We're doomed

[geekWithA.45]

My great fear is that if the Apocalypse should happen in my lifetime, that I'd be too old to properly enjoy it. 

[Balog]

Speaking of bulk products from Walmart, they also sell 3 liter bottles of wine for ~$7. And it's actually drinkable.

[Stand_watie]

It's a beautiful fall day here, the trees are shades of gold, crimson and flame orange, there's faint woodsmoke in the air under a crystal-clear blue sky, it's 60 degrees, and I'm eating a delicious locally-grown heirloom apple while mixing soundtracks.

Fall has arrived in east Texas. We got frost the last two days! Beautiful weather. Low of 40, high of 70. Low humidity. Golden sunshine. My units at work are running flawlessly (less physical labor for me, more $$ for my company which makes my bosses happy and my job more secure) because the machines and the chemical process both like cool dry weather.

In a tough ol' world, days like these remind me that G-d loves me.

[Stand_watie]

The people that wal-mart are doing it to, are the people who did it to the real mom & pop shops a generation or two ago. Wal-mart put our local Win-Dixie out of business. They didn't put our local Brookshires out of business, because they had a smarter business strategy than Win-Dixie. They adapted. They get customers because they offer service rather than cheapness.

Lowe's (the wal-mart of lumber, hardware and home supplies) recently moved into my town (the closest town to me anyway) and I'm glad to have them. They're cheap. The local hardware chain of stores has been raping the citizens of my area for fifty years. They and their progeny own half the town. If I want a cheap 5 lb box of deck screws or some cheap 2x4's I go to Lowe's. If I want a specialty part or good advice I go to the local chain, and pay the premium price.

Deliberately selling at a loss to drive competitors out of business, is "price fixing" and is illegal. Wal-Mart has been caught at it, and has been harshly spanked for it. Good. They should have been. One of the few good functions of government.

[Euclidean]

Deliberately selling at a loss to drive competitors out of business, is "price fixing" and is illegal. Wal-Mart has been caught at it, and has been harshly spanked for it. Good. They should have been. One of the few good functions of government.

Court case?

You could argue that's profiteering, but price fixing would be if Wal Mart, Target, and every other store got together and said "None of us will sell Product X for less than $1, that way we all make a killing as customers are forced to pay that much."

[Stand_watie]

Deliberately selling at a loss to drive competitors out of business, is "price fixing" and is illegal. Wal-Mart has been caught at it, and has been harshly spanked for it. Good. They should have been. One of the few good functions of government.

Court case?

You could argue that's profiteering, but price fixing would be if Wal Mart, Target, and every other store got together and said "None of us will sell Product X for less than $1, that way we all make a killing as customers are forced to pay that much."

You've got me. I was flat-out wrong. On two fronts, and as such I retract my earlier statement.

 "Price-fixing" isn't the term I wanted, "predatory pricing" was. Secondly, It's not the thing I believed it to be. An excerpt of an article. I think with a little clever googling you can come up with the name of the court decision.

....Arthur Foulkes: Predatory pricing by companies is a myth

By Arthur E. Foulkes
The Tribune-Star

TERRE HAUTE  The image of the predatory corporation is among the most fixed in the minds of many Americans when it comes to business and economics.

This image, sometimes perpetuated by movies and TV, is of a company that uses its huge size to cut its prices below cost so that all its smaller competitors are forced into bankruptcy. After the competitors carcasses litter the ground, the predator firm can greedily jack up its prices as money from victimized consumers comes pouring in.

The theory of predatory pricing seems plausible on its face. A big company cuts its prices to below costs, endures temporary losses but simultaneously drives all its competitors out of business and then, when it is effectively a monopoly, raises prices to new levels and reaps the rewards. A current edition of a college-level microeconomics textbook echoes this theory without criticism.

The only problem is, its very difficult to find any real-world examples of this ever happening.

Certainly, large businesses and chains often can capitalize on lower operating costs or other advantages of scale to sell goods at lower prices, which can drive less-efficient competitors out of business. But the cases of actual predatory pricing, where a firm sells below cost to clear away its competitors, is sort of like the Loch Ness Monster  much talked about, but seldom seen.

There are good reasons firms do not engage in below-cost pricing to drive out competitors.

First, the losses the firm would suffer would be great, especially because the lower prices would encourage consumers to buy more and more of the below-cost goods, even to the point of stockpiling where possible. This would only get worse for the predatory firm as its competitors went out of business one by one and more and more consumers came to its doors to buy at below-cost prices.

