The lecturer and the reading passage both discuss megastores. In the lecture, however, the professor casts doubt on the benefits of megastores, which is described in the reading.
First, the lecturer argues that megastores don’t allow people to save money, as the reading indicates that megastores save money due to reduced costs and mass production of the goods. In other words, when one product is on sale, others deceptively go up. Ultimately, people spend more than small family shops. Thus, megastores don’t allow people to save money, or help them buy goods in a cheap cost.
Furthermore, in contrast to the claim in the reading that megastores are very convenient, the professor insists that superstores are not convenient or advantageous. Specifically, there are no unique products to buy because a majority of the goods were mass-produced. People can buy unique and different products in small shops, but these family shops have been forced to close because megastores took over.
Finally, according to the reading passage, megastores provide many benefits for the local economy. However, the lecturer maintains that superstores are actually bad for the economy. In particular, megastores offer low-pay jobs that nobody wants, but people have to take them because there are no other jobs since family shops have been closed. They have no option but to take the job. On top of that, superstores don’t hire them fully because they want to avoid giving benefits and creating unions. Hence, teenagers and old people work in megastores because there is no option, and they need money.