by building houses and buying in stores. Although Wal-Mart created a middle class in China, they have not done much to help maintain our middle class. I feel Wal-Mart hasn’t contributed to our economy as much as they contributed to China’s.
Since Wal-Mart has had a helping hand in the changing over of jobs from manufacturing to retail I feel our economy is at a low. The people who held manufacturing jobs were in the middle class. When we moved those jobs a lot of them were forced to get jobs in retail. A lot of them went from making 60,000 dollars a year down to minimum wage. The cost of living has gone down because the wages have gone down. When no one makes enough money to buy expensive things, one of two things happen, either the existing businesses lower their prices so that they’ll still make money or low-cost stores are created to accommodate the living wage. The housing market most definitely goes down because no one can afford a house on a minimum wage. What they did to our economy by leaving the U.S and manufacturing in China impacted our economy in a negative way and virtually did the opposite of what they did for China’s economy.
Although we lost manufacturing jobs we gained service sector jobs however, there is a downfall to those jobs. The consequences of creating a competitive retail market and keeping prices low resulted in jobs going to China. Some argue that the loss of those jobs was inevitable and was due to a technological advancement more so than the retail market becoming competitive. Brink Lindsey in his article Job Losses and Trade says “Between 2000 and 2003, manufacturing employment dropped by nearly 2.8 million, yet imports of manufactured goods rose only 0.6 per cent.” As to say yes we lost a lot of manufacturing jobs but the imports from China didn’t rise that much. I have to disagree with him. Yes, we did lose those jobs and yes I do feel we did lose those jobs to outsourcing to China. Everything we buy is made in China.
So if the jobs didn’t go to China and were replaced by technological advancements why is everything made in China? Yes, I do believe technology got the job in some cases. The majority of those jobs did get outsourced to China. Wal-Mart’s market domination forced smaller retailers to close. Stores that only offered one type of product became insignificant. Customers have gotten used to one-stop shopping. Why go to several small stores to get the same products offered in one large store for less money. Because Wal-Mart buys in larger volume, their costs are lower. Because their costs are lower, they can offer products much cheaper than smaller stores. When Wal-Mart opens in an area, smaller retailers lose customers. Although Wal-Mart causes smaller retailers to lose market share, there are instances where having a Wal-Mart near boosts sales. The Wal-Mart in Oakland, CA is in a shopping centre with 9 other smaller stores.
They are the anchor store so they bring a lot of foot traffic to the other stores that are there. However, the stores are mostly restaurants and speciality shops. They are not in direct competition with Wal-Mart because they offer products that Wal-Mart doesn’t. Landing a contract with Wal-Mart can be very profitable for suppliers although it may not be the best decision. Wal-Mart sells millions of goods every day. If a supplier can get their products in Wal-Mart stores, then it’s very likely that they will make money. Wal-Mart buys millions of whatever product the supplier is selling. After they’ve become the main source of income for the supplier, they demand the product at a lower price and threaten to drop the contract. Wal-Mart is usually a supplier’s biggest contract and has a huge effect on the company’s profitability. The decision they have to make is to either close or meet the demands of Wal-Mart.
Wal-Mart’s cut-throat contract negotiations cause suppliers to lay off people to cover the deficit or cut costs in the manufacturing department. You would think the supplier would be in control of their business and the pricing of their product. Wal-Mart has made it so they are in control and they tell suppliers what to do and what prices they are going to pay. They become the main source of income for suppliers. In order for suppliers to meet their demands, they have no choice but to comply. As Wolfgang Schmitt, former CEO of Rubbermaid said from the Is Wal-Mart Good for America video “Wal-Mart’s way of disciplining the supplier is to show that volume can be given or it can be taken.” This is to say Wal-Mart controls what it does with the supplier’s products. Either they stock them on the shelves or they don’t. A classic example of Wal-Mart’s drastic contract negotiations is Classic pickles.
In the article, The Big Squeeze by Charles Fisherman, tells the story of the relationship between Vlassic and Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart offered consumers an industrial size jar of Vlassic pickles for less than $3. Vlassic was only making $.01 per jar sold. Wal-Mart wanted to pay Vlasic even less for the jars so they threatened Vlassic that they would not carry their products if they didn’t reduce the cost. Vlassic was forced to comply and eat the loss of revenue because they didn’t want to lose their shelf presence in Wal-Mart.
Wal-Mart employs a lot of people. They hire young people, old people, people with no college degrees, and disabled people. However, most of their employees are part-time with no health coverage. Although Wal-Mart offers several different career paths, it is not easy to advance from entry-level to middle or upper management. Wal-Mart, in my opinion, and in the opinion of others, mistreats their workers. They purposely hire a bunch of workers part-time so they don’t have to pay benefits or overtime. They only pay a little above minimum wage. As it was stated in Living Wage Policies and Wal-Mart in a UC Berkeley Research Brief “Wal-Mart’s workers earn an estimated 12.4 per cent less than retail workers as a whole and 14.5 per cent less than retail workers in general.”
There is also little chance you get promoted. People criticize Wal-Mart because it’s almost impossible to make a career out of working there. From my personal experiences, I know family members and friends who work for Wal-Mart and they completely dislike it. They keep their jobs because they need them. They complain that the managers mistreat them and that their complaints are ignored by HR. I appreciate the fact that Wal-Mart offers such good prices. I will continue to shop at Wal-Mart even though I don’t agree with their business practices because they are so affordable and convenient. However, they are ruining our economy. They are forcing jobs overseas. They are making companies lose money with their unfair contracts, and they are mistreating employees.
Example #7 – interesting ideas
Why is Walmart good for America? I’m writing an essay on this topic. Can someone give me THREE reasons why Walmart is good for America?
- It is a large employer providing many jobs
- It gives a large amount of tax to the government
- Prices are generally low therefore aiding the poor
I have to do an essay on whether Walmart is good or bad for America. I don’t want to like a full essay (although that would be awesome) I’m looking for opinions on it. Thank you.
Answer. They offer affordable products, employ millions of people in their Walmart and Sam’s Club stores, so why not? People bash them because they’re jealous of their success.
Is Wal-Mart Good for America’s economy? I have to write this essay about Walmart and if I think it’s good or bad for America’s economy. I think it might be good for the economy but I need 3 supporting topics, so if you could help that’d be great. also if you want to try and change my mind about it being good, that would be okay too.
Answer. Raising five children on a limited budget, was always good for “my” economy. I can’t believe that I was alone in this, so I would have to say it would be good for others as well. Prices and convenience for those struggling to make end meet and to make a life for their family (and I am talking merely essentials) are paramount. Not everyone can afford or even has the means of transportation to take them to all the stores that Wal-Mart provides under one roof.
Ok, this is a joke they bring in Chinese products because there is no tax on them and sell them to Americans really cheap yes it creates jobs because they have to staff their new locations. But the local companies are the ones that get hurt from the supergiant. Wait until we get a president that’s not scared of taxes the Chinese and watch Walmart take the hit for once… It’s not good at all…Besides hurting the United States economy.
Cite this page
This content was submitted by our community members and reviewed by Essayscollector Team. All content on this page is verified and owned by Essayscollector Team. All comments and user reviews are moderated by Essayscollector Team. In the case of any content-related problem, you can reach us through the report button.