It means small businesses stay open, communities fight together, but where do we go from here?

Where are you gonna go if you're poor and need stuff? Target? K-Mart? What kind of stuff will you buy? Harmful surfactants? Poisonos pesticide food? GMO's?
Whole foods is great, but in laymens terms, it should be called whole wallet. That's what you leave when you walk out.
So where can our working class heroes sustain and clean their homes for a fair price that doesn't include future Earth damage?
Marketing is a tool of the man. However, when Wall Mart falls, we see the hands of the people. They have been marketed to also. Someone has them believing small businesses keep more money in the community. That someone is right. A smaller Wall Mart type facility, independantly or employee owned and with all Eco-responsable merchandise,, would do just that.
It's not really Wal Mart's concept that is to blame, co-op's were based on greater purchasing power that Wall Mart has. It's their employee and business practices, their shoddy merchandise, and their reputation for NOT giving back that we are adamantly against.
Wall Mart could, by revising it's modus operandi, become something we really want in our communities (highly unlikely they will change though.)
Regardless, someone needs to open a chain of Eco-Mart's.
It's high time we not only won the battle of keeping Wall Mart out, but of bringing something better in for our working poor.

I remember walking through a Target store and seeing a huge sign gloating that 5% of *profits* were given back to the "community". The first thing I thought was "what if the profits were low that year?"

Small local businesses are a mainstay of community service. They sponsor local projects like baseball teams, schools, art programs, and charities. The owners can pull down 50 to 100+k in "income" (in LA, not some small town) and plow a few thousand back into the community. That would be 2-3% of personal revenues, not "profits".

These local businesses also have a characteristic that big stores will never have: they can be bought out by someone working there. Though a lot of them are passed down to the children, a lot are also purchased by the previous management, who are sometimes the people who were working the floor.

A manager at a big store might make a fat six-figure paycheck, and donate some back to a local project, but they aren't owners. Their role is to run interference, and take heat, for the corporation.

This isn't a liberal or conservative issue, but an economic and community issue. Small businesses (real ones, not contractors who suck up to big corporations) have the potential to create a self sustaining "ecology" that's responsive to the community. Gigantic businesses (and the subcontractor lackeys) are more likely to behave like capitalist imperialists, focused on extraction, exploitation, control, and de-skilling jobs.

Like neoliberal vampires, they subsidize their business until the local industries wither away, and once they have control of a market, they raise prices. They dominate the media to push their propaganda, until people believe that small businesses are inferior -- simply because a small business doesn't have the deep pockets to purchase the shinyest flooring material and brightest lights and a constant (pointless) overstock of goods piled dangerously high (in earthquake country!)

(Truly pointless - I used to go to Home Depot, but kept going back to two local stores that had a smaller, but more diverse stock that generally was a better fit. The prices were usually the same, but sometimes a little more. Now I just pass up HD entirely.)

This isn't to say small businesses are always better. There are a lot of jerks running local stores. But there are also jerks in management at big stores. I'm just saying, structurally, right now, in the era of union-less retail workers up against big corporations, small businesses are preferable.

Hitting them where it hurts. This is all they care about. If you have any cash short the stock (WMT). Pull them down and the market will punish them.

Well, Wal-Mart didn't cave in to the the "black leaders" who treat their "own" people like slaves. Without evidence, an educated guess can be made that at one point, these "leaders" demanded a bribe from Wal-Mart in order to "help sell" the idea to consumers.

When Wal-Mart refused to play their game (good for them) the "slave masters" revolted.

The big loser is the community itself. They just lost a lot of jobs and money, jobs that small businesses can't create because they're already being taxed to death.

The longer blacks (or anyone else) vote democrat, the longer they stay on the plantation.

The "bribes" were handed out to the "leaders" long ago. WM underwrote a public radio show, gave donations to many groups, etc.

The vote was a rebellion against WM doing an end-run around the entire development process. WM loves to do that - to get total control of the situation so they don't need to get civic approval.

