Peter Schiff, in his hour long response to a practical joke of an interview, claims almost reasonably that "people aren't lining up to be exploited" in regards to demand for jobs at typically unromantic locales such as McDonald's or Wal-Mart. Only almost because Schiff's wider political milieu directly invalidates the claim.
A staunch critic of centrally managed inflationist and fiat monetary policy, Peter Schiff (much like other belles of the libertarian celebrity circuit) claims some fame from his own "end the fed" argument. How can an expected-intelligent financial adviser (an interesting form of central planning as such) on the one hand spew the horrors and ill-effect of the all-unknowing money changers and with the other cracks the whips for the succubi empowering the printed-money masters.
Wal-Mart doesn't exploit anyone? How quickly we forget the extent of federal and lower level meddling in industry. Today more than ever we might also note the effects recently established international organizations have on events worldwide and locally.
The crops we subsidize, insure, haul away for ration donations in third world countries. These have a real wealth transferring impact on the finances of people at all levels. The wealthy literally milking the public trough in quantities the working class does not fathom.
When Peter Schiff says people don't like up to be exploited, he's obviously forgetting that when we receive coerced government entitlements, we are exploiting ourselves as much as we exploit the collective fellow man from whom we stole the hand-out. Not only do big box employees line up to be exploited (these companies contribute heavily to federal individual assistance programs) but the rich too line up to beg for money so they don't have to work in a free market.
Can you think of any big box retailers who found benefit in federal intervention? The US, supposedly most free economy on the planet, has plethora examples. Pick your favorite and join the conversation.