Wal-Mart vs. The Big Apple

New York Post columnist (and former Reason intern) Ryan Sager reports on Gotham's desperate struggle to keep Wal-Mart from sullying its commercial landscape:

Last week, the City Council's Economic Development Committee held a hearing aimed at keeping bulk, discount retailers from expanding in the Big Apple. The hearing was prompted by Wal-Mart's plan to open its first-ever store in the five boroughs -- in Rego Park, Queens….

"They have to make big changes if they want to come into New York," Councilwoman Helen Sears, who represents Rego Park, told The Post. "They have to rethink their benefits . . . They have to rethink labor-management relations."

The most interesting bit in the piece is the recovery of A.T. Stewart, who created the "Marble Palace," the first modern American department store, in lower Manhattan (he was hated for the same reasons Wal-Mart is routinely attacked).

Whole story here.

I reported on anti-Wal-Mart activism almost a decade ago and wrote about it for Reason here. Of particular interest (I think) is the material about the rise of A&P as the first national grocery store chain and the amount of legislation chain stores inspired during the Depression.

Comments

[joe]

Sears' opposition is based on the specific business practices of this one corporation (benefits, labor-management relations), yet the Post's columnist responds with a defense of department store retailers.

Straw man, or typical New York Post commitment to facts?

[Rhywun]

If Wal-Mart is capable of opening an urban store here in NYC, then by all means I support it. They should be mindful that Rego Park is a *city* neighborhood and should try not to surround the store by oceans of parking. But if they want to plop down their typical suburban model, then I will be against it for the precise reason that it will change the character of the neighborhood too drastically. The union nonsense should boil over once the politicians realize that the public is far less beholden to union interests than they are.

[joe]

Wal Mart actually has a pretty good urban model for its stores. With land as expensive as it is in NYC, it's difficult to believe they'd waste their money on a single story building and acres of parking.

[Evan Williams]

Oh, yes, that grand, subjective, ubiquitous gremlin, Mr. Nieghborhood Character!

As an architect, I do understand the notion of the nebulous urban fabric. But as an economic libertarian, I would say that the decision over whether parking is better than "neighborhood character", should be made by the people of that neighborhood, at the cash register, not by vote at a committee meeting. If the people of the nieghborhood really cherish their "character" that much, then they will "vote" with their dollar, and boycott Wallyworld, and it will have to close up shop, and then the old walmart parking lot will be turned into some cute outdoor mall full of trees and boutiques, and they'll all be happy.

This is natural model of preference-voting via consumerism. But if a governing body steps in and declares that WalMart cannot enter unless it "preserves neighborhood character", then those people are robbed of even having a chance to "vote with their dollars".

This is the folly of ARB's all over the nation. You have to build it out of this certain grade of brick. The brick mortar has to be this tint. The signage must be smaller than this. The windows must be period-correct. Etc.

[Rhywun]

I would say that the decision over whether parking is better than "neighborhood character", should be made by the people of that neighborhood, at the cash register, not by vote at a committee meeting.

Your sarcasm clearly indicates that you--like many architects--don't give a shit about neighborhoods. Remember, not all buildings are built on empty land. What if Wal-Mart has to tear down 500 houses and 100 businesses in Rego Park to build its new store? You don't consider it worthwhile for the neighborhood residents to have a say on whether this can happen *before* it is built? Or, if it's an empty site, suppose Wal-Mart plans parking for 1000 cars, in a neighborhood that otherwise doesn't see this sort of commercial traffic. You don't think it's worthy of considering the impact all that extra traffic will have, before it's built? Just build and let the local folk deal, eh?

[joe]

'I would say that the decision over whether parking is better than "neighborhood character", should be made by the people of that neighborhood, at the cash register, not by vote at a committee meeting.'

If they are putting in acres of parking, they are necessarily drawing a majority of their customers from beyond the neighborhood, leaving neighborhood residents with approximately the same share of the vote as the LP.

The model you offer works well when none of the players are big enough to shape the market by itself, but it fails in the modern economy. A neighborhood can send a corner store or restaurant packing by boycotting it, but the power imbalance in this case precludes that strategy from working.

[dhex]

yeah, it's hard to stop neighborhood imbalance after the store is built.

i mean, c'mon!!!!