As for jobs... a bunch of crappy low wage jobs doesn't help a community as much as a number of high wage and middle wage jobs. If you get some of those, the small businesses and lower wage jobs get created. If all you have are low end jobs, you can lose the opportunity to have some better jobs there, or maybe some homes.

If there's any "slavery" going on, it's the simple fact that Wal Mart is trying to lower labor costs all the time. After all, what is a slave, but a worker who is not paid for his work? Slaves didn't sit around chained and being unfree: they worked, and created wealth, which was then taken by the slave owner.

Wal Mart is:

Anti-Union
Anti-Democracy
Anti-Community
Pro Racist & Pro Fascist

Boycott them & picket their stores.

Why should I do that? The sell me stuff dirt cheap.........

The "bribes" were handed out to the "leaders" long ago. WM underwrote a public radio show, gave donations to many groups, etc.

>>> At least you admit there's possibly exortion going on by black "leaders." bravo.

"The vote was a rebellion against WM doing an end-run around the entire development process. WM loves to do that - to get total control of the situation so they don't need to get civic approval."

>>> I concede you could very well be right, but here's why I disagree: the 'development' process is most likely a crop of bullshit enivronmental 'fees' and such, which Wal-Mart would gladly pay in order to make profits. That tells me that there was direct opposition (aka discrimination) going on if Wal-Mart wasn't permitted to go thru the same legal channels like any other business might. (Imagine the outrage if another racial group was allowed to vote on whether blacks could open a business somewhere).

>>> If Wal-Mart is so above the law, then there would've been no vote at all (the whole thing was a fiasco anyway). So, in case I'm wrong, if you can provide one example of one location where Wal-Mart made a successful end run around these various regs, let us all know.

"As for jobs... a bunch of crappy low wage jobs doesn't help a community as much as a number of high wage and middle wage jobs. If you get some of those, the small businesses and lower wage jobs get created. If all you have are low end jobs, you can lose the opportunity to have some better jobs there, or maybe some homes."

>>>> You guys on the left don't seem to know where wealth comes from. A kid out of high school isn't going to be made CEO of General Motors, but he nonetheless needs job experience and a start. It's correct that being a Wal-Mart cashier is not a career and you shouldn't depend on it to pay for a certain level of comfort or even survival. Per your own statement: Wal-Mart IS the middle and high-paying company providing "small" jobs.

"If there's any "slavery" going on, it's the simple fact that Wal Mart is trying to lower labor costs all the time. After all, what is a slave, but a worker who is not paid for his work? Slaves didn't sit around chained and being unfree: they worked, and created wealth, which was then taken by the slave owner."

>>>> Do you know why labor costs are kept low? So prices stay low so more people buy more stuff and Wal-Mart profits. There's no secret or conspiracy here. That's how weath gets created. If you don't like minimum rage, you go to school and increase your value. Like it or not, everyone in a capitalist society is their own CEO and selling their labor.

>>> You claim that high and middle wage jobs are what's needed. Well, why would a high-tech company move to the ghetto--or anywhere else--if there's no one there who can perform those jobs?

>>> And here's the real liberal punchline: just how much money does a company have to make before it becomes an evil corporation? Find that line between 'high paying jobs" and evil corporation money.

>>> The City of Inglewood was the big loser here.
While Maxine Shitbird Walters and Jesse Love-Child Jackson board their Lear Jets for the next self-serving exploitation-fest, the people of Inglewood remain as poor as they were before.

If the people really hated Wal-Mart that much, it would've been allowed to open...and then close its doors a month later for lack of customers.


P.S. to the numbskull who claims that Wal-Mart is "racist". The Wal-Marts here are a multicultural miracle of Blacks, Hispanics and Whites, united in bargains and low prices.

i like wallyworld for the 1 lb. cheap bags of chips, cheap electronics/dvds, and usually the old geezer at the door is friendly,+the cashiers are upbeat ...but no sense looking for quality there, it aint.

Jobs cannot be created in athe retail sector. They will simply migrate as competition forces other stores out of business.

