Originally posted by: SampSon
Mill: I had my responce partially written up, but I cut it and saved it because I thought the forums were going down tonight, not tomorrow. It's at work and I'm way too lazy to retype that sh!t.
I don't know how things are run down south (probably sh!tty), but up north here in NY we have designated zones called "empire zones" that companies can get tax breaks and grants to develop or open a business in. That's really the only way you're getting a break in your taxes in this state. Otherwise none of the towns in my area have cut any breaks for wal-mart to come in. This is actually a rather hot debate in this area, because many people want the town counsels to contribute money to the development of wal-mart centers in the area, but the towns refuse.
Just recently the development plan of a new super wal-mart was canned because the town wouldn't rezone the property wal-mart bought to build the center. The counsel even took it a step further by zoning the land state wetlands and forcing wal-mart to give it up.
NY is strict, not sure about the rest of the nation though.
We have similar zones, but the economic policy as of late has been to lure big-box retailers by using tax breaks. i.e. the first 5 years we share the sales tax revenue with you and/or don't collect our portion. This isn't just a Southern thing -- Big Box retailers get these types of deals all over. It isn't a fair shake because the little retailers simply don't get them.
Well then I guess were lucky up here in NY. These big retailers arn't catching many breaks at all. I guess the liberals are good for something eh?Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: SampSon
Mill: I had my responce partially written up, but I cut it and saved it because I thought the forums were going down tonight, not tomorrow. It's at work and I'm way too lazy to retype that sh!t.
I don't know how things are run down south (probably sh!tty
Just recently the development plan of a new super wal-mart was canned because the town wouldn't rezone the property wal-mart bought to build the center. The counsel even took it a step further by zoning the land state wetlands and forcing wal-mart to give it up.
NY is strict, not sure about the rest of the nation though.
We have similar zones, but the economic policy as of late has been to lure big-box retailers by using tax breaks. i.e. the first 5 years we share the sales tax revenue with you and/or don't collect our portion. This isn't just a Southern thing -- Big Box retailers get these types of deals all over. It isn't a fair shake because the little retailers simply don't get them.
What would you consider a "little retailer" that would be inline to compete with wal-mart?
For all household items I've always went to a K-mart or supermarket type store. Or an electronics store for electronics. Or a computer store for computers.
Though I see that people usually go to walmart for low end consumer household goods, and now it's moving into food.
Let's see. Wal-Mart wants to build a store on some land they bought for cheap. Only problem is the land is not zoned for commerical or large retailers. Wal-Mart tries to get the zoning changed by being nice and talking about how great it will be for the economy. City votes on it and it is denied. Wal-Mart says: We'll sue if you don't give us what we want. City says: We can't afford a lawsuit that lasts 10 years, so ok.
How is that not invading?
moshquerade
No Lifer
- Nov 1, 2001
- 61,504
- 12
- 56
Originally posted by: SampSon
Well then I guess were lucky up here in NY. These big retailers arn't catching many breaks at all. I guess the liberals are good for something eh?Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: SampSon
Mill: I had my responce partially written up, but I cut it and saved it because I thought the forums were going down tonight, not tomorrow. It's at work and I'm way too lazy to retype that sh!t.
I don't know how things are run down south (probably sh!tty
Just recently the development plan of a new super wal-mart was canned because the town wouldn't rezone the property wal-mart bought to build the center. The counsel even took it a step further by zoning the land state wetlands and forcing wal-mart to give it up.
NY is strict, not sure about the rest of the nation though.
We have similar zones, but the economic policy as of late has been to lure big-box retailers by using tax breaks. i.e. the first 5 years we share the sales tax revenue with you and/or don't collect our portion. This isn't just a Southern thing -- Big Box retailers get these types of deals all over. It isn't a fair shake because the little retailers simply don't get them.
What would you consider a "little retailer" that would be inline to compete with wal-mart?
For all household items I've always went to a K-mart or supermarket type store. Or an electronics store for electronics. Or a computer store for computers.
Though I see that people usually go to walmart for low end consumer household goods, and now it's moving into food.
Well, anything 50,000 sq feet and less tends to be way smaller than Wal-Mart. Really, I'm referring to local markets, drugstores(which that's another story), and basically any store that doesn't have a gigantic storefront.
