Wednesday, March 08, 2006

The Pro-WalMart Faction

A majority of Saranac Lakers want a department store in the area. However, some in the 'pro-WalMart faction' (probably less than a majority) want a WalMart and only WalMart. The box has to be at least 121,000 sq ft and the box has to be built on the village sandpit site, no where else. So there is nothing else to discuss.

Others, both 'pro-WalMart' and 'anti-WalMart' disagree. They feel that there should be some questions raised about the effects of WalMart (or any other 'mega-retailer) on our Village and the Tri-Lakes area.

Many 'anti-WalMarters' want to discuss how much WalMart expects the village to spend in infrastructure needs, they want to discuss the effects of loss of taxes when other area grocery stores go out of business, they want to discuss the possible detrimental effects on downtown businesses and/or loss of tax base, they are concerned about the effects of a WalMart on Tupper Lake businesses, they think we need to concern ourselves about environmental effects of a large box store, they are concerned about other possible county wide effects of having WalMarts in Potsdam, Malone, Saranac Lake and Plattsburgh. And, some of us are concerned about the unethical business practices of a $300 billion dollar company. The largest company in the world with revenues greater than 22 countries.

Furthermore, some WalMart supporters, like ynw (see comments under SL Village Sandpit SEQR in the post below), feel the need to resort to using tactics such as changing the subject, personal attacks on people who sincerely believe WalMart is unethical, or even attacking Habitat for Humanity and its supporters or attacking the people who can only afford to live in low income housing and how wrong it is that taxpayers are 'supporting' them. Maybe if WalMart paid a living wage or at least provided adequate health benefits (WalMart can afford it) 'ynw' wouldn't have to 'support' low income people. Maybe 'ynw' should start a 'Pro-WalMart' blog. WalMart is paying pro-WalMart bloggers now and even providing them with 'information' to post. It's a good deal since it doesn't even require thinking.

This blog is obviously biased against WalMart (mostly for ethical reasons). But links to articles and papers that provide fact-based arguments and evidence about why WalMart may not be good for SL are provided. Let's see some 'fact-based arguments on why WalMart and only WalMart is right for SL.

3 comments:

Molly Shubert said...

Very well-stated and I completely agree. I would love to read something factual about the benefits WalMart brings to a community (other than cheap goods and low-paying jobs). All of the factual, research-based articles I have read about WalMart are "anti-WalMart."

I second Adirondack Wal-Mart, "Let's see some fact-based arguments on why WalMart and only WalMart is right for SL."

PeterH said...

I dont think you should minimize the "cheap goods" argument. Other big boxes could do almost as well, but for people on limited budgets (almost everyone to some extent), access to low-cost stuff might make a big difference in their lives. Lots of the rural poor are on one form of government assistance or another, and those checks would go a lot farther with a Walmart nearby.

Adirondack Wal-Mart said...

It's been estimated that WalMart could raise their prices one-half of one percent and provide better pay and benefits to their employees. It's also been shown that WalMart prices are not really all that cheap.

According to Prof. Ken Stone How does the number-one retailer maintain an image of low prices? First, by actually making sure its prices are lower than its competitors, at least on key items. These items are called "price-sensitive" items in the industry, and it is commonly believed that the average consumer knows the "going price" of fewer than 100 items. These tend to be commodities that are purchased frequently.