"Studies show that for every two jobs created by a Wal-Mart store, the community loses three. Jobs that are retained by a community are merely shifted from local businesses to the giant retailer. In a 1994 report, the Congressional Research Service warned Congress that communities need to evaluate the significance of any job gains at big-box stores against any loss of jobs due to reduced business at competing retailers. The report also pointed out that these so-called new jobs "provide significantly lower wages then jobs in many industries, and are often only part-time positions, seasonal opportunities, or subject to extensive turnover." The Real Story is that when Wal-Mart moves into the neighborhood, it devours local businesses and lowers community living standards."

"Jobs cannot be created in the retail sector. They will simply migrate as competition forces other stores out of business."

>>>> Oh? It looks to me like competition is alive and well, and those with the better or product or service usually win out.

"Studies show that for every two jobs created by a Wal-Mart store, the community loses three.

>>>> Studies by whom? The Coalition of Small Businesses Worried by Wal?

"Jobs that are retained by a community are merely shifted from local businesses to the giant retailer. In a 1994 report, the Congressional Research Service warned Congress that communities need to evaluate the significance of any job gains at big-box stores against any loss of jobs due to reduced business at competing retailers.

>>>>> And what is Congress going to do? Punish the successful and nationalize Wal-Mart, so that local merchants can fix prices and continue to screw the consumer? The Soviets tried a government-managed economy. Oops. No more USSR (thank God).

"The report also pointed out that these so-called new jobs "provide significantly lower wages then jobs in many industries, and are often only part-time positions, seasonal opportunities, or subject to extensive turnover." The Real Story is that when Wal-Mart moves into the neighborhood, it devours local businesses and lowers community living standards."

>>>>> Baloney. "Community living standards." More baloney. Poor communities like Inglewood had nothing to lose by adding a Wal-Mart.

>>>>> It’s consumers that decide who stays and who goes. Anyone else trying to call the shots is either a government stooge or community "leader" (predator) worried about a loss of dependency on THEM. Are ya listening, JESSE?

...oh yes, learn about Inglewood from a waiter in Tex-ass.

Wal Mart is interesting. Their efficiency, monopolization, and profit squeezing actually appeals to the little remaining bit of the "dictatorship of the proletariat" vanguardist socialist attitude I had in high school. In a socialist utopia, everything would be Wal Mart and Ikea. Nobody would fly first class, and there would be no profit margins. That's what it takes to lower prices.

This has some intersting side effects. The local tax base often shrinks. Prices drop, which is nice, but, because less money's being spent, fewer taxes are collected, and city services are impacted (until they raise taxes, or WM raises prices). WM has a record of selling below cost (dumping) to drive out competition.

Some local businesses in direct competition with WM close up. This alters the social fabric of a community, because these local businesses help pay for local social services, like athletic teams, bands, and other small institutions.

Wal-Mart did try to get an approval for the project from the City Council, but it was denied, so, they went to the referendum. With the referendum, they were trying to get around the normal approval process. The referendum wasn't simply to override the CC vote, but to get WM exemption from the normal processes. (They attempted this in West Covina recently.) WM are not the only corporation that tries to do this -- developers with a lot of money seem to try to get around environmental and other regulations all the time.

Also, the Environmental Impact Report process isn't about "fees" but about assessing and minimizing the environmental impact of development. They prescribe modifications to the project, mainly, to prevent excessive pollution, traffic, and water waste. Though these things add to the cost of development, they help preserve the quality of life for many areas. Having grown up near a landfill, I can assure you that these regulations have improved the state in the past 30 years.

I don't have the resources to track down when WM has managed to get into a city via referendum and got away with avoiding process, but, they did get in via referendum in Glendora. I can only assume they tried their best to get around development laws.

You really don't see how Wal Mart is becoming like a retail monopoly. They move in, dump product, drive out competition, then raise prices. Because they have so much leverage against suppliers, they squeeze profit margins until they are almost zero. And then they squeeze more, and suppliers close up a factory in America and get a contrator in another country.

The low prices are nice, but, it's being done on the backs of the workers, not only of the workers who are underpaid overseas, but also those who were fired when the jobs went overseas. If average net real income drops after that kind of move, then, demand ultimately drops. The low prices feel like a godsend now, with the crappy economy, but there *is* a bottom to all this a few years away, if unemployment goes up.