I basically never shop at Wal-Mart. I always use the local grocery store around here(part of the Bruno's chain), and now we've got a CVS and other stores close by as well. Last time I've shopped at Wal-Mart was due to them being open 24 hours a day. I needed a playstation controller, and it was after 11. No one else with one close-by would be open. So to Wal-Mart I went. My area is actually getting a Target within the next few years, so I can't wait.
My issue with Wal-Mart is not just their practices. I find their shelving, inventory, and general upkeep very lacking when compared to Target or local stores. Wal-Mart always manages to be dingy, out-of-stock, crowded, and very generic looking.
I typically do as you. If I want Electronics I go to an Electronics store. If I want Flowers I go to a Florist.
I've personally seen enough small businesses close up because walmart moved, but I'd say it's happening more when they move into smaller towns (I saw it happen when they moved in to Vernon, TX) and less impact when they open in larger cities.
Well as a business model having all of the household items you need in one location is a GOOD IDEA. Instead of promoting suburban sprawl by further developing land and stretching municipality infastructure, you have everything in one building that is locationally convenient to a community. You wouldn't want to drive to 5 stores in order to pick up lightbulbs, toothpaste, candy, condoms and a broom would you?Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: SampSon
Well then I guess were lucky up here in NY. These big retailers arn't catching many breaks at all. I guess the liberals are good for something eh?Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: SampSon
Mill: I had my responce partially written up, but I cut it and saved it because I thought the forums were going down tonight, not tomorrow. It's at work and I'm way too lazy to retype that sh!t.
I don't know how things are run down south (probably sh!tty
Just recently the development plan of a new super wal-mart was canned because the town wouldn't rezone the property wal-mart bought to build the center. The counsel even took it a step further by zoning the land state wetlands and forcing wal-mart to give it up.
NY is strict, not sure about the rest of the nation though.
We have similar zones, but the economic policy as of late has been to lure big-box retailers by using tax breaks. i.e. the first 5 years we share the sales tax revenue with you and/or don't collect our portion. This isn't just a Southern thing -- Big Box retailers get these types of deals all over. It isn't a fair shake because the little retailers simply don't get them.
What would you consider a "little retailer" that would be inline to compete with wal-mart?
For all household items I've always went to a K-mart or supermarket type store. Or an electronics store for electronics. Or a computer store for computers.
Though I see that people usually go to walmart for low end consumer household goods, and now it's moving into food.
Well, anything 50,000 sq feet and less tends to be way smaller than Wal-Mart. Really, I'm referring to local markets, drugstores(which that's another story), and basically any store that doesn't have a gigantic storefront.
I basically never shop at Wal-Mart. I always use the local grocery store around here(part of the Bruno's chain), and now we've got a CVS and other stores close by as well. Last time I've shopped at Wal-Mart was due to them being open 24 hours a day. I needed a playstation controller, and it was after 11. No one else with one close-by would be open. So to Wal-Mart I went. My area is actually getting a Target within the next few years, so I can't wait.
My issue with Wal-Mart is not just their practices. I find their shelving, inventory, and general upkeep very lacking when compared to Target or local stores. Wal-Mart always manages to be dingy, out-of-stock, crowded, and very generic looking.
I typically do as you. If I want Electronics I go to an Electronics store. If I want Flowers I go to a Florist.
Smaller stores are the exact same thing as wal-mart, except they are physically smaller. Their business model, goal and ideal is no different than wal-mart. They want to deliver to you the most product, at the lowest price possible. When you shop these stores do you really walk through thinking "I'm really helping my community and sticking it to the man!"?
If people hate wal-mart and are pissed at it then why do they continue to flock there in droves?
My local supermarkets are right on par with wal-mart in terms of size. One of the local supermarkets here called "Wegmans" is HUGE and provides you with everything from drugs to frying pans. Not a single person in this entire area complains about them, they are accepted as mainstay and a benefit to the community. They do the exact same things wal-mart does with trying to sway common counsel and coerce rapid development, but it's more welcomed. Now if Wegmans were to start heavily expanding nationwide I'm sure they would catch a lot of flack from other communities (even though they do have some stores in other states). Same concept, smaller scale. Though given the chance jus about every single business owner would take it to the extent wal-mart does.
I'm not trying to vehemently defend wal-mart, I couldn't care less if they existed or not. Something else will always be there to replace it. The people harping on wal-mart and calling it an "evil empire" just gets tired. The ideals and economic model is cyclical, you will destroy the current one (wal-mart) and then just groom another one. The primary driving force being if you like the proprietors and their attidtude or not.
