|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
dairyairy
Joined: 17 May 2012
Location: South Korea
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| This is going to be a disaster for consumers. It's time for Korean consumers to show they vote, too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dairyairy wrote: |
| This is going to be a disaster for consumers. It's time for Korean consumers to show they vote, too. |
Yea! Time to put on the red headbands and stop people from entering the mom and pop stores.
They want eggs? Splatter their storefronts with them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dairyairy
Joined: 17 May 2012
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 5:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atwood wrote: |
| dairyairy wrote: |
| This is going to be a disaster for consumers. It's time for Korean consumers to show they vote, too. |
Yea! Time to put on the red headbands and stop people from entering the mom and pop stores.
They want eggs? Splatter their storefronts with them. |
Protesting? No. But voting out the politicians who support closing stores and limiting what they can sell would be a good idea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nicwr2002
Joined: 17 Aug 2011
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't know how it works here, but if its anything like America, stop offering the big stores subsidies to build their businesses. How about stop offering tax incentives to the big stores? I really hate "mom and pop" stores, no desire to make their store better, no desire to offer customer services, no desire to get off the phone talking to their friend, they just want a government hand out so they can keep doing business as usual. Even my Korean friend was appalled when the lady continue to talk to her friend on the phone and just threw the cash down without evening looking at her. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
saram_
Joined: 13 May 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Am I the only one not too bothered by this?
Vegetables and fruit/ tofu are all as cheap in the smaller stores anyway.
It is no harm to allow the smaller stores compete with the supermarkets by giving them some advantage. Maybe they will drop their prices of other products too to attract more customers.
There is sure to be a smaller store/supermarket closer to most people than a larger emart/ Costco type place anyway so I dont get the inconvenienced argument.
What's wrong with giving the smaller places a chance?
The only argument is - Oh it's inconvenient?
These days fruits and veg are cheaper in smaller stores. It ll be no skin of my nose when or if the larger stores stop selling the items that they are proposed.
The smaller stores should be given a fairer chance.
They are struggling hugely anyway.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 8:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| saram_ wrote: |
Am I the only one not too bothered by this?
Vegetables and fruit/ tofu are all as cheap in the smaller stores anyway.
It is no harm to allow the smaller stores compete with the supermarkets by giving them some advantage. Maybe they will drop their prices of other products too to attract more customers.
There is sure to be a smaller store/supermarket closer to most people than a larger emart/ Costco type place anyway so I dont get the inconvenienced argument.
What's wrong with giving the smaller places a chance?
The only argument is - Oh it's inconvenient?
These days fruits and veg are cheaper in smaller stores. It ll be no skin of my nose when or if the larger stores stop selling the items that they are proposed.
The smaller stores should be given a fairer chance.
They are struggling hugely anyway.. |
What's unfair about the situation now? Why haven't they already dropped thier prices?
As for vegetables and fruit, they are certainly not as cheap as at the larger stores and their provenance is questionable. Selection is often quite limited.
As for chances, they have all day everyday to make money by providing people a service they judge worth their time and money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alongway
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 9:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Am I the only one not too bothered by this?
Vegetables and fruit/ tofu are all as cheap in the smaller stores anyway.
|
The quality is often no where near as good, and only some items are cheaper.
There is also a big difference between Emart and Costco. Costco supplies a lot of those smaller stores.
Why Costco is being lumped in with them is beyond me, they're a wholesaler.
They sell in large bulk often for the express purpose of saving money to resell the item.
About the only thing I could see making sense would be to say no single item sales.
| Quote: |
What's wrong with giving the smaller places a chance?
The only argument is - Oh it's inconvenient? |
And more expensive.
Why screw the consumer to prop up a failing business? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dairyairy
Joined: 17 May 2012
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 4:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2013/03/123_131971.html
Consumers lambast Seoul's sales ban plan
| Quote: |
A growing number of consumers have lashed out at Seoul City�s move to ban large discount stores from selling basic items. The move is aimed at forcing more shoppers go to traditional markets or smaller �mom-and-pop� stores.
The city government announced Friday it will seek to restrict the sale of 51 items at large-sized discount chains and super supermarkets (SSMs). The items in four categories include cigarettes, soju, spinach, courgettes, mackerel and tofu.
Seoul City plans to propose revising a related law at the National Assembly following a public hearing with interested parties and consumers next month.