Working at Wal Mart isn't a solution either. The social model it pushes is a handful of rich people, and a lot of poor people. This isn't an unusual social stratification -- it exists in a lot of countries, like the Philippines or Mexico. There, goods are cheap, people are underpaid, and it's a nice place to make things for Wal Mart.

That social stratificaiton also existed in America prior to WW2. There really wasn't a "middle class" in the way we know it today, until after WW2. My point is just this: Wal Mart and other retail can reshape the service economy to be more like a third world or pre WW2 economy.

Wages are the way money is redistributed in this economy. That's why it's important for the service sector to be developed in a way where there are higher-wage service jobs, middle-wages service jobs, and lower-wage service jobs. If you don't do that, there's no way to rise up and out of the low wages.

To Wal Mart's credit, they promote from within, and with real increases in wages. To their detriment, they contract out janitorial services to companies that exploit undocumented immigrant labor. Also, they havea 1:15 manager:worker ratio, so the opportunities for advancement are limited.

I won't say the situation is untenable. Eventually, it can be made to work. But, it's also possible to create a different economic situation, where the distribution of wealth is more diverse, and some kind of middle class is retained. I believe, however, that this will take a lot of effort by many people to upset the current trend.

Being for or against Wal-Mart is not a Left vs. Right issue, but a Big Business vs. Local Community issue. In every anti-Wal-Mart campaign, you'll find both conservatives and liberals who value community. Unions get involved, sure, but, so do churches, local businesses, and others.

PS - What's with the conservatives baiting Jesse Jackson? So jealous.

http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2000/0900bernhardt.html

error

"No more USSR (thank God)."

In addition to God, what other fairy tales do you believe in?

The Easter bunny? The Tooth Fairy? Santa Claus?

You're nuttier than Rush Limbaugh on an Oxycontin binge!

...da waiter is a living, breathing Tex-Ass anachronism (pardon the redundancy)....

A few points.
1. Wal-Marts encourage their employees to go on welfare, and are notorious for finding tax loop holes so they don't pay into the social system. Its not that they don't give to the community, they drain it.
2. Though Wal Mart is cheap, it makes people poorer. In Midwest towns (example: Canton, KS), a wal mart opens and people begin to go there instead of the locally owned stores, then the stores close, and the owners end up working for wal-mart. Since business dries up, the money does too, and you see homes go for up for sale, and the entire town's property value drop. Since most of these Wal-marts are outside city limits, the welfare drains the city and the corporation does not pay into it. This process takes about 5 years. This is, of course, small towns. If a large city gets one, this will still happen, but at least there are more opportunities to work in other areas.
3. When the leftists agree with the rightists that small business ownership is better locally, then who is left to support wal-mart? The answer is wal-mart, which is why they by pass the political parties all together, advertise great jobs (min. wage/part-time) with community focused ideals (to drain the welfare out) and fool people into support. It usually works and after seeing this all over the country (I have lived in several towns that wal mart has hurt), I was surprised and proud of the people here. Great Job...Wal-Mart be GONE
!!!!

I don't have the resources to track down when WM has managed to get into a city via referendum and got away with avoiding process, but, they did get in via referendum in Glendora. I can only assume they tried their best to get around development laws.

Portage, MI to name one, but it is pretty normal since both parties fight it. Republicans want to protect small business owners (so they claim) and Democrates want to protect social services. Wal-Mart runs small businesses out by using social services as a way to offer their employees health insurance.

"In addition to God, what other fairy tales do you believe in?

The Easter bunny? The Tooth Fairy? Santa Claus?

You're nuttier than Rush Limbaugh on an Oxycontin binge!"

>>>>> Unlike others who follow organized religions, I don’t care if you believe in God or not. Atheists are by and large no different than guys wearing nose rings, crying for attention with their ‘rebelliousness,’ which is even less original than religion.

>>>>> You’re neither superior nor inferior for being an atheist. How impressed is anyone supposed to be with someone who makes the Almighty State their god and thinks so highly of his fellow man he gives up his rights and freedom?

