More on Wal-Mart

The Appleton Post Crescent lines up against forcing Wal-Mart to provide insurance:

That might cover the state's cost for employees on BadgerCare, but at the expense of consumers, including the low-income and elderly who seek out bargains at discount stores like Wal-Mart. Or at the cost of jobs, potentially thrusting those workers into jobs that don't offer insurance, or into a state program for the uninsured.

Amen. I made a similar argument in a column last week.

Here's an excerpt from a comment I got on that column (emphasis added to my favorite part):

We have 4 children, and make less than $25,000 a year. Is that because of Wal-Mart? No. Wal-Mart had no impact in that area of our lives, because we didn't let it. Wal-Mart is a company, like anyone else. Why should Wal-Mart, or any business (Government included) be forced to offer health insurance to their employees? If a business doesn't want to offer healthcare to it's employees, who are we to say that they have to? If we don't like their business policies, then we shouldn't shop there. If enough people don't like their business policies, they will shut down.

Amen again.