Second, once a predatory firm drove its competitors out of business and jacked up its prices to monopoly levels, new competitors would simply be encouraged to return to the market to enjoy some of the monopoly profits now available. As economist Donald Boudreaux has written, nothing cures monopoly like excess profits. The entry of new competitors would make it impossible for the predatory firm to charge the prices necessary to make up for the great losses it suffered in order to achieve its temporary monopoly status.

After selling pharmaceuticals at low prices in the late 1980s and early 1990s, Wal-Mart in Conway, Ark., was accused of predatory pricing and was sued. Interestingly, it was not consumers who sued Wal-Mart, but local competitors who openly admitted that Wal-Marts low prices were tough to compete against. In 1993, a court found for Wal-Marts competitors and ordered the company to raise its pharmaceutical prices and pay damages to local pharmacists.

This is a typical case of so-called predatory pricing because the complaint of predatory pricing was brought by competitors, not consumers. It is also a typical case because the ultimate losers were consumers, who were forced to pay more for pharmaceuticals after the court handed down its decision in favor of Wal-Marts competitors...




http://www.tribstar.com/business/local_story_281205928.html

[Paddy]

Walmart is trying to bully itself a Super Walmart into our little town, even though there is a Walmart 12 miles north.  Our city council turned 'em down flat last night.  (Note the threatening attitude of the Walmart 'representative')

Let the games begin.

-1 VOTE STALLS PROJECT BEFORE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Atascadero council denies Wal-Marts bid to proceed

The applicants may decide to pursue a citywide ballot initiative for their north-end retail project

By Stephen Curran

Wal-Mart supporters and opponents wave signs in silence as the Atascadero City Council debates Monday whether to accept the retailers application for a Supercenter and a developers application for an adjacent shopping center.

TRIBUNE PHOTO BY DAVID MIDDLECAMP

Wal-Mart supporters and opponents wave signs in silence as the Atascadero City Council debates Monday whether to accept the retailers application for a Supercenter and a developers application for an adjacent shopping center.
Click any image to enlarge.
Wal-Mart and The Rottman Group submitted plans for this store to anchor a north Atascadero shopping center.

Wal-Mart and developer The Rottman Group might turn to a ballot initiative after Monday nights defeat before the Atascadero City Council.

The council debated for 90 minutes before voting 4-1 to order staffers to shelve the companies applications for a 195,000-square-foot Supercenter and adjacent shopping center at Del Rio Road and El Camino Real. Councilman Tom OMalley dissented.

Mayor George Luna said he was concerned that the large-scale project exceeded the 150,000-square-foot limit spelled out for that corner in the citys General Plan  Atascaderos blueprint for regulating development.

Further studying the issue, Luna said, would merely delay what he said were council members inevitable votes.

I dont see the reason for getting more information on a store I would never vote for, he said of the proposal before the council.

Mondays decision came less than a week after council members sat through six hours of public comment aimed at swaying what residents on both sides of the bitter debate said was a critical vote for the city. They decided at 2 a.m. Wednesday to postpone the vote.

Aaron Rios, a Wal-Mart spokesman who attended the meeting, said the company plans to discuss the vote and has not decided whether it would proceed with a project. He and Rottman representatives have said they could consider putting the development to a citywide ballot initiative.

Rios called the councils decision another delay tactic.

We need to evaluate whether (the city) is working as openly with us as we are with them, Rios added.

Debate over the planned development has divided many in Atascadero for nearly two years. The controversy became a key issue in last Novembers council election, pitting those who advocated greater scrutiny for commercial interests against those who claimed city leadership was already too hard on area businesses.

Critics have said the 335,000-square-foot retail plaza is too large for the North County city and would force independently owned businesses to close shop.

Supporters, meanwhile, claim it would help fund municipal services endangered by the Atascaderos lagging sales tax revenue.

A survey conducted in August and paid for by Wal-Mart, Rottman and the Atascadero Chamber of Commerce found that 56 percent of the 301 registered voters surveyed favored the project and that 38 percent opposed the plans.

Representatives for the Atascadero Police Association and Atascadero Professional Firefighters Association last week urged the council to allow the environmental report to proceed.

Doing so, they said, would allow them to determine whether the development would produce enough sales tax revenue to pay for the additional personnel needed to patrol the area.

Tom Comar, a spokesman and co-founder for locally based Oppose Wal-Mart, said his group does not plan to abandon its efforts and would closely monitor the companies next moves.