>>>> I guess what sucks for you is that unlike God, your commie/socialist bullplop has been proven a failure over and over again throughout history.

>>> Unlike many of your filthy, degenerate lefty "heroes," R. Limbaugh

1) uses facts to shred hype on a daily basis
2) took drugs to combat crippling pain, not for recreational use

I'm pro-drug legalization anyway. Oxycourtney Love needs to be in a casket before she kills someone.
----------
KPC

"...da waiter is a living, breathing Tex-Ass anachronism (pardon the redundancy)...."

>>>> a harsh sentence from a statist non-entity….it’s almost like winning a stale chocolate medal of some sort covered with gold foil

-----------------------

A few points.

1. Wal-Marts encourage their employees to go on welfare, and are notorious for finding tax loop holes so they don't pay into the social system. Its not that they don't give to the community, they drain it.

>>>> Prove it. Provide two examples of this happening. Show me a memo or interview that proves this to be true, that Wal-Mart encourages employees to join the welfare state (I thought that was the job of leftists). Or are you merely cut-n-pasting from the World Socialist Headquarters website?

2. Though Wal Mart is cheap, it makes people poorer. In Midwest towns (example: Canton, KS), a wal mart opens and people begin to go there instead of the locally owned stores, then the stores close, and the owners end up working for wal-mart. Since business dries up, the money does too, and you see homes go for up for sale, and the entire town's property value drop. Since most of these Wal-marts are outside city limits, the welfare drains the city and the corporation does not pay into it. This process takes about 5 years. This is, of course, small towns. If a large city gets one, this will still happen, but at least there are more opportunities to work in other areas.

>>>>> Sorry, Charlie. Progress is progress. People don’t want to pay $50 for stuff they can get for $20, and if time is up for the reign of locally owned stores, so be it.
I notice a disturbing lack of local blacksmiths but that doesn’t seem to concern you lefties when you board your horseless carriages like the rest of us. Time = change.

3. When the leftists agree with the rightists that small business ownership is better locally, then who is left to support wal-mart? The answer is wal-mart, which is why they by pass the political parties all together, advertise great jobs (min. wage/part-time) with community focused ideals (to drain the welfare out) and fool people into support. It usually works and after seeing this all over the country (I have lived in several towns that wal mart has hurt), I was surprised and proud of the people here. Great Job...Wal-Mart be GONE

>>>>>>> I keep coming back to this tho none of you seem interested in this particular truth: in a free market, CONSUMERS decide who stays and who goes. If enough people don’t shop at Wal-Mart, then Wal-Mart goes the way of K-Mart. If the citizens of a local town shop at Wally World, then they are to blame for their own local stores' "demise."

waiter Tex-ASS: "a harsh sentence from a statist non-entity…."

...I guess in Tex-ass, an idiot waiter blathering nonsense passes for an insult....

and this was fuckin' HILARIOUS..

waiter: "I keep coming back to this tho none of you seem interested in this particular truth:"

...no, we are not interested, but there is nothing "particular" about that 'truth" that sets it apart from any of your other 'truths"....

..now, little man, your ignorance is pervasive, so how old are you? My guess is old enough to parrot bullshit not old enough to have developed balls enough to challenge what you are being fed ("took drugs to combat crippling pain, not for recreational use"...I mean, c'mon, you gotta be a RUBE to believe that...)

...fifteen....

"..now, little man, your ignorance is pervasive, so how old are you?"

>>> I awakened from the liberal, multicultural matrix 10 years ago. So I'm at least 10. ha ha ha. I'm delighted that you and others find my "ignorance" pervasive, which simply means it's permeating throughout this website, causing much consternation. You're going to need every last dragster huff of socialist nitrous oxide to even stay neck and neck with me.

"My guess is old enough to parrot bullshit not old enough to have developed balls enough to challenge what you are being fed"

>>> You've got it EXACTLY backwards, Chumley. The left is the establishment and the right is the new rebellion.

