There's a Ralph's on LaBrea and one on Crenshaw, both in Inglewood, and 3 more within 2.5 miles of the city center, and that's just Ralphs, not Vons or Albertsons. I doubt they are charging six bucks for a gallon of milk.
Inglewood isn't a den of pawn shops and crack dens, it's a mostly middle-class city that's predominantly African-American. The reason Wal-Mart is targeting it is that is one of the few cities in Los Angeles with separate city government that they could get their foot in the door. (they sure as hell aren't going to get into Torrance or Santa Monica)
The point is that Wal-Mart is coming in and using California's wacky laws (the one that got us our new Governor, whether you think that's bad or good) to do an end-run around a city's ability to control development. Wal-Mart will be able to put one of their super-centers in without an EIR, without any zoning, and without worrying about traffic impact on the area. If they succeed in Inglewood, Los Angeles is next.
You all realize that this whole thing is just so Jesse Jackson can grab as much money from a big fat wallet to enrich himself and his freinds right? You know Maxine Waters is going to get a cut of that. Jackson is the pimp and "racism" is the whore. Make that bitch earn Jesse!
I'd rather they didn't have jobs that were terrible for them. The pay isn't even the worst part. Walmart has consistent labor violations because they take advantage of people with no where else to go. No it's not simply better to just have any job.
I'd rather they didn't have jobs that were terrible for them. The pay isn't even the worst part. Walmart has consistent labor violations because they take advantage of people with no where else to go. No it's not simply better to just have any job.
So you let them move in and enforce existing labor laws. What's the big fvcking deal?
I'd rather they didn't have jobs that were terrible for them. The pay isn't even the worst part. Walmart has consistent labor violations because they take advantage of people with no where else to go. No it's not simply better to just have any job.
They have had one well publicized incident involving a sub-contractor for janitorial services. The point really is that they are the world's largest target with regard to theri size. Understand that if Sam Walton were still alive, his shares in Walmart would be worth TWICE the net-worth of Bill Gates.
It is like literally saying don't let them do anything unless they can please all the people all the time. That is impossible. Even our favorite fruit company has court action working continually against it. It is the nature of big business today. (Apple vs. Apple, Apple and EU copyright violations, various class action dealings in the U.S. and lastly some new actions involving their dealer network) Apple is hardly an evil win at all costs company and even they are continually hit with legal action.
There's a Ralph's on LaBrea and one on Crenshaw, both in Inglewood, and 3 more within 2.5 miles of the city center, and that's just Ralphs, not Vons or Albertsons. I doubt they are charging six bucks for a gallon of milk.
Inglewood isn't a den of pawn shops and crack dens, it's a mostly middle-class city that's predominantly African-American. The reason Wal-Mart is targeting it is that is one of the few cities in Los Angeles with separate city government that they could get their foot in the door. (they sure as hell aren't going to get into Torrance or Santa Monica)
The point is that Wal-Mart is coming in and using California's wacky laws (the one that got us our new Governor, whether you think that's bad or good) to do an end-run around a city's ability to control development. Wal-Mart will be able to put one of their super-centers in without an EIR, without any zoning, and without worrying about traffic impact on the area. If they succeed in Inglewood, Los Angeles is next.
Inglewood Crime
Total Crime: \t177 \t
Personal Crime: 236
Represents the percentage of crime compared to the national average of 100. Scores are based on demographic and geographic analysis over seven years.
I consider that level of crime a bit higher than middle class. That is per capita by the way as is very high as you can see.
The Walmart is being built by the Forum. Are you telling me that there isn't the means to handle the traffic rountinely generated by the traffic at the Forum?
This is all because this is the first super center and will sell groceries.
As for Ralphs, I use to rountinely go into these supermarkets, including Ralphs and complain to the managers about why I, as a teacher could buy 20 different brands of Malt Liquor, but couldn't find any school supplies to speak of, and yes they still charge more. They aren't as exploitive as say, the Korean grocery shop owners, but they are still more expensive.
As for Ralphs, I use to rountinely go into these supermarkets, including Ralphs and complain to the managers about why I, as a teacher could buy 20 different brands of Malt Liquor, but couldn't find any school supplies to speak of, and yes they still charge more.