Its not a victory, Comar said. Its a success.

http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/story/179448.html

[Len Budney]

Walmart is trying to bully itself a Super Walmart into our little town, even though there is a Walmart 12 miles north.  Our city council turned 'em down flat last night.  (Note the threatening attitude of the Walmart 'representative')

I couldn't find the threatening bit. On the other hand, I found the politicians' tone rather menacing. Apparently there's a piece of real-estate that the owner wants to sell, and Walmart wants to buy, but these politicians are muscling in and refusing to allow it. It's interesting, though, that they focus their attention on Walmart. I think they should accuse the property owner of treason against the city, and have him publicly flogged for daring to up and try to sell his land to anyone he bloody well pleases.

--Len.

[Paddy]

Walmart is trying to bully itself a Super Walmart into our little town, even though there is a Walmart 12 miles north.  Our city council turned 'em down flat last night.  (Note the threatening attitude of the Walmart 'representative')

I couldn't find the threatening bit. On the other hand, I found the politicians' tone rather menacing. Apparently there's a piece of real-estate that the owner wants to sell, and Walmart wants to buy, but these politicians are muscling in and refusing to allow it. It's interesting, though, that they focus their attention on Walmart. I think they should accuse the property owner of treason against the city, and have him publicly flogged for daring to up and try to sell his land to anyone he bloody well pleases.

--Len.

Lemme ask ya this, then.  Lou Dobbs claims, in his 2006 book, 'War on the Middle Class', that the WTO is "currently assisting Wal-Mart in taking on state policies, by helping the world's biggest retailer get concessions opposed by local governments..........WalMart is lobbying the WTO to get the federal government to remove limits on size, height, and number of stores that can be established in the U.S."

IOW, WalMart is attempting to have the WTO force the United States to use the power of the federal government to force communities to allow the retailer to do whatever it wants.

Is that right to you, Len?  Private corporations using government to force their will on the people of a community?

[jefnvk]

I dont see the reason for getting more information on a store I would never vote for,

On the other hand, it seems that the city council's mind is made up, he's against Wal-Mart and nothing can change his mind.  It is seemingly their job to ensure that the business plan is not going to cause undue problems with surrounding businesses and local growth, with Wal-Mart occupying such a large area.  The councilman seems to have more of an ethical problem, if he refuses to allow them to present their case further.  That is not right.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

sounds like warrenton  local group opposwed walmart in town they built outside town limits and town promptly annexed the site as well as sales taxes

[Len Budney]

Is that right to you, Len?  Private corporations using government to force their will on the people of a community?

Definitely not. Businessmen who use government force to achieve their ends are every bit as bad as the bureaucrats they collude with.

--Len.

[Paddy]

I dont see the reason for getting more information on a store I would never vote for,

On the other hand, it seems that the city council's mind is made up, he's against Wal-Mart and nothing can change his mind.  It is seemingly their job to ensure that the business plan is not going to cause undue problems with surrounding businesses and local growth, with Wal-Mart occupying such a large area.  The councilman seems to have more of an ethical problem, if he refuses to allow them to present their case further.  That is not right.

He's opposed to it because the size exceeds the city's Master plan limit of 150,000 sq ft.  Walmart wants an exception, they want special treatment.  Walmart knew what the limit in the Master plan was when they bought the land.  Now they're trying to bully their way past the rules.

[jeepmor]

So is the sky falling or not?  Because I have to work in a few hours and if it's falling, screw that, I'm going wheeling. 

Yeah, Wal Mart sucks.  They don't offer benefits worth a tiddly damn to their employees and this is what bothers me.  Not the competition, competition is good, but doing at the cost of their employees benefits is just wrong.  Largest company in America and yet most of their employees don't have health insurance to my knowledge.  That's wrong.

Oh yeah, let's turn to the government, they'll save us. 

[jefnvk]

Largest company in America and yet most of their employees don't have health insurance to my knowledge.  That's wrong.

Yet, the people agreed to work under those conditions.

Not to mention all the people that Wal-Mart employees, who really serve no purpose (do they really need elderly and handicapped greeting people).  Oh, and the fact that in a college town, kids can pretty muc hwork whatever hours they want.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

>>Oil at all time high<<

So lets get those alternative energies going your Gouvernor is talking about so much. It wouldn't hurt to let drown some of the people who deserve nothing
but are sitting on an oilwell in their own natural resources = polluting filth !