>>> As for parrotization, the same argument could be made of your side, only more convincingly. Communism is a failure. Socialism is a failure wherever people want more than an expensive false safety net. Anarchism isn't even on the map. All the colorful liberal media stations and establishment papers are losing ground to conservative RADIO shows, the internet and ONE TV station.

("took drugs to combat crippling pain, not for recreational use"...I mean, c'mon, you gotta be a RUBE to believe that..."

>>> We're talking about Limbaugh here, not Clinton, so it's actually possible to believe what the man says at face value. Since OC is addictive, I'm sure at some point the back pain became secondary to the high. But until Limbaugh says or it's proven in a court, "There was no back pain. I just felt like getting high," I don't see the big deal. I consider the 'drug war' more evil than drug use and don't listen to RL regularly anyway, since he's preachin' to the choir.

>>> It's laughable that any moral relativist would give two shits about Limbaugh's drug use anyway. It looks to me like since 'youse guys' can't successfully dispute the man's fact-supported politics, you have to attack him personally. Typical liberal tactic, copied and recopied. So, who's the parrot again?
How many drug-addled losers are liberal Hollywood heroes? Said before and still true: I don't see this same sneering liberal contempt for OxyCourtney Love, and she's an idiot across the board.

>>> You've been spoon-fed the lie that the left consists of noncomforming rebels and that your politics have yet to be tried. How can these be, if you have no moral standing and are surrounded by the wreckage of the left's failed attempts at flight?

Excellently handled there Walker, good stuff.

You da man.

"How impressed is anyone supposed to be with someone who makes the Almighty State their god and thinks so highly of his fellow man he gives up his rights and freedom?"

Actually, unlike you, I'm not a follower. I don't have or need a "god."

As far as "rights and freedom" go, I am against the Patriot Act. You? Didn't think so.

You may take your foot out of your mouth now.

Idiot.

...just what I thought...fifteen...


...but forget it, waiter...we don't need huff laughing gas to be laughing at YOU....ya see...."consternation" doesn't quite articulate the feeling..."hilarity" would be a better word....look it up in your Weekly Reader...

I think what we need for the working poor are jobs so people don’t have to work and be poor. Providing them with illusions of being able to purchase things that they think they need such as, cheap TV’s, candy, and other waste no one needs is not what we need more of. We need to downsize our lives. We need to work on cheaper forms of transportation, a fair and livable wage for all humans working on the planet. We don’t need more delusions of everything is ok. Cheap products are provided by cheap labor by people in other places on this planet who are exploited by being paid wages that wouldn’t even allow them to by the products that they are producing. We do need affordable food for the working poor, but cheap quality food isn’t going to be provided at Wal-Mart or Food-4-Less, I’ve shopped at Food-4-Less and the quality of the food is lacking, the vegetables and fruits seem to rot with two days and the canned and processed products you can purchase to put off your hunger will set you up for health problems in the future that if you are working poor you won’t be able to get treatment for.

Accepting the corporate line that, “we are helping you” Isn’t going to help anyone.

Go to little rural towns in the South or the Midwest and see what Wal-Mart and gigantic corporation similar have done to small town life, yeah before things were slightly more, but at least you had a choice to run your own business to give back to the people who would give back to you, and a choice to work for barely above minimum wage.

The stuff they sell there for way below retail is stuff you don’t need.

Actually, unlike you, I'm not a follower. I don't have or need a "god."

>>> I’m so very impressed. You truly are a REBEL. “Take THAT, society!”

>>> You're so not a follower "Chuck," you gots to steal my handle.

"As far as "rights and freedom" go, I am against the Patriot Act. You? Didn't think so."

>>> But wait…I didn’t say anything, you answered your own question without any input from me: typical liberal.

"You may take your foot out of your mouth now.
Idiot. "

>>>> Ha ha ha. You can only win boxing your own shadow…and even then by a split decision.

---------

"...just what I thought...fifteen... "

>>>> Well then shouldn't you feel EXTRA dumb getting SERVED by a teen?

"...but forget it, waiter...we don't need huff laughing gas to be laughing at YOU....ya see...."consternation" doesn't quite articulate the feeling..."hilarity" would be a better word....look it up in your Weekly Reader..."