I don't frequent wal-mart much, but if I'm in the area and I need some random crap for the house I'll go there. I (the consumer) will go to whatever business I feel gives me the right product at the price I agree with.
Kind like of like pedro down on 14th street.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
You mean the city pretends to deny it, posturing for the sake of public appearance, until the commissioners all get fat bribes (excuse, "campaign contributions"), their contractor brothers-in-law all get the building contracts, and the city gets a fat tax committment plus millions for a new park and a bunch of street improvements.
Don't you understand how this works? Corruption is the name of this game.
LOL, that's exactly how it works, and it stinks something awful. But in the off-chance of a non-corrupt government, the threat of a long lawsuit spins them around just as fast. I can't even get into how corrupt poltics are here, but let's just say our County Commission has already been subjected to several federal investigations. Not only that, but our ex-Governor is up on charges with freakin' Richard Scrushy (of Healthsouth fame). Currently, one county commissioner is facing trial for taking bribes to award sewer contracts to his favorite engineers and businesses. Our sewer system was so horribly managed and corrupt that the Feds came in and ruled it unconstitutional. Of course, the work performed after the bribe I'm talking abour recently flooded, so the EPA is fining us on a daily basis (and taxpayers have to pay it), and the work was ruled "extremely substandard" by an auditing firm. Very sad stuff, but that's the game, and that's why I'd never want to be a politician, nor do I respect them.
We don't have Walmart in the UK, and from what I saw of it in Canada, I'm glad. The market is very different over here- people demand a certain level of quality that is seemingly higher than that of the average American consumer (who shops at WM).
What we do have, is Tesco. Now I don't know if they're beginning to expand into other countries, but over here there's always stories on the news and radio when it's the end of their financial year and they're posting record profits, again. I have nothing against Tesco, because they stock a lot of good-quality items, at good prices. Their value range, while it may not have the same pretty packaging as the regular foodstuffs, is actually pretty good and it's damned cheap. A few pence for a can of baked beans, for instance.
Recently, Tesco has been expanding into consumer electronics, which is in no way a bad thing, IMO. They have £25 DVD players, which may seem a tad high for bargain-basement goods to an American, but given the higher cost of living in the UK, it's extraordinarily cheap, and good value for money given what you get. Electronics are just one of the avenues they are exploring. I get my car insurance and home insurance from them, as they are the cheapest on the market. Now that I have my maximum no-claims-bonus (65%), I suppose I should shop around, but I'm not too bothered about it. It's cheap, and it works, and that's the attitude that most people are adopting.
However, there are a rising amount of businesses that go on record on the radio talk shows, saying that they cannot compete with Tesco anymore and they are having to scale down their operations. I've lost track of the number of times that people have lamented the loss of local produce from their shopping choice. Tesco buys it's produce and supplies from the cheapest supplier, and doesn't restrict their purchasing to the UK. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but I take issue with local producers being forced out of the market because Tesco want to gain further market share. However, this tale does have its upside. Recently, BBC Radio 2 had the founder of a local village shop on their lunchtime chat show, who detailed how he has opened a store that stocks local produce exclusively. Apparently, for him, business couldn't be better. People are lapping up the fresh and tasty food that they have bought from literally down the road, and they have plans to expand. I raise my glass to this man, as he has shown that Tesco is not the be-all and end-all of grocery shopping, and that there is still a place for small businesses.
I sit firmly on the fence of this issue, even if it is somewhat non-relatable to the Walmart monopoly discussion. We shop at Tesco monthly, and it's good value for money. However, we also buy meat from established butchers, and there's a place up the road from us called Middle Farm who stock a huge range of jams, cheeses, ales, ciders, etc. While they still cannot compete with Tesco, there is undoubtably still a place for them in today's world, because they offer something that Tesco simply cannot.
What we do have, is Tesco. Now I don't know if they're beginning to expand into other countries, but over here there's always stories on the news and radio when it's the end of their financial year and they're posting record profits, again. I have nothing against Tesco, because they stock a lot of good-quality items, at good prices. Their value range, while it may not have the same pretty packaging as the regular foodstuffs, is actually pretty good and it's damned cheap. A few pence for a can of baked beans, for instance.
