Wal-Marts are typically in areas where public transit isn't appealing (or even exists in the first place) if you have the ability to drive a car.

Tough titty for the employees who do rely on transit. No extra $ for them.

Well to hear it from HN readers, they're the lucky ones: they won't be exploited like their car-driving brethren.

A specious mischaracterization of the arguments on display.

Is it? The arguments boil down to:

* I bet this isn't really "optional"

* I bet they're not going to get paid enough to make it worthwhile

And none of those made the same inference as you that they were lucky as a result, which was the specious mischaracterization I referred to.

Does the extra $$ exceed the cost of owning a car in the 1st place? This might not be as true as you think..

really, what proportion of workers do you think will ditch the bus in favor of driving a car to work? Absolutely tiny, if any at all. These people live in the burbs for the most part and everyone drives everywhere.