[joe]

See, when an actor in the economy becomes large enough, it is longer limited to responding to the market, but can actually shape it to its advantage. Normally, the interests of any one actor are balanced out by those of others, and broad change can only occur via market forces. But when one of the actors is strong enough to bend the market to its will, rather than win by outcompeting rivals (which is to say, convincing others to go along of their own free will, without coercion), then something else needs to balance the power of that actor.

If a food distributor can shut off a grocery chain from shipments of all Pepsico, Kraft, and RJR products if the chain choosed to stock Coke, the store and its customers no longer have the opportunity to purchase soda in a free market. Which is harmful in and of itself, but also denies society the benefits of a properly functioning market - the continual conformance of producers to the public's taste, the downward pressure on prices, the...hell, I don't need to list the benefits of market dynamics on THIS board!

[joe]

dhex raises an oft-forgotten point in these parts - buildings and site layouts are extremely resistant to change after the fact, even if the market pushes them towards change. If a car model doesn't sell, they stop making it when that run ends. If a financial instrument has no takers, they change the interest rate with the click of a mouse. But the built environment requires extreme efforts to adapt. If changes in the economy make a city redundant, the city doesn't go away (contrary to the silly assertions often made on this board). It just becomes a worse and worse city, dragging down the region around it.

Land development is a special case, because land and buildings work differently from other goods and services.

[Agammamon]

". . .What if Wal-Mart has to tear down 500 houses and 100 businesses in Rego Park to build its new store?. . ."

If you believe the character of the neighborhood must be preserved, then buy up those house so that Walmart can't tear them down. get your friends and neighbors to buy them up. If you can't get enough money together to block Walmart then their wasn't enough collective concern about "preserving the character of the neighborhood" to merit blocking the store's arrival in the first place.

You may not want them their, and that's fine. Hate 'em, tell everyone you hate them, try to get others to hate them - all part of American society. But the rest of us aren't going to model our lives (or neighborhoods) to please a small minority.

[bigbigslacker]

Rhywun, fuck all that. Are you actually concerned someone might build a store with ample free parking and low prices? Afraid the wrong types might want to shop in your neighborhood? Prollish middle-class nobodies? Hicks? Darkies? Horrors! There oughta be a law forcing these people to respect your neighborhood.

[Thomas Paine's Goiter]

If a food distributor can shut off a grocery chain from shipments of all Pepsico, Kraft, and RJR products if the chain choosed to stock Coke, the store and its customers no longer have the opportunity to purchase soda in a free market.

Kraft, Pepsico and RJR all distribute their own products as wholesalers. They don't use middlemen.

[joe]

"If you can't get enough money together to block Walmart then their wasn't enough collective concern about "preserving the character of the neighborhood" to merit blocking the store's arrival in the first place."

Remember, folks, commitment to goals and ideals has a direct inverse relationship to the amount of disposable income in a neighborhood.

Also, money spent on activities that don't turn a profit is just as available as money invested in business ventures.

I could accuse bigbigslacker of being motivated by a perfernence for suburbanites and a desire to punish people who live in Queens for living in an area with too many minorities, but evn I'M not that much of a dickhead.

[joe]

TPG, it was an example to illustrate a point. Did you not understand what I meant?

[Coarsetad]

A small suburb outside of San Antonio is currently trying to keep a Wal-mart out. And from stir its caused, it is by no means a "small minority" that doesnt want them there.

Speaking of "voting with dollars," this suburb is way too small to support a super-wal-mart, so it seems like most of voting will be done by out of towners. Sounds fair, huh?
Small communities should have the legal power to effectively deal with mega-corporations... otherwise more and more of them will start turning to the state and federal government for help. I think it is also helpful to realize that sometimes government is the little man. What small bedroom community has the resources to battle Wal-mart's multi-million dollar legal team?

[Thomas Paine's Goiter]

TPG, it was an example to illustrate a point. Did you not understand what I meant?

Sure, but you're using a poor example. For what you want to occur, three major corporations who are trying to sell products would all have to collude with each other to block a chain from selling their product.

Three major corporations can't get internal divisions to cooperate, and you think that they'll be able to set up a cartel to block the sale of product?

[Jacob]

How can low-income people live in NY without Wal-Marts?

[Wild Pegasus]

If a community's character is so important, the community ought to be able to exclude blacks as well as Wal-Mart.

- Josh

[joe]

All right, there are three different people agreeing with me on a non-Iraq thread.

You all need to cut it out. It's freaking me out.

[joe]

Winged Josh, your argument amounts to lumping extremely different concepts under a similar label, and pretending they cannot be meaningfully distinguished. Ethnic composition is a very different bird than the appearance and function of the built environment. Simply referring to both as "character" does not nullify this distinction.

[sulla]

Wal-Mart should stay out of Queens. The whole charm of Wal-Mart is the ability to pick up that Remington 870 you've had your eye on, and a box of tampons for the old lady in the same trip. A store in Queens isn't going to have that.

[Russ D]

this suburb is way too small to support a super-wal-mart, so it seems like most of voting will be done by out of towners. Sounds fair, huh?

Sure does. The people who live in this small suburb shop at stores in other towns, effectively using their dollars to "vote" in those other towns. Perhaps enough of them did so that Wal-Mart saw the data and said "We oughta build a store closer to these people."

[dhex]

or more likely they saw the success of home depot and thought, why not?

same thing with ikea in red hook. that's going to be a fucking mess...

[Russ D]

dhex, I said "perhaps", you said "more likely". How can you be so sure of yourself? And more importantly, if the Home Depot was already there, why would they oppose a Wal-Mart then? Seems like they share enough customers.

[dhex]

queens is a big place.

one is in long island city, the other in college point. rego park is a middle point between the two. but none are really close, especially when factoring in queens blvd.

i can think of many reasons to oppose a wal-mart. they're big, ugly and take up too much space. in a city where housing is already expensive, watching chain stores move into neighborhoods and annihilate blocks of space at a time are going to build some resentment.

yes, this may not vibe with the libertarian understanding of the universe, but saying "we'll create 100 dead end jobs" - as is a common selling point - is a neat but not gaudy illustration of the issue.

not that this matters, because it's not like the community makes the decision. city pols + developers / cash = wal-mart. rego park is not the upper east side.

[Rhywun]

Are you actually concerned someone might build a store with ample free parking and low prices?

Low prices? No, not concerned - bring 'em on.
Ample free parking, yes I *am* concerned, if it turns another once-livable city neighborhood into yet another unwalkable suburb. Contrary to popular opinion (especially on this board), not everyone likes the suburban lifestyle. In fact, we choose (with our dollars!) to live in the city. Turning the city into a suburb is a LOSS of choice, unless that is what the neighborhood wants.

Afraid the wrong types might want to shop in your neighborhood? Prollish middle-class nobodies? Hicks? Darkies? Horrors!

a. It's not my neighborhood. Same borough, though.
b. "Darkies"? Are you serious?

[joe]

'The people who live in this small suburb shop at stores in other towns, effectively using their dollars to "vote" in those other towns. Perhaps enough of them did so that Wal-Mart saw the data and said "We oughta build a store closer to these people."'

And if Rego Park only existed as a location where people from Lon Gisland went to shop, that would be the only consideration that matters. But it is not. First and foremost, it is a place where people in Rego Park live their lives and raise their kids.

[Russ D]

joe, you and I both live in urban areas. We both know that those urban areas are filled with people who don't live in the neighborhood; I can't speak for you but for me that is part of the appeal. (Not to mention that outsiders willingly spending money in my neighborhood keeps my property taxes down.) And we both travel to other neighborhoods to shop on occasion. Are we wrecking someone else's quality of life by shopping in another neighborhood?

I don't expect my neighborhood to remain unchanged while I live there. Change is constant, some of the changes I like, some I don't. My house is the way I like it. When I no longer like my neighborhood, I'll save myself an ulcer and look for another place to live. That's the advantage of living in a metro area with hundreds of neighborhoods to choose from.

[dhex]

"Prollish middle-class nobodies?"

for a second there i thought you meant "polish middle-class nobodies" and meant to post about greenpoint.

[Rhywun]

city pols + developers / cash = wal-mart

I agree with joe that Wal-Mart probably knows how to build an urban store. There are plenty of big-box stores that have fit into NYC just fine, like K-Mart and Borders. I wasn't aware that Wal-Mart had any experience at this, though. I thought they built exclusively in sub/ex-urban areas.

[Thomas Paine's Goiter]

I agree with joe that Wal-Mart probably knows how to build an urban store. There are plenty of big-box stores that have fit into NYC just fine, like K-Mart and Borders. I wasn't aware that Wal-Mart had any experience at this, though. I thought they built exclusively in sub/ex-urban areas.

Last I heard, they didn't have any functioning urban stores in the US, though they were putting one in Atlanta, supposedly multi-story. They will be moving away from the giant rectangles they plop down everywhere.

One telling piece might be the success of inner-city Wal Marts in China. Every one they open over there has been met with success.

[Ben]

A large amount of choice at the lowest price? Who gives a fuck what the store looks like when you've got that. All many people care about is price, choice, and convience--especially in NYC.

[Rhywun]

One telling piece might be the success of inner-city Wal Marts in China.

Except that "inner city" in China still means it could be surrounded by giant parking lots, like the hotel I stayed at in Beijing not 10 minutes from Tiananmen Square. You guys would be delighted... there's little in the way of "planning" in the new China, at least to my eye.

[joe]

"Are we wrecking someone else's quality of life by shopping in another neighborhood?"

No, absolutely not. This isn't about spending money in other people's neighborhoods. This isn't even about locaing retail in other people's neighborhoods. This is about the design of the buildings you build in other people's neighborhoods.

TPG, an old column in Reason references a successful urban Wal Mart in LA. Sadly, it uses this example as evidence of the benefit of locating a suburban model Wal Mart in a different inner city part of LA.

I know, "inner city" doesn't apply precisely to Los Angeles - you know what I mean.

"All many people care about is price, choice, and convience--especially in NYC." If that is the case, and the residents of the neighborhood are happy at the idea of a Sprawl Mart blighting their neighborhood, then Wal Mart will have no problem getting their permits.

[John]

I have never met a person opposed Wall-Mart who wasn't a rich, snobbish, asshole who would never be caught dead shopping there. Yes, I am sure they rich New Yorkers who can afford to shop in specialty shops, love the neighborhood feel of the place. The people who actually work for a living in that neighborhood, might value the generally 6% lower prices and one convenient location for a lot things they need and can't get now a little more than the upscale folks do. I know from being a poor college student in an inner city, as bad as it sucks to be poor in a small town, it sucks worse in the city where there are few stores and its impossible to get a lot of what you need if you don't have a car to drive to the suburbs. I also know from growing up in a small town what a Godsend Wall-Mart is to small towns. The vaunted small-town businesses that Wall Mart displaced were generally poorly run, with a lousy selection, and expensive as hell. Also, if you think Wall-Mart treats its employs badly, work for a typical tight-ass small business sometime. It will make Cathy Lee's sweat shops in Thailand look good. Every rich Yuppie concerned about the small-town feel or the neighborhood opposing a Wall mart can go f**k themselves. You not doing anyone but yourselves any favors.

[Wild Pegasus]

Winged Josh, your argument amounts to lumping extremely different concepts under a similar label, and pretending they cannot be meaningfully distinguished. Ethnic composition is a very different bird than the appearance and function of the built environment. Simply referring to both as "character" does not nullify this distinction.

Then, for starters, you're going to have to choose your words more carefully.

Of course, it's actually a lot closer than you'd like to think. A neighbourhood, once a critical mass of blacks move in, becomes a "black neighbourhood", property values plunge, and whites leave. In a scant few years the area is dangerous and shabby. It happened to both of the little towns on either side of my hometown. Compare that to the results of building a Wal-Mart, which my hometown did about a decade ago with no ill effects. Which one has been worse for the "character"?

Of course, I wouldn't exclude either one, because I don't rightfully get a say in what other people or their voluntary associations do with their property. Blacks, Jews, Mexicans, gays, Muslims, Wal-Mart, and Crazy Uncle Tony's House of Adult Pleasures don't need my permission to move in.

- Josh

[dhex]

"I have never met a person opposed Wall-Mart who wasn't a rich, snobbish, asshole who would never be caught dead shopping there."

rego park, if you ever get the chance to go, is not like a disconnected part of queens. it's not the inner city by any stretch, though it is at least in part an immigrant neighborhood (or part of an immigrant continuum, maybe?). it's more or less on the main drag and has a number of shopping options, including a new vertical mall sort of complex not too far away down the blvd.

i have no wal-mart experience, but if it's anything like target, they seem like fun.

bars are fun too. don't want to live in one, though. there is a middle ground here. and that's not ignoring the sort of government and developer collusion which is, generally, frowned upon round here. it is endemic in nyc.

the ikea in red hook is something else entirely though, due to the structure of the area. it's going to fuck shit up for MILES, traffic wise.

[Luisa]

The linked op-ed is such BS--talking about excluding Wal_mart as infringing on people's freedom. I'm more concerned about my freedom not to have my taxes stolen to give to Wal-Mart as corporate welfare (see goodjobsfirst.org) or worse, my home or business: http://reclaimdemocracy.org/articles_2004/eminent_domain_bigboxes_wallst.html

Wal-Mart is to free markets what a cancer is to a human.

[John]

DHex,

Targets are much nicer than Wall-Marts and in the end may drive Wall-Mart to extinction. There may be good zoning reasons not to put a major department store there. It just seems like a lot of the people who will go to the barracades to stop a Wall-Mart wouldn't have too much problem with an Ikea store that would create just as many problems. Most of the objection to Wall-Mart is outright class snobery.

[Ben]

Don't forget all the whores for the unions John.

[Luisa]

Re John's comment: "I have never met a person opposed Wall-Mart who wasn't a rich, snobbish, asshole who would never be caught dead shopping there."

Have you really attempted to meet anyone involved in organizing against Wal-Mart? -- they're overwhelmingly working-class and often union members who recognize that Wal-Mart is poison to everyone union member on the planet.

BTW, Wal-Mart "creates" jobs only if you ignore the jobs they destroy within two years of opening. Their "efficiency' comes from employing fewer people (both directly and indirectly) and paying them less per dollar of sales, while forcing taxpayers to cover many of their expenses.

[Rhywun]

Most of the objection to Wall-Mart is outright class snobery.

I really don't understand the logic. Suburban shopping has left vast numbers of carless, inner-city people without any options left for decent shopping (myself included, until I moved to NYC). Every time a WalMart opens in another small town, all the downtown shops either close down, or if they're "lucky", become antique shops or whatnot. Those too young, too old, too infirm or whatever to drive to the suburbs are left, again, with no options. How is that "class snobbery"???

[Coarsetad]

I find it sad when liberaterians defend mega-corperations, as is they are shining example of sucess of a free-market society. Companies the size of wal-mart are only private instuitions, when it suits them. There are whole departments within wal-mart whose only job is to public/government support for their expansion (ie zoning abatements, tax deferments, etc.) Who here would support an individual that one face championed the free market, and then went out to cash his welfare check?

[Luisa]

Ben,

Yes some of us "union whores" were too lazy and irresponsible to be born into the right families like you and we actually work for wages. We even have the audacity to think we deserve to be treated and paid fairly.

[matt]

Without the government, and its subsidies (both direct and indirect) to big business, I find it unlikely that huge corporations like Wal-mart would even exist. Instead of attacking Wal-mart's rent-seeking activity (like all companies it's driven by the profit motive), how 'bout attacking the politicians and government goons who deal them out the favors?

BTW, luisa:

Newsflash: All taxes all stolen.

[Jimbo]

Ok, as someone who actually lives in NYC (in an outer borough), and has a Target nearby, I have to say WOOO - Let's Go Walmart!

The shopping in NY is superb if you're in the market for Japanese books, silk toe warmers, giant acrylic phalluses, roasted duck, or knock-off Guccis.

But, if you're looking for life's neccessities - underwear, napkins, soda, snow shovels, etc. - you are in for misery and expense. "Super" markets are the size of suburban DMV offices and just as soul-crushing. Hardware stores exist without a single Stanley tool! Buying in bulk means two dented 11 oz. cans of corn for $3.

We drive out of town to go to walmart, target, and other big box stores. Commodities don't need boutiques, they need economies of scale - Walmart brings that in a way a bodega does not.

PS. Rego Park's "character" is better described by Dickens than the posters here. It's not like this store is being dropped into Central Park.

[Ben]

Luisa--I was not born into any "right" family. I have nothing against any workers anywhere that want to band together to form a union. All workers have the same right to fight for a better work place. But if they seek to gain any special favors or treatments from the government then they become no better than armed thugs. I am not saying all unions are bad, but when they are in bed with the government then I have no love for them. And yes, I feel the same way about corporations.
And if you don't feel you are treated or paid fairly somewhere and your employer doesn't agree then maybe you should seek employment elsewhere.

[Rhywun]

"Super" markets are the size of suburban DMV offices and just as soul-crushing.

Soooooo true. I have five supermarkets within a ten-minute walk of my house in Queens (an Associated, two Trade Fairs, a C-Town, and a Key) and they all SUCK. There are also plenty of discount "department" stores where I get my stuff that other people buy at WalMart. And yes, the choice sucks. So sure, I'd like to see WalMart come to NYC - but do it in an urban way like some others have done successfully. Even better, open a store in Manhattan! And yeah, Rego Park is not Manhattan, but it *is* on a subway line and it's a pretty built-up area. It's not Nassau County.

[Kevin Carson]

Evan Williams,

I fully agree--so long as W-M is charged for sewer and other utility infrastructure based on the actual costs they impose on the system. Of course, that happens almost nowhere. When local governments try to charge Wal-Mart for the cost of dealing with their runoff or for the cost of expanding access roads, they usually threaten to pick up and leave.

Rhywun,

As joe (who takes second to no man in his respect for urban planning) pointed out, there's no way in hell Wal-Mart could make money demolishing several blocks of NYC at those real estate prices.

[Thomas Paine's Goiter]

I know, "inner city" doesn't apply precisely to Los Angeles - you know what I mean.

Yeah, LA isn't very vertical, nor crowded. Atlanta is moreso. I'm interested in what WMT is going to do there.

[Twba]

Every time a WalMart opens in another small town, all the downtown shops either close down, or if they're "lucky", become antique shops or whatnot. Those too young, too old, too infirm or whatever to drive to the suburbs are left, again, with no options.

You should start a shuttle bus service to transport those people to WM. Buy a 15 passenger van and let the fun begin.

[Steven Crane]

Seemingly, the K-Mart in Astor Place does fine.

[David Innes]

This evening I heard an interesting perspective on the Walmart/wages issue on a Seattle-area talk show. A caller from one of the surrounding Red suburban towns mentioned that the two small hospitals she was a financial administrator for, the number of "financially uncompensated" cases went up measurably when Walmart opened in her area, and again 16 months later when a Sam's Club went in.

I wondered how she could be so sure. A bit ago it occurred to me that every admissions form I've ever filled out asks for employment information, even if you're self-insured. I don't know how far patient privacy regulations go, so I don't know how easily one could verify her fairly informed anecdotal evidence, but I'm pretty sure internal accountants would notice if the same employer's name kept showing up in the stacks of unpaid accounts.

She sounded pretty Red herself -- not particularly sensitive about the workers themselves, but very nettled that her hospital was stuck with their unpaid bills.

Her comment in response when the host, a fairly libertarian Democrat, mentioned the attractiveness of Walmart's resulting low prices was that the impact on low wages extends beyond the affected workers.

The host said he figured if hospitals finally started turning away the uninsured then you might see some revisions to labor policy, but as long as they, and their paying customers, were willing (or forced, since it's often illegal to refuse to treat even fully-employed indigents) to effectively subsidize low-wage employers like Walmart he didn't see much change on the horizon.

It's a pretty different perspective.

[Twba]

I wonder about the comment by the councilman concerning benefits.

"They have to make big changes if they want to come into New York," Councilwoman Helen Sears, who represents Rego Park, told The Post. "They have to rethink their benefits . . . They have to rethink labor-management relations."

If WalMart is screwing its workers, how does it stay in business much less continue to expand?

Our health plan covers most major medical expenses. The company contributes to the cost of health benefits and we offer affordable Associate plans. There is no limit for most health coverage. 60% of our Associates tell us they joined Wal-Mart because of our benefits. We also offer:

* Dental Coverage
* Company-Paid and/or Dependent & Optional Life Insurance
* Business Travel Accident Insurance
* Long- and Short-Term Disability
* Illness Protection Plan

So WalMart offers medical insurance.

All Wal-Mart Associates become eligible to share in the company's profits through our Profit Sharing Program, after one year and 1,000 hours of service. This is funded entirely by Wal-Mart and is primarily invested in Wal-Mart stock. Both Full-Time and Part-Time Associates are eligible to share in Wal-Mart profits. The company has contributed more than $2.7 billion toward Associates' profit sharing and 401(k) accounts since 1972.

Is the councilman against profit sharing?

WalMart must be doing something right to become such a large employer.