�I think it�s the craziest thing for the city government to do to its citizens. I can�t believe it is considering the sales ban. It can do a better job than this,� Kim Sun-kyung, a 50-year-old housewife, told The Korea Times Tuesday.
Kim, who lives in Cheongdam-dong in southern Seoul, used to shop at E-Mart in Seongsu-dong every Sunday, which is located about 15 minutes drive away from her house.
�The nearest traditional market is Garak Market, but the place is way too far and even closed at night time. Now that E-Mart is closed on two Sundays every month, I have to take extra time to go shopping some other time instead,� she said.
�It�s already very inconvenient, but the government is becoming even more ridiculous. All of my friends and neighbors are against the new plan.�
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 4:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dairyairy wrote: |
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2013/03/123_131971.html
Consumers lambast Seoul's sales ban plan
| Quote: |
A growing number of consumers have lashed out at Seoul City�s move to ban large discount stores from selling basic items. The move is aimed at forcing more shoppers go to traditional markets or smaller �mom-and-pop� stores.
The city government announced Friday it will seek to restrict the sale of 51 items at large-sized discount chains and super supermarkets (SSMs). The items in four categories include cigarettes, soju, spinach, courgettes, mackerel and tofu.
Seoul City plans to propose revising a related law at the National Assembly following a public hearing with interested parties and consumers next month.
�I think it�s the craziest thing for the city government to do to its citizens. I can�t believe it is considering the sales ban. It can do a better job than this,� Kim Sun-kyung, a 50-year-old housewife, told The Korea Times Tuesday.
Kim, who lives in Cheongdam-dong in southern Seoul, used to shop at E-Mart in Seongsu-dong every Sunday, which is located about 15 minutes drive away from her house.
�The nearest traditional market is Garak Market, but the place is way too far and even closed at night time. Now that E-Mart is closed on two Sundays every month, I have to take extra time to go shopping some other time instead,� she said.
�It�s already very inconvenient, but the government is becoming even more ridiculous. All of my friends and neighbors are against the new plan.�
|
|
Yea, but when's the last time a Korean in a position of power listened to anyone? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cdninkorea
Joined: 27 Jan 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 6:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| saram_ wrote: |
Am I the only one not too bothered by this?
Vegetables and fruit/ tofu are all as cheap in the smaller stores anyway.
It is no harm to allow the smaller stores compete with the supermarkets by giving them some advantage. Maybe they will drop their prices of other products too to attract more customers.
There is sure to be a smaller store/supermarket closer to most people than a larger emart/ Costco type place anyway so I dont get the inconvenienced argument.
What's wrong with giving the smaller places a chance?
The only argument is - Oh it's inconvenient?
These days fruits and veg are cheaper in smaller stores. It ll be no skin of my nose when or if the larger stores stop selling the items that they are proposed.
The smaller stores should be given a fairer chance.
They are struggling hugely anyway.. |
South Korea is supposed to be a free country, and (economic) freedom means that if a store wants to sell something and someone else wants to buy it, the exchange is legal. We can quibble about what the exceptions are, like weapons, alcohol to minors, etc. but food is not one of those cases. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 6:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cdninkorea wrote: |
| saram_ wrote: |
Am I the only one not too bothered by this?
Vegetables and fruit/ tofu are all as cheap in the smaller stores anyway.
It is no harm to allow the smaller stores compete with the supermarkets by giving them some advantage. Maybe they will drop their prices of other products too to attract more customers.
There is sure to be a smaller store/supermarket closer to most people than a larger emart/ Costco type place anyway so I dont get the inconvenienced argument.
What's wrong with giving the smaller places a chance?
The only argument is - Oh it's inconvenient?
These days fruits and veg are cheaper in smaller stores. It ll be no skin of my nose when or if the larger stores stop selling the items that they are proposed.
The smaller stores should be given a fairer chance.
They are struggling hugely anyway.. |
South Korea is supposed to be a free country, and (economic) freedom means that if a store wants to sell something and someone else wants to buy it, the exchange is legal. We can quibble about what the exceptions are, like weapons, alcohol to minors, etc. but food is not one of those cases. |
Well, it ain't a free country. Freedom here is quite relative. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Weigookin74
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 6:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cdninkorea wrote: |
| saram_ wrote: |
Am I the only one not too bothered by this?
Vegetables and fruit/ tofu are all as cheap in the smaller stores anyway.
It is no harm to allow the smaller stores compete with the supermarkets by giving them some advantage. Maybe they will drop their prices of other products too to attract more customers.
There is sure to be a smaller store/supermarket closer to most people than a larger emart/ Costco type place anyway so I dont get the inconvenienced argument.
What's wrong with giving the smaller places a chance?
The only argument is - Oh it's inconvenient?
These days fruits and veg are cheaper in smaller stores. It ll be no skin of my nose when or if the larger stores stop selling the items that they are proposed.
The smaller stores should be given a fairer chance.
They are struggling hugely anyway.. |
South Korea is supposed to be a free country, and (economic) freedom means that if a store wants to sell something and someone else wants to buy it, the exchange is legal. We can quibble about what the exceptions are, like weapons, alcohol to minors, etc. but food is not one of those cases. |
Kind of like how the government tells the hakwons what prices to charge and how many students in every class. I don't understand the small business mindset here. I probably never will. Guess I think of free markets, competition, and consumer choice as setting things, improving service, and better quality as it does in the west. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mayorgc
Joined: 19 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Stan Rogers wrote: |
| mayorgc wrote: |
| Stan Rogers wrote: |
| mayorgc wrote: |
| I'd like to see someone here rationalize/defend this decision from an economic point of view. |
I'll bite. Historicly special preference was given to big business (chaebols) and they have become so big and powerful that they now dominate the Korean ecomony. Their expansion has often come at the expense of small business. Just take a walk outside and see how many businesses are Chaebol owned/operated/affiliated etc.
The government wants to right this past wrong and give preference to small business so that the Korean economy will become more diverse and not dominated by a few super wealthy families.
As a foreigner you or I may not like how they do it but I understand their logic behind it. It's also politically expedient. |
Not an argument, but a question.
By handicapping the super-marts, how does that create a more diverse economy? |
I meant a more diverse number of people sharing the pie. The government doesn't want to see monopoly control of the food market by a very small group of people. |
Is this new "plan" more efficient then the current set up? Does handicapping homeplus or E-mart make the economy better? Yes, these mom and pop stores will artificially increase their market share, but other than making them richer, how does that benefit society as a whole? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 10:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Weigookin74 wrote: |
The smaller stores should be given a fairer chance.
They are struggling hugely anyway.. |
South Korea is supposed to be a free country, and (economic) freedom means that if a store wants to sell something and someone else wants to buy it, the exchange is legal. We can quibble about what the exceptions are, like weapons, alcohol to minors, etc. but food is not one of those cases.[/quote]
Kind of like how the government tells the hakwons what prices to charge and how many students in every class. I don't understand the small business mindset here. I probably never will. Guess I think of free markets, competition, and consumer choice as setting things, improving service, and better quality as it does in the west.[/quote]
I think that's an awfully big generalization to wrap something like "East and West" in, especially considering that both free enterprise and inane regulation exist in both, and pinning down what constitutes "the West" in terms of government & economics is difficult at best.
There is a converse to this- Small businesses seem to operate with less regulation. I'm not sure about this, but it seems that people can pretty much set up shop out of the back of their truck and sell just about anything. I've seen college kids just throw up random tents and sell beer out of coolers. That would probably get them a potential felony rap back home these days. At the same time there is of course the massive government interlock between the big corporations and those in power. You have some very protectionist trade policies here, at the same time, you can have a much more "Free" labor market for example. Or in other cases, labor may be much more restricted.
The point is that these things are much more ambiguous. I'd say that the best way to describe things, here or back home, is that in the end, they are all driven by interests. The laws reflect those interests and the power/influence they possess, although this can fluctuate like the wind.
| Quote: |
| but food is not one of those cases. |
The people of New York City beg to differ, as their mayor has banned trans fats and is trying to ban certain sizes of soft drinks and who can sell them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mayorgc
Joined: 19 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 5:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
The people of New York City beg to differ, as their mayor has banned trans fats and is trying to ban certain sizes of soft drinks and who can sell them. |
Not a valid comparison to the Seoul situation. The bans in NYC affect everybody the same way. Everybody wins/loses at the same time.
The Seoul bans only affect the big stores. Punish one to benefit the others. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