Yeah, what ever happened to the corner trumpet shop?
That's high, but not vacant-building, ghetto, inner-city high (that 236 would be about 350-400). However, it is hard to argue it is a regular middle-class neighborhood with these numbers
um, i hope some folks here realize that a bad neighborhood can make a wal-mart truly scarier than you can possibly imagine.sure, they're all nice, big, clean, never-have-to-leave cities of cheap commerce IN THE BEGINNING, but man, i have seen PLENTY of derelict wal-marts that one has to wonder how they're even still standing... a wal-mart does not suddenly make a bad neighborhood good again.
just because you don't have ne'er-do-wells running pawn shops any more also doesn't prevent them from working at that new wal-mart, either. turn on the lights and the bugs scatter... for new dark places to hide. wal-mart has no other intention than to sell as many products as cheaply as possible to generate, you guessed it, more wal-marts. never forget that. and the "it's a free country" argument doesn't hold water with me anymore, because it allows entities to take advantage of such a system when they know they have the momentum and resources to make it nigh-impossible to combat.
That's high, but not vacant-building, ghetto, inner-city high (that 236 would be about 350-400). However, it is hard to argue it is a regular middle-class neighborhood with these numbers
100 is average. That means there are communities where the number is 10 relative to 100. 100 being average means it is the middle. 0 would be no crime and 200 would be basically hell on earth.
Walmart is bypassing the local city council and going in for a referendum. Why bother electing people to govern your city if corporate bullies are going to ignore them completely?
If it doesn't work elsewhere, what's the big ****ing deal with the local residents fighting the same problems before they start?
It's not the residents though. I haven't looked at the results of the vote yet so if they say no then I will retract it. It's the stupid ass city council with their out of touch agendas.
Well the results are in and it looks like it will defeated. Voter turnout was very low. I think the better vote would have been to allow people to vote with their wallets once the wal-mart was built but no we can't do that in our whacked out dumbass society now can we?
Really interesting article on how Walmart now so dominates retail in America they can pretty much extract anything they want out of their suppliers (in a phrase from the article, "the only thing worse than doing business with Walmart is not doing business with Walmart".
For instance:
Quote:
One way to think of Wal-Mart is as a vast pipeline that gives non-U.S. companies direct access to the American market. "One of the things that limits or slows the growth of imports is the cost of establishing connections and networks," says Paul Krugman, the Princeton University economist. "Wal-Mart is so big and so centralized that it can all at once hook Chinese and other suppliers into its digital system. So--wham!--you have a large switch to overseas sourcing in a period quicker than under the old rules of retailing."
Steve Dobbins has been bearing the brunt of that switch. He's president and CEO of Carolina Mills, a 75-year-old North Carolina company that supplies thread, yarn, and textile finishing to apparel makers--half of which supply Wal-Mart. Carolina Mills grew steadily until 2000. But in the past three years, as its customers have gone either overseas or out of business, it has shrunk from 17 factories to 7, and from 2,600 employees to 1,200. Dobbins's customers have begun to face imported clothing sold so cheaply to Wal-Mart that they could not compete even if they paid their workers nothing.
"People ask, 'How can it be bad for things to come into the U.S. cheaply? How can it be bad to have a bargain at Wal-Mart?' Sure, it's held inflation down, and it's great to have bargains," says Dobbins. "But you can't buy anything if you're not employed. We are shopping ourselves out of jobs."
If you're really trying to convince people that this is true, you're lying.
Make whatever untruthful assertion you want. The point is that I can't think of a single large company that doesn't have some legal matter before them. I read and receive a couple business email digests a day and it happens.
Really interesting article on how Walmart now so dominates retail in America they can pretty much extract anything they want out of their suppliers (in a phrase from the article, "the only thing worse than doing business with Walmart is not doing business with Walmart".
For instance:
Food for thought.
They say the same thing about Home Depot, Microsoft, Dell, etc. That same article also mentioned dozens of companies that got their crap together as a result of Walmart as well.
Imagine Apple trying to make a deal with Walmart. 30% margins, average retail price going up when the rest of the industry is going down, half the specs for twice the price, products arriving months late along with large numbers of warrenty debacles.
Imagine Walmart forcing a company like that to shape up. That doesn't sound terrible at all to me.
Comments
Originally posted by bunge
Pay at an anti-union joint like Walmart is worse for the neighborhood.
You'd rather they have no jobs at all?
Inglewood isn't a den of pawn shops and crack dens, it's a mostly middle-class city that's predominantly African-American. The reason Wal-Mart is targeting it is that is one of the few cities in Los Angeles with separate city government that they could get their foot in the door. (they sure as hell aren't going to get into Torrance or Santa Monica)
The point is that Wal-Mart is coming in and using California's wacky laws (the one that got us our new Governor, whether you think that's bad or good) to do an end-run around a city's ability to control development. Wal-Mart will be able to put one of their super-centers in without an EIR, without any zoning, and without worrying about traffic impact on the area. If they succeed in Inglewood, Los Angeles is next.
Originally posted by Scott
You'd rather they have no jobs at all?
I'd rather they didn't have jobs that were terrible for them. The pay isn't even the worst part. Walmart has consistent labor violations because they take advantage of people with no where else to go. No it's not simply better to just have any job.
Originally posted by bunge
I'd rather they didn't have jobs that were terrible for them. The pay isn't even the worst part. Walmart has consistent labor violations because they take advantage of people with no where else to go. No it's not simply better to just have any job.
So you let them move in and enforce existing labor laws. What's the big fvcking deal?
Originally posted by BR
So you let them move in and enforce existing labor laws. What's the big fvcking deal?
If it doesn't work elsewhere, what's the big ****ing deal with the local residents fighting the same problems before they start?
Originally posted by bunge
I'd rather they didn't have jobs that were terrible for them. The pay isn't even the worst part. Walmart has consistent labor violations because they take advantage of people with no where else to go. No it's not simply better to just have any job.
They have had one well publicized incident involving a sub-contractor for janitorial services. The point really is that they are the world's largest target with regard to theri size. Understand that if Sam Walton were still alive, his shares in Walmart would be worth TWICE the net-worth of Bill Gates.
It is like literally saying don't let them do anything unless they can please all the people all the time. That is impossible. Even our favorite fruit company has court action working continually against it. It is the nature of big business today. (Apple vs. Apple, Apple and EU copyright violations, various class action dealings in the U.S. and lastly some new actions involving their dealer network) Apple is hardly an evil win at all costs company and even they are continually hit with legal action.
Nick
Originally posted by tmp
There's a Ralph's on LaBrea and one on Crenshaw, both in Inglewood, and 3 more within 2.5 miles of the city center, and that's just Ralphs, not Vons or Albertsons. I doubt they are charging six bucks for a gallon of milk.
Inglewood isn't a den of pawn shops and crack dens, it's a mostly middle-class city that's predominantly African-American. The reason Wal-Mart is targeting it is that is one of the few cities in Los Angeles with separate city government that they could get their foot in the door. (they sure as hell aren't going to get into Torrance or Santa Monica)
The point is that Wal-Mart is coming in and using California's wacky laws (the one that got us our new Governor, whether you think that's bad or good) to do an end-run around a city's ability to control development. Wal-Mart will be able to put one of their super-centers in without an EIR, without any zoning, and without worrying about traffic impact on the area. If they succeed in Inglewood, Los Angeles is next.
Inglewood Crime
Total Crime: \t177 \t
Personal Crime: 236
Represents the percentage of crime compared to the national average of 100. Scores are based on demographic and geographic analysis over seven years.
I consider that level of crime a bit higher than middle class. That is per capita by the way as is very high as you can see.
The Walmart is being built by the Forum. Are you telling me that there isn't the means to handle the traffic rountinely generated by the traffic at the Forum?
This is all because this is the first super center and will sell groceries.
As for Ralphs, I use to rountinely go into these supermarkets, including Ralphs and complain to the managers about why I, as a teacher could buy 20 different brands of Malt Liquor, but couldn't find any school supplies to speak of, and yes they still charge more. They aren't as exploitive as say, the Korean grocery shop owners, but they are still more expensive.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
As for Ralphs, I use to rountinely go into these supermarkets, including Ralphs and complain to the managers about why I, as a teacher could buy 20 different brands of Malt Liquor, but couldn't find any school supplies to speak of, and yes they still charge more.