[Twba]

[Twba]

WalMart CEO responds to critics.

[joe]

"A neighbourhood, once a critical mass of blacks move in, becomes a "black neighbourhood", property values plunge, and whites leave."

This is pure myth, one of those things that "everybody knows" that aren't actually true.

What actually happens is that lower income people (often black) are able to afford to live in a neighborhood for the first time because the property values are falling there, and the longtime residents identify a result of the declining property values (the immigration of poorer black people) as the cause of that decline.

Study after study has demonstrated that black people moving into neighborhoods with stable property values does not result in a reduction of property values.

[joe]

Man, libertoid shout "class snobbery" like Al Sharpton shouts "racism."

Yeah, it's gotta be about those wealthy white snobs in Rego Park, Queens. Isn't it nice to think so?

I've seen way too much of this bullshit on my side of the fence, and this is the mirror image.

[joe]

"If WalMart is screwing its workers, how does it stay in business much less continue to expand?"

Um, by SCREWING ITS WORKERS?

Could it possibly be that Wal Mart employees don't actually have the employment options you might imagine them to have? Especially after the Wal Mart has become the only game in town?

[dhex]

"It just seems like a lot of the people who will go to the barracades to stop a Wall-Mart wouldn't have too much problem with an Ikea store that would create just as many problems."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

i apologize, but if you could go and see the fucking stinkwar over the ikea in red hook, man...

oh wait, you can:

http://www.curbed.com/mt/mt-search.cgi?search=ikea

a good place to start.

it's really not class snobbery. now, it may very well be in other places and parts of the world, but at least not really in these cases. it's not like you don't get the usual "ZOMG TEH CORPORASHUNS" type nonsense, but the weekend influx of cars into that area is going to suck dead donkey dick, no matter how you slice it.

[Jimbo]

I'm detecting that not many here actually know someone who works at walmart (let alone have had first-hand experience). As pure anectdote, I have a friend who works there and enjoys it! Far from feeling oppressed, she likes the benefits and the chance to meet people at the store, which has become something of a town center, even though the small downtown still exists, unmolested.

Also, it should be remembered that the wages and benefits should not be compared to some mythical "fair" or "living" wage, but to the alternatives for people with a limited set of skills and experience. If you put yourself in that position, you'd be hard pressed to find an alternate retail employer (especially a mom & pop!) with a comparable offering.

I am not the biggest fan of the store as a customer, and it's one of my worst performing stocks recently, but I have to say that the criticisms by the councilwoman and others come off as ignorant, elitist, and usually fresh from the Union hall PR dept.

[Twba]

Joe, you are full of yourself today. WalMart is never the only game in town. If it was screwing its workers, it would lose business and good employees to competitors.

[Twba]

...the weekend influx of cars into that area is going to suck dead donkey dick...

Welcome to the real world. Weekend traffic everywhere sucks. You would think people are buying food and clothing and other essential stuff at rock bottom prices. Where should WalMart locate a new store?

[dhex]

ikea is not wal-mart. try to keep up.

the real world also includes people who live in the neighborhood who do not want the ikea there. it probably will get built. it's not like the aversion to a massive influx of drivers into an area without the infrastructure for it is communism...

OR IS IT?

[Twba]

I shopped the Ikea in Elizabeth NJ. I didn't mistake it for WalMart. I am not as stupid as my posts make me appear. Where should Ikea or WalMart locate a store?

[joe]

Twba, that depends on the type of store. Wal Mart should locate its urban-model stores in major commercial corridors of urban areas, such as the business districts of Rego Park.

[dhex]

ikea could find plenty of open land in the rockaways, for starters. well, not as much as 3 years ago, maybe, but still. places with more highway access, also for starters.

i'm between a lowes, a home depot and a local, family-run hardware store that's been open for 30 years. the lowes is good for certain things, and is built in a way that doesn't really interfere with local traffic (major avenues, the bqe and the pathmark next door help with the parking, for starters) and the family run hardware store stays in business because the people there know what the hell they're talking about.

it's a good balance, all things considered.

ikea, not so good, all things considered. posterboard bookshelves on the cheap or no.

[Emily]

Woah. Doesn't Manhattan have the highest Kmart density in the world? Is that why? Because there are no Wal Marts? And I thought New Yorkers just really liked Martha Stewart products.