The argument against Walmart is that its $30/hr additional labor budget comes from $10 worth of externalities provided not just by Alice, Bob and Charlie's taxes, but also Dave's, Edward's, Franks, Gary's, Hester's, Ignacio's, Janice's, Katherine's, Lisa's, Mark's, Nancy's, Oliver's, Peggy's, Quincy's, Richard's, Sam's, Theresa's, Ulysses', Verna's, Walter's, Xerxes', Yolanda's, and Zach's. And that if Walmart can't turn a profit without sucking money out of every pocket in Alphabetsville, Walmart shouldn't be in business. From a capitalist standpoint, a business that cannot operate without subsidy should not operate and Walmart is a subsidized corporation. From a socialist standpoint, a business that does not enrich the social fabric with its subsidy should not be subsidized and the preponderance of evidence holds that Walmart does not enrich the social fabric of the communities it enters.