Yeah, what ever happened to the corner trumpet shop?
Originally posted by trumptman
Inglewood Crime
Total Crime: \t177 \t
Personal Crime: 236
That's high, but not vacant-building, ghetto, inner-city high (that 236 would be about 350-400). However, it is hard to argue it is a regular middle-class neighborhood with these numbers
just because you don't have ne'er-do-wells running pawn shops any more also doesn't prevent them from working at that new wal-mart, either. turn on the lights and the bugs scatter... for new dark places to hide. wal-mart has no other intention than to sell as many products as cheaply as possible to generate, you guessed it, more wal-marts. never forget that. and the "it's a free country" argument doesn't hold water with me anymore, because it allows entities to take advantage of such a system when they know they have the momentum and resources to make it nigh-impossible to combat.
p.s. sorry 'bout all the edits...
Originally posted by progmac
That's high, but not vacant-building, ghetto, inner-city high (that 236 would be about 350-400). However, it is hard to argue it is a regular middle-class neighborhood with these numbers
100 is average. That means there are communities where the number is 10 relative to 100. 100 being average means it is the middle. 0 would be no crime and 200 would be basically hell on earth.
176 and 236 are pretty damn bad.
Nick
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Yeah, what ever happened to the corner trumpet shop?
I gave it up. I started selling samplers with hot beats and cell phones.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
It is like literally saying don't let them do anything unless they can please all the people all the time.
If you're really trying to convince people that this is true, you're lying.
Originally posted by bunge
If it doesn't work elsewhere, what's the big ****ing deal with the local residents fighting the same problems before they start?
It's not the residents though. I haven't looked at the results of the vote yet so if they say no then I will retract it. It's the stupid ass city council with their out of touch agendas.
Really interesting article on how Walmart now so dominates retail in America they can pretty much extract anything they want out of their suppliers (in a phrase from the article, "the only thing worse than doing business with Walmart is not doing business with Walmart".
For instance:
One way to think of Wal-Mart is as a vast pipeline that gives non-U.S. companies direct access to the American market. "One of the things that limits or slows the growth of imports is the cost of establishing connections and networks," says Paul Krugman, the Princeton University economist. "Wal-Mart is so big and so centralized that it can all at once hook Chinese and other suppliers into its digital system. So--wham!--you have a large switch to overseas sourcing in a period quicker than under the old rules of retailing."
Steve Dobbins has been bearing the brunt of that switch. He's president and CEO of Carolina Mills, a 75-year-old North Carolina company that supplies thread, yarn, and textile finishing to apparel makers--half of which supply Wal-Mart. Carolina Mills grew steadily until 2000. But in the past three years, as its customers have gone either overseas or out of business, it has shrunk from 17 factories to 7, and from 2,600 employees to 1,200. Dobbins's customers have begun to face imported clothing sold so cheaply to Wal-Mart that they could not compete even if they paid their workers nothing.
"People ask, 'How can it be bad for things to come into the U.S. cheaply? How can it be bad to have a bargain at Wal-Mart?' Sure, it's held inflation down, and it's great to have bargains," says Dobbins. "But you can't buy anything if you're not employed. We are shopping ourselves out of jobs."
Food for thought.
Originally posted by bunge
If you're really trying to convince people that this is true, you're lying.
Make whatever untruthful assertion you want. The point is that I can't think of a single large company that doesn't have some legal matter before them. I read and receive a couple business email digests a day and it happens.
BTW...
Walmart loses
So regardless of all the supposed evil of Walmart, the people still had their say.
Nick
Originally posted by addabox
Might want to take a look here.
Really interesting article on how Walmart now so dominates retail in America they can pretty much extract anything they want out of their suppliers (in a phrase from the article, "the only thing worse than doing business with Walmart is not doing business with Walmart".
For instance:
Food for thought.
They say the same thing about Home Depot, Microsoft, Dell, etc. That same article also mentioned dozens of companies that got their crap together as a result of Walmart as well.
Imagine Apple trying to make a deal with Walmart. 30% margins, average retail price going up when the rest of the industry is going down, half the specs for twice the price, products arriving months late along with large numbers of warrenty debacles.
Imagine Walmart forcing a company like that to shape up. That doesn't sound terrible at all to me.
Nick