>>>> Just keep scrambling for your liberal MAD-LIBS, jerky. Other avenues of argument are closed to you.

----------

"I think what we need for the working poor are jobs so people don’t have to work and be poor. Providing them with illusions of being able to purchase things that they think they need such as, cheap TV’s, candy, and other waste no one needs is not what we need more of. We need to downsize our lives. We need to work on cheaper forms of transportation, a fair and livable wage for all humans working on the planet. We don’t need more delusions of everything is ok."

>>>> This sounds suspiciously like you don’t trust the bulk of humans to make rational decisions. Well, you shouldn’t. But a managed economy by a few 'elites' is even worse than foolhardy capitalists with disposable income. More delusions are created by those trying to seize power than companies. These power grabbers have the gaul to pretend they’re “for the people” and “public servants.”

"Cheap products are provided by cheap labor by people in other places on this planet who are exploited by being paid wages that wouldn’t even allow them to by the products that they are producing.

>>> How do you think poor countries are supposed to earn wealth? By selling labor or natural resources. If they don’t have oil or other natural resources, they still have people willing to work for wages. MORE capitalism is the answer, not less. The alternative to this wrongly-perceived ‘exploitation’ is dependency on ‘World Aid’ that will never be enough.

"We do need affordable food for the working poor, but cheap quality food isn’t going to be provided at Wal-Mart or Food-4-Less, I’ve shopped at Food-4-Less and the quality of the food is lacking, the vegetables and fruits seem to rot with two days and the canned and processed products you can purchase to put off your hunger will set you up for health problems in the future that if you are working poor you won’t be able to get treatment for."

>>>> foods seem to do what they’re supposed to do. In fact, Americans are not only fat (aka famine-resistant) but many pay 3 times more for “organic” foods.

"Accepting the corporate line that, “we are helping you” Isn’t going to help anyone."

>>>> Then neither is believing that everything is a conspiracy and all businesses are evil and out to get you. “Buyer beware” is always the standard, but companies that cheat consumers or don’t offer a worthwhile product soon end up out of business, all without government intervention.

"Go to little rural towns in the South or the Midwest and see what Wal-Mart and gigantic corporation similar have done to small town life, yeah before things were slightly more, but at least you had a choice to run your own business to give back to the people who would give back to you, and a choice to work for barely above minimum wage."

>>>> If those small stores' prices were truly "only slightly more" then they wouldn't have so many problems with having Wal-mart around.

>>>> Those choices, to run your own business or work for minimum still exist. Despite an empire like McDonald’s, people still run individual hamburger stands. Not to go off subject here, but why would the Left, which sneeringly refers to the Midwest as “flyover country” and despises the South (the version that exists in their own minds) care what happens to these towns anyway? Aren't most small towns conservative and/or religious?

>>> Maybe it’s time for the concept of small towns to disappear and mid-sized towns with larger, more competitive economies to appear, who knows?

"The stuff they sell there for way below retail is stuff you don’t need. "

>>>> Consumers don’t agree with your assessment. In addition to Olsen Twins posters Wal-Mart sells lots of stuff people need: toiletries, building supplies, clothing, etc.

>>> Suffering is universal. Where the right and left disagree is the source of suffering and how to reduce it. You gots your beliefs and i gots mine. That's really all there it to it.

I trust people to make their own decision, but when a big corporation like Wal-Mart comes into your neighborhood you can't make a decision, because everything else closes down, so your options go from several to one.

I'm for choice that's why I'm against Wal-Mart.

"As far as "rights and freedom" go, I am against the Patriot Act. You? Didn't think so."

">>> But wait…I didn’t say anything, you answered your own question without any input from me: typical liberal."

Obviously, the answer was correct.

I'm a Union Plumber, I only work on large commercial projects because the people here whining won't pay for my wages on their home. (Residential Construction Nonunion).

I shop at Wal-mart because they have the best product at the best price(Freedom What a Concept)

I your looking for blame put it on the unions to organize employees at Wal-mart (please don't whine)

ALWAYS FOR ME WAL-MART