"We don't need another WallMart."
The problem with this point of view is the assumption that one has or should have the power to prevent another from pursuing an opportunity, that the process of opening a business should be entirely politicized.
"We don't need another black family in the neighborhood."
Can we see the potential problem with empowering people to frustrate or deny opportunities or freedoms to others?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
We don't need another iron mine (oh, never mind, we don't have any to begin with, and don't want to give Walker a victory.)
We don't need another foundry. (too dirty)
We don't need another Cree/Ruud (not union jobs)
We don't need another industrialist, period (greedy corporation)
We don't need another Thomas industries (won't bargain with union to our satisfaction)
We don't need another Jacobsen (ditto)
We don't need another Western Publishing (ditto)
We don't need another Rainfair (ditto)
We don't need another AMC/Chrysler (ditto)
We don't need another GM plant (ditto)
We don't need another _________ (fill-in-the-blank) (ditto)
See a pattern here?
Yeh, a dead Racine!
There is something more to think about here - and that is the concept of small fish getting eaten by big fish, until only the big fish are left.
Due to the tax structure and laws at different levels of government, A Sole Proprietor can't compete with a local Corporation which can't compete with a State Corporation, which can't compete with a Regional Corporation, which can't compete with a National Corporation, which can't compete with an International Corporation, and NO ONE can compete with Government - i.e. NSP, Fest Hall, TIF's, etc.
NOW- Wal-Mart will use it's International Corporate power to put out of business it's competitors for the sole purpose of cornering the market and holding you hostage when it's done. That's wrong.
The playing field needs to be leveled - especially for Corporations. It's not as simple as some say. I would argue that Corporations need to be be limited in size so that more people can participate and that they can't abuse their power to run operations at a loss, subsidized by profitable operations, expressly to put others out of business.
Also - a business is a privilege - and a Community has an interest in regulating density and locations.
There has to be some reasonable restrictions on a local level - and the advantages given to Corporations need to leveled out.
I'd like to see the Corporate structure dismantled, and the power given to Sole Proprietors.
Our biggest problems are government Corporations which abuse their taxing authority - RUSD, City of Racine, Village of Mt. Pleasant, etc. and engage in all sorts of business ventures like insurance, pensions, recreation, construction, landlord/tenant, etc, they shouldn't be in.
BTW - Michigan doesn't discriminate against opposite sex DP, unlike Racine.
"That means the new ban would affect mostly local governments and public schools in Michigan. The ban will apply to health insurance and other fringe benefits for unmarried partners of the employees, whether they're of the opposite or the same sex."
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9RQAD8O0.htm
GH, great addition to my point. How about: We don't need another job.
TSE you make some good points but I cringe a bit at the notion that a business is a privilege. When we give government that kind of power, they abuse their power, reward their friends, punish their enemies etc...
Can you say sherman anti-trust laws TSE? Good points.
And TSE is right Denis, corporations are constructs of law, you know government as in OUR government.
Waldamart is BY FAR the employer with the largest number of employees in Wisconsin who get public assistance like food stamps and Badgercare, because they refuse to pay a living wage. AND they tell their employees how to get that assistance.
All good reasons to not only oppose another Walmart on Hwy 11, but also not to patronize Waldamart at all!
Notice that all the companies Gearheaded listed actually make things here, unlike Waldamart which makes NOTHING and imports most of what it sells from overseas sweatshops.
Wal-Mart is only still around because people shop there in droves. They do so because they offer slightly lower prices than most other places. People vote with their feet who to support, and millions and millions vote for Wal-Mart.
The concept of "we don't need" is certainly accurate. No one "needs" a Wal-Mart (or Target or KMart or Dimples for that matter). But if Wal-Mart comes, people will decide whether or not to support it with their wallets.
Not every job demands a "living wage" (a number I have yet to see published, btw) in the free market. If every job did demand this (unknown number)as a minimum, I would expect the CPI to proportionately explode and the value of the dollar proportionately diminish to unmanageable levels.
If Wal-Mart is doing *illegal* things to tip the playing field in their favor (violating anti-trust laws or employment laws or taxation laws or pricing laws), I would expect them to be prosecuted with extreme prejudice by the US Justice System.
That having been said, I shop at Wal-Mart as rarely as possible because standing in line where there are 2 checkouts open and 20 people in each line isn't worth the pennies of savings per product for me. I'd rather spend time with my kid, even if I have to spend $8.99 on something instead of $8.95.
@Sean. My point (which you missed of course) was making stuff was something we were pretty good at. But losing jobs is something unions and Democrats excell in. Drip, drip, drip. Bit by bit. Always a great excuse for chasing a company out of town. Like "we aren't giving up anything that we've ever bargained for, regardless of how much we've priced ourselves out of the market." Or my personal recent favorite: "Stepp is dumb. Walker is dumb. We need 100% certainty nothing bad will ever happen."
Well Sean, you won I guess. Those tail lights you see is the mining company moving on to Michigan, where apparently jobs are still wanted, and maybe the pols won't cut off their nose to spite their face. So this really isn't about WalMart. Digging a hole in the ground to get ore to make stuff is as basic as it gets. What jobs do you want, anyway?
I think Wal Mart is one of the best things to ever happen in my lifetime. They have employed many many people who otherwise would have no jobs. They have revolutionized a distribution system. They have helped hundreds of small companies get big - read employment.
And best of all, they have given me, the consumer, more CHOICE.
"And best of all, they have given me, the consumer, more CHOICE."
Except when it comes to government mandates and services - which are paid for through FORCE.
Income and property taxes are odious to a free society. It is time to fund government with consumption taxes - and end the tyranny of public sector unions.
Wal-mart does not give the customer more choice. If a product is offered in 4 varieties, they will only carry one of them. If you want choice-visit Woodman's in Oak Creek or Kenosha.
Post a Comment