>>Dollar at all time low<<

Compared to what, the artificial Euro, existing already for 6 years ?
the Yen, Rubels, Kopteks, Coconuts, shells, clams or glasperls we all like so much ? Let the money lenders do what they want and be happy to still be living in the strongest economy in the world.   

>>The evironment is irreversibly damaged<<

Tough luck, but there is till plenty of it left and who needs the 32 kinds of fruitflies which are going extinct every year any way ? Let's be happy about what we still have, preserve  it and look for clean and green new planets. 

>> Humanity's very survival is at risk <<

says the UN.

>> we're about to attack Iran <<

Well, just do it, finish it and then get out of it !
People who publicly hang two boys of nineteen next to each other for having engaged in homosexual activities, well I guess I'll miss the 32 kind of fruitflies
more.

>> What's on sale at Walmart this week? <<

What's Walmart ?

A Frenchman makes more sense than you, Riley.  Hang your head in shame.

(No offense to the French intended)

[Paddy]

>> we're about to attack Iran <<

Well, just do it, finish it and then get out of it !
People who publicly hang two boys of nineteen next to each other for having engaged in homosexual activities, well I guess I'll miss the 32 kind of fruitflies
more.

>> What's on sale at Walmart this week? <<

What's Walmart ?

A Frenchman makes more sense than you, Riley.  Hang your head in shame.

If you mean we should attack Iran, HTG, it's only fair you and GWB should be the first ones through the door.

The rest of us will be along later.     

[Perd Hapley]

If you mean we should attack Iran, HTG, it's only fair you and GWB should be the first ones through the door.

The rest of us will be along later.   

Generic, vacuous anti-war argument number 47. 

[Euclidean]

Walmart is trying to bully itself a Super Walmart into our little town, even though there is a Walmart 12 miles north.

So?  We have a small city with two Wal Marts which are physically less than 20 miles apart.  We also have street corners where Exxon and Texaco have been directly across the street from each other for years, competing for the same business.

  Our city council turned 'em down flat last night.  (Note the threatening attitude of the Walmart 'representative')

Let the games begin.

-1 VOTE STALLS PROJECT BEFORE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Atascadero council denies Wal-Marts bid to proceed

The applicants may decide to pursue a citywide ballot initiative for their north-end retail project

By Stephen Curran

Wal-Mart supporters and opponents wave signs in silence as the Atascadero City Council debates Monday whether to accept the retailers application for a Supercenter and a developers application for an adjacent shopping center.

TRIBUNE PHOTO BY DAVID MIDDLECAMP

Wal-Mart supporters and opponents wave signs in silence as the Atascadero City Council debates Monday whether to accept the retailers application for a Supercenter and a developers application for an adjacent shopping center.

I bolded that last part.  Funny how that's part of the issue too but all we're seeing here is "blame Wal Mart".

Click any image to enlarge.
Wal-Mart and The Rottman Group submitted plans for this store to anchor a north Atascadero shopping center.

Wal-Mart and developer The Rottman Group might turn to a ballot initiative after Monday nights defeat before the Atascadero City Council.

The council debated for 90 minutes before voting 4-1 to order staffers to shelve the companies applications for a 195,000-square-foot Supercenter and adjacent shopping center at Del Rio Road and El Camino Real. Councilman Tom OMalley dissented.

Mayor George Luna said he was concerned that the large-scale project exceeded the 150,000-square-foot limit spelled out for that corner in the citys General Plan  Atascaderos blueprint for regulating development.

Further studying the issue, Luna said, would merely delay what he said were council members inevitable votes.

I dont see the reason for getting more information on a store I would never vote for, he said of the proposal before the council.

So rather than objectively weigh the consequences of the decision, or question the veracity of such a ridiculous zoning rule (the building of the local company's warehouse I used to work at as a teenager would easily have been in violation of their rule and that was a small business), he's already got his mind made up because "Wal Mart is baaaaad!"

Now if the council really wants to enforce this zoning rule, as far as I'm concerned it's a loss for the city and not Wal Mart.  Wal Mart can sell the land and even get a plot somewhere else if they want to.  OTOH the city is willing to give up the thousands of dollars Wal Mart pumps back into local charities every year, the jobs, the tax revenue, etc.

Mondays decision came less than a week after council members sat through six hours of public comment aimed at swaying what residents on both sides of the bitter debate said was a critical vote for the city. They decided at 2 a.m. Wednesday to postpone the vote.