Recently, Tesco has been expanding into consumer electronics, which is in no way a bad thing, IMO. They have £25 DVD players, which may seem a tad high for bargain-basement goods to an American, but given the higher cost of living in the UK, it's extraordinarily cheap, and good value for money given what you get. Electronics are just one of the avenues they are exploring. I get my car insurance and home insurance from them, as they are the cheapest on the market. Now that I have my maximum no-claims-bonus (65%), I suppose I should shop around, but I'm not too bothered about it. It's cheap, and it works, and that's the attitude that most people are adopting.
However, there are a rising amount of businesses that go on record on the radio talk shows, saying that they cannot compete with Tesco anymore and they are having to scale down their operations. I've lost track of the number of times that people have lamented the loss of local produce from their shopping choice. Tesco buys it's produce and supplies from the cheapest supplier, and doesn't restrict their purchasing to the UK. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but I take issue with local producers being forced out of the market because Tesco want to gain further market share. However, this tale does have its upside. Recently, BBC Radio 2 had the founder of a local village shop on their lunchtime chat show, who detailed how he has opened a store that stocks local produce exclusively. Apparently, for him, business couldn't be better. People are lapping up the fresh and tasty food that they have bought from literally down the road, and they have plans to expand. I raise my glass to this man, as he has shown that Tesco is not the be-all and end-all of grocery shopping, and that there is still a place for small businesses.
I sit firmly on the fence of this issue, even if it is somewhat non-relatable to the Walmart monopoly discussion. We shop at Tesco monthly, and it's good value for money. However, we also buy meat from established butchers, and there's a place up the road from us called Middle Farm who stock a huge range of jams, cheeses, ales, ciders, etc. While they still cannot compete with Tesco, there is undoubtably still a place for them in today's world, because they offer something that Tesco simply cannot.
If Wal-Mart offered quality merchandise at low prices I'd shop there. They don't. Their prices on quality electronics and items are no cheaper than regular and speciality stores. Their loss-leading items will never drag me into the store, so they've lost my business.
A PS2 Wireless controller costs the same at Wal-Mart as does another retailer across the street.
If they had quality items like you are speaking of I'd shop there. What no one ever wants to discuss is that Wal-Mart's trading with China is a NEGATIVE for our trade deficit. Who cares if 100 rubberbands are a nickel cheaper than Kroger? When it hurts our trade deficit and allows China to buy more of our debt, how is it a good thing? It fvcking isn't goddamn it, and I'm tired of the uber Capitalists saying that we should sell this country to the cheapest bidder.
Sorry for the rant. I wish we had a Tesco. The major difference I've always seen when traveling to Europe is that the grocery stores typically have a fresher product. A lot of that is due to size. The average country in Europe is tiny compared to the US, and it is just much harder to get fresh good with everything now being regional and national than local. If we could go back to the idea of "local produce" as you were talking about, it would be a boon for food quality.
Sales that last years until all of its competition folds, and a sale on lays potato chips, are 2 very different things.
And about the OPs article, joe schmo selling watches on ebay is considered a small business by their standards, this has no bearing on the businesses that walmart steamrolls.
Actually im an independant voter, and an adamant believer in the fact that democracy doesnt work.
People are far too stupid to govern themselves.
and just to add on to my actual standpoint on the matter, walmart is a perfect case in point.
People are too stupid to step up and shop somewhere else, so walmart will continue to grow and dominate until it does in fact become a monopoly. Its business model is relentless and doesnt allow for increases in services that have destroyed the other "supermarket superpowers".
You associate a "fair market" with communism, i associate a fair market with a market in which other businesses can even co-exsist.
I can point to several Wal-Marts across the nation that have come in, set up a store, attracted merchants to a "mall area", then subsequently, closed that store, moved it a mile or two, leaving 1. an empty big box and parking lot and 2. a dead "mall area" complete with struggling smaller merchants, and the resulant blight that accompanies commercial, corporate death.
Now if Wal-Mart would restore those fields to their former state (woods, grasslands, etc. ) I wouldn't care, but an asphalt lot does nothing for anyone.
Frankly, I think it's symptomatic of the lack of concern corporate citizens have for the system as a whole.
Now if Wal-Mart would restore those fields to their former state (woods, grasslands, etc. ) I wouldn't care, but an asphalt lot does nothing for anyone.
Frankly, I think it's symptomatic of the lack of concern corporate citizens have for the system as a whole.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter