|
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 |
AbbeFaria
Joined: 17 May 2005
Location: Gangnam
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 6:20 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| wannago wrote: |
This is just silly. If Wallyworld "mows down" the mom and pop stores, then mom and pop ought to do more to entice customers into their store instead of whining about how long they've been in business and how the big bully Wal-mart is being unfair. Fact is, the bottom line is what sells no matter how much the whiners want to complain. This is called capitalism, free enterprise...call it what you want although I realize it is something our fine neighbors to the north don't subscribe to.
Some of you need to understand that Wal-mart is also a grocery store for a lot of people and spending $600-$700 a month for a large family is done easily. Do you really expect Joe and Jill Schmoe who work hard for their money and barely make ends meet as it is to care what a bunch of liberal cry-babies have to say about Wal-mart? Yes, I'm sure you do but, no, they don't. If you really think that someone remembering your name as well as your dog's name is worth $300-$400 a month (my guess on extra money spent) then you have too much disposable income and you should do the right liberal thing and give the excess to the government to re-distribute for you. Now that would be something to see! |
Walmart is not capitalism or the free market, because they tell the seller what they are allowed to charge in their stores. The prices in Walmart are not set to what the market will bear. A company comes to them and wants to sell something. Walmart says okay, we'll put it on our shelves, but for $3.25 less then you want to charge. This has ripple effects all down the chain. They want to be in Walmart stores because of the huge distribution capabilities so they cut whereever they can. A company will determine their price based on several things, but just a few of them are cost to make the product in raw materials, cost of labor per unit, which includes insurance, benefits, healthcare etc. and profit. This leads them to their final number. In many cases it's the lowest they can go and still make the bare minimum in profit.
So now they start to cut. They lower their amount for health coverage perhaps. Or cut wages by 50 cents an hour. Or switch to cheaper materials which leads to a lower-quality product. They will even raise their prices at other retailers to make up the difference. Then, when they're still coming out in the red, they start putting pressure on their suppliers to cut costs so they can get the raw materials cheaper and the cycle starts all over again. Eventually it leads to people losing their jobs and factories going overseas where people will work 12 hour shifts for 2 bucks a day.
Sure, they don't have to sell with Walmart, but they're company needs to grow. And since Walmart has a strangle-hold on much of the retail world then growing as a company means getting their product on Walmart shelves. No mom and pop retailer has the power to tell PepsiCo. to lower their prices.
Now, how can mom and pop compete with that? What else do they have to go on besides friendly, personable service. They can't tell General Mills to lower the cost of their cereal, they don't have near the bargaining power for that.
One of my favorite anecdotes about the evils of Walmart is when they were busted for opening up life insurance accounts on their elderly employees. You know, the kindly, hunch-backed door greaters who've lost all semblance dignity who stand at the door and say "Welcome to Walmart" and hand you a little sticker. Oh, well what's wrong with that, you might be thinking. If they die, it will benefit that person's family. Except that the beneficiary wasn't the family of the deceased, but Walmart. The company is not rich and bloated enough on life of it's consumers that they have to open secret policies on the elderly and get the pay-out if the person happens to die while employed at Walmart.
I myself stopped shopping at Walmart about 2 years ago. It's just not worth it. There have been times where I've been forced in there out of necessity, but everytime I come out I feel dirty. And seriously, has anyone bought any good clothes from Walmart lately? I went out to visit the folks one weekend back in the states and my mom hands me some shirts. Said she was in Walmart and they were on sale and she new I was coming out. I explained my stance on Walmart, but so as not to make her feel bad, I took them anyway. About a month later, after only being worn a few times, they start to unravel. Not only that, they shrink in weird ways. The mid-section starts to shirnk upwards so it begins to look like a halter top. My girlfriend tells me this is because they cut the fabric the wrong way and I defer to her judgement on these things since she minored in Costuming in college. Back when I still shopped at walmart regularly, I've had this happen as well. Pants that would shrink upwards after a few months and I began to look like I was wearing highwaters. Or shoes that hurt my feet so bad I would limp for days after taking them off.
For me saving a few dollars on my purchase does not justify all that I loose in the long run by supporting Walmart.
-S- |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
wannago
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 7:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AbbeFaria wrote: |
| wannago wrote: |
This is just silly. If Wallyworld "mows down" the mom and pop stores, then mom and pop ought to do more to entice customers into their store instead of whining about how long they've been in business and how the big bully Wal-mart is being unfair. Fact is, the bottom line is what sells no matter how much the whiners want to complain. This is called capitalism, free enterprise...call it what you want although I realize it is something our fine neighbors to the north don't subscribe to.
Some of you need to understand that Wal-mart is also a grocery store for a lot of people and spending $600-$700 a month for a large family is done easily. Do you really expect Joe and Jill Schmoe who work hard for their money and barely make ends meet as it is to care what a bunch of liberal cry-babies have to say about Wal-mart? Yes, I'm sure you do but, no, they don't. If you really think that someone remembering your name as well as your dog's name is worth $300-$400 a month (my guess on extra money spent) then you have too much disposable income and you should do the right liberal thing and give the excess to the government to re-distribute for you. Now that would be something to see! |
Walmart is not capitalism or the free market, because they tell the seller what they are allowed to charge in their stores. The prices in Walmart are not set to what the market will bear. A company comes to them and wants to sell something. Walmart says okay, we'll put it on our shelves, but for $3.25 less then you want to charge. This has ripple effects all down the chain. They want to be in Walmart stores because of the huge distribution capabilities so they cut whereever they can. A company will determine their price based on several things, but just a few of them are cost to make the product in raw materials, cost of labor per unit, which includes insurance, benefits, healthcare etc. and profit. This leads them to their final number. In many cases it's the lowest they can go and still make the bare minimum in profit.
So now they start to cut. They lower their amount for health coverage perhaps. Or cut wages by 50 cents an hour. Or switch to cheaper materials which leads to a lower-quality product. They will even raise their prices at other retailers to make up the difference. Then, when they're still coming out in the red, they start putting pressure on their suppliers to cut costs so they can get the raw materials cheaper and the cycle starts all over again. Eventually it leads to people losing their jobs and factories going overseas where people will work 12 hour shifts for 2 bucks a day.
Sure, they don't have to sell with Walmart, but they're company needs to grow. And since Walmart has a strangle-hold on much of the retail world then growing as a company means getting their product on Walmart shelves. No mom and pop retailer has the power to tell PepsiCo. to lower their prices.
Now, how can mom and pop compete with that? What else do they have to go on besides friendly, personable service. They can't tell General Mills to lower the cost of their cereal, they don't have near the bargaining power for that. |
Let's take this one issue at a time. You brought up some interesting points, but I think you're wrong. It most certainly is capitalism and the free market. Walmart also has to compete with other retailers such as Kmart, Target, etc. They have built a certain (rather sizeable) market share by saying what they will pay for the goods on their shelves. Your point would be excellent if a company had only Walmart as the sole outlet for their products but it just isn't so. Can mom and pop compete with that? On a price level no, of course not but that means mom and pop need to find other ways to make a customer want to walk into their store as opposed to Walmart. I come from an area of the country where the nearest Walmart is 90 miles away. People from my small community would drive that 90 miles on average once a month to stock up on groceries, including coolers full of frozen items. Why? Because they could buy the things they wanted, pay for gas and still save more money than buying their food at the local grocery store. It isn't about politics and evil corporate monsters to these people. It's about trying to make an already stretched budget go even further. The mom and pop stores in the area have either gone out of business or have found a niche to get people in their store. It's not easy being a retailer in a small town.
| AbbeFaria wrote: |
| One of my favorite anecdotes about the evils of Walmart is when they were busted for opening up life insurance accounts on their elderly employees. You know, the kindly, hunch-backed door greaters who've lost all semblance dignity who stand at the door and say "Welcome to Walmart" and hand you a little sticker. Oh, well what's wrong with that, you might be thinking. If they die, it will benefit that person's family. Except that the beneficiary wasn't the family of the deceased, but Walmart. The company is not rich and bloated enough on life of it's consumers that they have to open secret policies on the elderly and get the pay-out if the person happens to die while employed at Walmart. |
I have no idea whether this is true or not and really couldn't care less. It's tacky at best and, maybe, illegal at worst?
| AbbeFaria wrote: |
I myself stopped shopping at Walmart about 2 years ago. It's just not worth it. There have been times where I've been forced in there out of necessity, but everytime I come out I feel dirty. And seriously, has anyone bought any good clothes from Walmart lately? I went out to visit the folks one weekend back in the states and my mom hands me some shirts. Said she was in Walmart and they were on sale and she new I was coming out. I explained my stance on Walmart, but so as not to make her feel bad, I took them anyway. About a month later, after only being worn a few times, they start to unravel. Not only that, they shrink in weird ways. The mid-section starts to shirnk upwards so it begins to look like a halter top. My girlfriend tells me this is because they cut the fabric the wrong way and I defer to her judgement on these things since she minored in Costuming in college. Back when I still shopped at walmart regularly, I've had this happen as well. Pants that would shrink upwards after a few months and I began to look like I was wearing highwaters. Or shoes that hurt my feet so bad I would limp for days after taking them off.
For me saving a few dollars on my purchase does not justify all that I loose in the long run by supporting Walmart.
-S- |
Of course you are able to choose where you do your shopping as is every other consumer in the country. Also, I'm not going to be an advocate for the quality of Walmart's products. Personally, I won't buy clothes there because I find them to be total crap, but I won't criticize those who do. But, that's where the free market comes in. If Walmart puts out poor quality products, then people won't buy them. If you want to make it a trip to hell to go into Walmart, then that's your business. I won't, however, look down on people who are trying to get the most for their dollar because they can't afford to have "outrage" against Walmart. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AbbeFaria
Joined: 17 May 2005
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 9:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wannago wrote: |
| Can mom and pop compete with that? On a price level no, of course not but that means mom and pop need to find other ways to make a customer want to walk into their store as opposed to Walmart. |
You've used this line more than once in reference to Walmart and we've already discussed how there is no way for a small operation to compete with Walmart on price. So price and family friendly service, from someone who knows your name and probably knows your parents name and went to school with your grandmother, aren't good enough, what council would you give them?
"Sorry Mrs. Roberts. I know you've been running this corner market here in Smalltownville for 60 years, but I can get three different kinds of Welches Grape Juice at Walmart and at the same time buy socks made by a 6 year old boy in Thailand who lost two of his fingers but still sews with the best of them. You've only got that one kind of grape juice and it costs 47 cents more. It's capitalism, you understand."
It's coming around to bite Walmart in the rear. There have been grumblings from labor groups for years and it's only getting worse as time goes on. The life insurance scam is very true, as well as their violation of child labor laws, hiring of illegal immigrants, forcing people to work overtime off the clock and even locking people in the stores overnight to clean, again off the clock. And sure, they aren't the only offenders of these kinds of laws, but they are one of the biggest.
None of their hourly employees work full time because otherwise they might qualify for *gasp!* health insurance. They make a barely livable wage of around $USD 8.25 an hour. In the U.S. that comes to about $330 a week, and then after Uncle Sam comes in, you're down to maybe USD $260. Oh wait! that's only if you work full time. I think they cap their hours at 28 per week, so you do the math. Take home pay, after taxes, for your average Walmart employee, is probably around $170 a week. After that kind of paycheck, yeah, the only place you can afford to shop at is Walmart.
And yes, it gets worse. Walmart employees are drilled from day one about the joys and beauty of...can you guess? That's right, profit sharing. They watch video's, attend meetings and psuedo seminars about the people who invested $25 back in 1976 and are now millionaires. But that was when there shares were going for pennies on the dollar. Now, with them hovering around $50 bucks a share, it takes poor old Suzie, a working mother with no highschool education and in desperate need of a dentist (care she can never afford because the only semi-decent job in her area is Walmart and again, no health insurance), several months of payroll deductions to even get a share. If she works until retirement, rolling over her dividends each year, let us say 30 years, she might die with a handfull of walmart stock that did practically nothing for her except shrink her already hideously small paycheck.
Walmart spends a large part of there advertising budget trying to combat this kind of publicity. They paint themselves as America's store, for the common folk, for the betterment of the community, but they do nothing but drain the life out of every place they go. There's a drain on the local economy because Walmart employees, instead of finding a job they could support themselves and their families, found low wages and even less hours, now have to apply for government assistance. From foodstamps to medicaid. Then all the people who had to file bankruptcy, the butcher, the baker, and even the candlestick maker, because Walmart put them out of business.
And as to the people in your town that drove 180 miles round trip, what could they possibly be getting at Walmart that made the gas and wear and tear on their vehicles necessary? A wider variety of frozen fish sticks? If their budgets are so shoestring, that would lead one to believe that they're most likely driving older model cars, most likely in disrepair for lack of funds to keep them in good running condition, so that means hideous gas mileage. I've shopped in many a mom and pop store and their prices are not that inflated compared to Walmart. These people were just deluded into the illusion of savings.
-S- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joe_doufu
Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 9:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bullet points:
-- Wal-mart's prices are unbeatable.
-- Wal-mart is convenient; you can get everything you need from food to clothing to ammunition in one stop, all while your oil is being changed and your tires replaced
-- "Mom" and "Pop" have been screwing us on price for decades
-- Wal-mart helps communities by creating jobs for those who cannot normally find jobs: the elderly, the handicapped, and the stupid
-- Wal-mart pays plenty of taxes at the city, state, and national levels, and as a public company, publishes accurate reports its financial results openly.
-- Wal-mart increases the standard of living in the USA. Remove it and you'll have massive immediate inflation due to a sudden drop in efficiency. Personal debt will rise and the purchasing power of a dollar will plummet.
-- The Chinese have Wal-mart. We must compete with the Chinese. We can't sacrifice our single best distribution/logistics network.
-- Wal-mart offers the incomparable "Sam's Choice Peanut Butter Cups" confection, which has no equal on this Earth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 11:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| joe_doufu wrote: |
-- The Chinese have Wal-mart. We must compete with the Chinese. We can't sacrifice our single best distribution/logistics network.
|
Huh?
Yes, there is wal-marts in China. Are you saying w/out wal-mart China would be dominating trade between the two countries even more?
What exactly are you refering to? It isn't clear. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joe_doufu
Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| joe_doufu wrote: |
-- The Chinese have Wal-mart. We must compete with the Chinese. We can't sacrifice our single best distribution/logistics network.
|
Yes, there is wal-marts in China. Are you saying w/out wal-mart China would be dominating trade between the two countries even more?
What exactly are you refering to? It isn't clear. |
OK the phrasing was intentionally simplistic.
The point is, there's no way we'd willingly sabotage our nation's best nationwide distribution and logistics system, while other nations are copying it. The American mindset is always economic growth, never deliberately impoverishing ourselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2005 1:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Calif. Jury Orders Wal-Mart to Pay $172 Million
Thu Dec 22, 7:27 PM ET
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Wal-Mart Stores Inc. must pay $172 million in damages and compensation to about 116,000 current and former employees for denying meal breaks, a California jury ruled on Thursday.
Concluding a class-action court challenge against the world's biggest retailer, the Alameda County, California jury held that Wal-Mart had broken a state law on breaks for meals.
The ruling applies only to current and former Wal-Mart employees in California, said Chris Lebsock, an attorney for the plaintiffs.
The four plaintiffs who launched the lawsuit in 2001 had claimed Wal-Mart had failed to pay hourly employees for missed or interrupted meal breaks.
The jury ruled Wal-Mart must pay $57.2 million in compensation and $115 million in punitive damages, said Jessica Grant, another lawyer for the plaintiffs.
"What was compelling for the jury was that we put a lot of evidence before them of memos by Wal-Mart from seven years ago that concluded they had been breaking the law," said Grant. "Instead of taking steps to solve the problem, Wal-Mart concealed it."
Wal-Mart faces similar lawsuits in over 30 states, said Grant, whose firm is pressing two of the court challenges, one in Maryland and the other in Massachusetts, on behalf of 80,000 class-action plaintiffs.
Wal-Mart was not immediately available for comment.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051223/bs_nm/retail_walmart_dc;_ylt=AtnuxNpEG.3t.3zmu.VEZPcEtbAF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joe_doufu
Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2005 5:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| igotthisguitar wrote: |
| a class-action court challenge against the world's biggest |
| igotthisguitar wrote: |
| the ... California jury |
I think the above is all you needed to see. Class-action lawsuits are the new "wealth transfer" making America a little more socialist than it seems to be on paper. How many times does "the big guy" ever win in court and get cash reparations from "the little guy"? Never.
I myself got several thousand dollars this year from a class action lawsuit regarding a company i worked for years ago, claiming that we'd worked overtime and hadn't been paid for it... a flat-out lie, as it was the most cushy internet bubble job i ever knew. Don't take this robbery as some kind of proof that you're morally right to hate Wal-mart. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| joe_doufu wrote: |
| Don't take this robbery as some kind of proof that you're morally right to hate Wal-mart. |
Did i say i hated Wal-Wart? Truth is i'm very WARY of "hate".
Because a person does not patronize Wal-Mart does not mean they "hate" it. That's absurd.
I DO believe however that we largely VOTE with our DOLLARS. The little "X" so many good "free world" people place beside their legislative candidate of choice, or the button they happily press on the fake computer screen with the blatantly rigged "electoral" software is really quite secondary.
As far as contributing to this thread, the main reason i do so is in the hope of stimulating discussion & thought. Simple. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 11:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here's one guy who isn't turning away ...
Civil rights icon "tapped" to defend Wal-Mart 
Mon Feb 27, 4:32 PM ET
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Civil rights leader and former Atlanta mayor Andrew Young will become the public face of a
Wal-Mart-backed group whose aim is to combat criticism of the world's largest retailer, the group said on Monday.
Young, who was an aide to Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. during the civil rights protests of the 1960s and served
as ambassador to the United Nations under President Jimmy Carter, will serve as chairman of Working Families
for Wal-Mart's national steering committee, the group said in a statement.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060227/bs_nm/retail_walmart_young_dc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
I myself got several thousand dollars this year from a class action lawsuit regarding a company i worked for years ago, claiming that we'd worked overtime and hadn't been paid for it... a flat-out lie, as it was the most cushy internet bubble job i ever knew. Don't take this robbery as some kind of proof that you're morally right to hate Wal-mart.
Back to top
|
Introduce yourself as this person if I meet you. Its you and those of your ilk, who allow Walmart and those of their ilk to justify screwing me and mine out of a decent paycheck. Forcing us to accept second rate conditions that our fore fathers fought against. Thanks  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
 I read what you writ, and rereading it again, I am pissed. What is it, the slave trade didn't do it for you. (read where the word came from). Oh, you must have missed reading about the conditions my people escaped from in the Industrial Age, so thanks for allowing the Large corporations to justify reintroducing these conditions.
The only time we had good conditions is when we were fighting communism. Now we have corrupted Communism and our own people give reasons to hate/abuse workers, we are stuck accepting the conditions of the Industrial/Service age (post 1900, now 2006). THANKS VERY MUCH FOR ANOTHER NAIL IN MY COFFIN  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 2:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
 Bit overboard, I must admit, but my feeling remains the same, minus the anger |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endofthewor1d
Joined: 01 Apr 2003
Location: the end of the wor1d.
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/45118
Wal-Mart Parking Lot Puts Municipal Parking Lot Out Of Business
February 8, 2006 | Issue 42•06
AUBURN, ME—After serving the area for more than four decades, Parking Lot 2A lowered its moveable-arm gates for the last time Friday. The much-loved municipal parking lot is only the most recent casualty of Wal-Mart parking lots.
Enlarge Image
Family-owned Lot 2A sits empty.
A Wal-Mart Supercenter opened across from Lot 2A in October 2001.
Comprising 80 public and 45 rental stalls, the city-owned lot charged $3 a day during its prime. However, city engineers report that over the past five years, 2A's clientele has steadily eroded, as more Auburn locals have opted for the convenience of the Wal-Mart lot.
Locals in the Lewiston-Auburn region say the municipal lot's closure marks the end of a public-parking-space-rental era.