Aaron Rios, a Wal-Mart spokesman who attended the meeting, said the company plans to discuss the vote and has not decided whether it would proceed with a project. He and Rottman representatives have said they could consider putting the development to a citywide ballot initiative.

Rios called the councils decision another delay tactic.

We need to evaluate whether (the city) is working as openly with us as we are with them, Rios added.

That doesn't sound overly aggressive to me at all.

Debate over the planned development has divided many in Atascadero for nearly two years. The controversy became a key issue in last Novembers council election, pitting those who advocated greater scrutiny for commercial interests against those who claimed city leadership was already too hard on area businesses.

Critics have said the 335,000-square-foot retail plaza is too large for the North County city and would force independently owned businesses to close shop.

Why is it too large?  Can they support their assertion?  On top of that even if they're right who cares?

Supporters, meanwhile, claim it would help fund municipal services endangered by the Atascaderos lagging sales tax revenue.

A survey conducted in August and paid for by Wal-Mart, Rottman and the Atascadero Chamber of Commerce found that 56 percent of the 301 registered voters surveyed favored the project and that 38 percent opposed the plans.

Representatives for the Atascadero Police Association and Atascadero Professional Firefighters Association last week urged the council to allow the environmental report to proceed.

Doing so, they said, would allow them to determine whether the development would produce enough sales tax revenue to pay for the additional personnel needed to patrol the area.

Well that last part actually sounds reasonable to me, at least someone is willing to actually ponder whether or not it's a good idea based on some sort of evidence and not some knee jerk emotional reaction.

Tom Comar, a spokesman and co-founder for locally based Oppose Wal-Mart, said his group does not plan to abandon its efforts and would closely monitor the companies next moves.

Its not a victory, Comar said. Its a success.

http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/story/179448.html

It's nothing, it's a local government looking for how the new Wal Mart is going to grease its palms.  It could be a Super Target or a new shoe factory and they'd be doing the same old stuff.

Sounds like typical local politics (gotta grease those palms and they know Wal Mart has lots of money, so they're going to string it out) with a shot of baseless anti Wal Mart hysteria.

[Paddy]

Generic, vacuous anti-war argument number 47.

Yes, I'm anti war with Iran, fistful. We can't even win the one we started in Iraq dontcha know.

[Perd Hapley]

Generic, vacuous anti-war argument number 47.

Yes, I'm anti war with Iran, fistful.

Of course you are.  When you use silly arguments like the afore-mentioned, you paint yourself into a corner where you can't logically support any war at all.  Not that that would stop you, if we came up with a war that you liked. 

On the other hand, many of the people denouncing military intervention in Iran today, were saying a few years ago that we should have invaded Iran instead of Iraq.  Or, they wanted to invade Saudi Arabia.  But if any such plan was put forward, they would denounce that, too. 

[Paddy]

Euclidean, the area is zoned for development.  We have a Master plan that's been in place for years.  As long as the proposed development conforms with the Master plan, it will be welcomed and approved.  Walmart doesn't want to have to conform, they want special treatment, an exception, to build a store that is larger than the plan allows.  The plan allows 150,000 sq ft., they are welcome build a store that size, but no, Walmart wants to build 350,000 sq ft.  They knew that when they bought the property.  Why should they get special treatment?  Because they're Walmart?

[Paddy]

But if any such plan was put forward, they would denounce that, too.

Certainly under the current administration.  They've already proven themselves absolutey incompetent at waging war. It would be foolish beyond belief to give them a second chance.

[MechAg94]

Yeah, Wal Mart sucks.  They don't offer benefits worth a tiddly damn to their employees and this is what bothers me.  Not the competition, competition is good, but doing at the cost of their employees benefits is just wrong.  Largest company in America and yet most of their employees don't have health insurance to my knowledge.  That's wrong.

Okay, no offense jeepmor, but that comment is just so much BS.  How many of Walmart's competitors give more pay/benefits?  How many of the so-called Mom and Pop operations who got forced out of business gave health benefits or paid great wages?  You are not talking about an engineering firm, you aren't even talking about Department store.  This is a low drag retail store with lots of minimum wage or near minimum wage workers.  You wouldn't have the same expectation of your local McDonald's would you? 

[MechAg94]

Personally, I think if health insurance provided by employers was outlawed, health insurance would get cheaper overnight.  People wouldn't confuse free health benefits/daily care costs with actual emergency health insurance.  We might as well just have govt health care.  Everyone seems to already expect someone else to pay for everything anyway.