"Shutting down the lot was a hard decision to make," said former parking-lot manager Blaine Gaffney, whose great-uncle Merle Wilson was the city public-works engineer who oversaw the construction of the lot in 1962. "We were just breaking even as it was. Then along comes Wal-Mart, just giving away parking for free, and we simply couldn't keep up."
Run by three generations of attendants, Lot 2A offered locals a safe, accessible, low-cost setting to park their cars.
"We were proud of how we ran our parking lot," said Gaffney, the walls of whose office were once decorated with photographs of lot staffers posing with loyal motorists and their cars. "People came from all over the county to park here. We served a lot of good, hardworking people for four decades. Not a lot of people can say that these days."
When the final car left Friday evening, Gaffney likened Lot 2A to a nuclear test site. Gray and featureless, save for the odd crack in the concrete, and eerily quiet, the lot hardly seemed the place where WCSH-6 newscaster Bill Green once parked his Audi. Without question, Lot 2A's days of celebrity patronage are no more.
"When that lot was built 44 years ago, it took nearly a month of backbreaking work to get it into shape," Gaffney said. "My wife's dad and my cousins on my mom's side got down on their hands and knees to help smooth the concrete themselves. This new one, they just came in with some Mexicans and dumped the cement."
Gaffney added: "Didn't take more than two days. Three, if you count painting the stall lines."
Despite Gaffney's grumbling contention that the Wal-Mart lot is "built on a sinkhole," it has been widely characterized as the parking place to beat. Boasting 1,000 spaces, state-of-the-art halogen light posts, clearly marked stalls, and small, concrete-hemmed islands of foliage, the Wal-Mart lot does have its advantages, locals report.
"With this new lot, there's no waiting, and it's free," former municipal-lot patron Edwin "Smokey" Thompson, 61, said. "And there's always plenty of places."
Thompson added: "Plus it's a lot closer to the Wal-Mart."
Some car owners are wistful about the transition.
"I'll miss the old lot," Lewiston resident Christine Fink, 41, said. "There were some oil stains, but there was character, and they always had a smile for you. It may not have been as level as the Wal-Mart lot, and it may have had puddles when it rained, but I still liked it."
To many Auburners, Lot 2A was a reminder of simpler times when people came to shop at the Ace Hardware store, or enjoyed a malt at Denny's.
"People had their favorite parking spots," Gaffney said. "It didn't matter that the paint had worn off. They just knew where to go because they had come so many times. Still, as soon as that new lot opened, people got suckered in by the price. But at the new lot, they don't know the drivers by name like we did."
Gaffney hopes to keep that personal touch alive in his new job as a cart collector at the Wal-Mart lot.
"I always say hello to everyone who drives through," Gaffney said. "I get strange looks, but in time they'll get used to it, maybe even learn my name. I certainly hope so, because I need this job."
Wal-Mart officials had no comment on Lot 2A's closure or whether unfair parking practices may have played a role in its demise.
"It is not the policy of Wal-Mart to comment on the activities of other businesses," Wal-Mart spokesman Olan James said. "We pride ourselves on our work with communities, and we hope that in time, people will come to embrace our parking lot as one of the family." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 5:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
EOTW, thank for that post. I forgot how funny the Onion can be.
Joe, how dare you defend those WalMart monsters! Know your audience.
As for me, I like WalMart. Let me tell you, when you're from a really small town (less than 5,000 people) the "mom and pop" stores are few in number and pretty crappy. Having WalMart means not having to drive 20 miles to the nearest decent-sized city every other day. Think of all that extra gasloine being consumed when people are forced to drive all over the place to pick up a few things. And for people who don't have cars? Ouch. We don't have public transportation in my berg. I don't see myself as screwing Summer Wine or others when I shop at my local WalMart. If I boycotted it, I'd be screwing myself, though. I'm wary of WalMart to a degree, but why shouldn't I be wary of other stores that want to keep their local monopoly intact as they blather on about the "character" of the town (like that's their real interest)? Nothing is ever so black and white as: Small=good, Big=bad.
And I must once again agree with Joe that WalMart's "Sam's Choice" peanut butter cups are awesome. |
|
| 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
