San Diego to Ban Wal-Mart Supercenters (1 Viewer)

Again, I make the same people putting the pressure on the political leaders that passed this law put the pressure on them to get rid of the law. If Wal Mart would open a few 90k square foot buildings and sell everything at their cost until they changed the law the local people wouldn't be able to pass up the savings and the competition would suffer greatly. They could also open several huge stores right on the county line and do the same thing. This would not only still hurt local competition but it would take tax revenue from San Diego County and give it to the neighboring county. I know Wal Mart would have to take a hit until the deal passed but it would send a message to the local political leaders as well as any other counties that think about doing the same thing. Wal Mart could afford to take a hit in the ten digit range and it wouldn't effect them they would easily make it back in the long term. Plus it would help to insure this does not become a popular idea among other areas of the country.
 
The problem with Wal-Mart and the big oil companies is that the more competition they subsume, the less competition they'll be, and the more power they'll have over prices, supply, etc.

If they start price gouging, then the anti-trust statutes will kick in and Walmart will be divided up. That isn't the case, yet.

What's happening right now is the local businesses are using their political influence so that THEY will have more power over prices rather than the free market/competition system. As long as Walmart is excluded, they can continue to charge higher prices without fear of true competition. It seems to me you are siding with anti-competition forces in fear that the company that is only looking to compete MIGHT some day act in a manner that artificially raises or keeps prices high to the detriment of the consumer. Isn't that what the local San Diego businesses are effectively doing right now?
 
If they start price gouging, then the anti-trust statutes will kick in and Walmart will be divided up. That isn't the case, yet.

What's happening right now is the local businesses are using their political influence so that THEY will have more power over prices rather than the free market/competition system. As long as Walmart is excluded, they can continue to charge higher prices without fear of true competition. It seems to me you are siding with anti-competition forces in fear that the company that is only looking to compete MIGHT some day act in a manner that artificially raises or keeps prices high to the detriment of the consumer. Isn't that what the local San Diego businesses are effectively doing right now?

The best post yet on this thread.
 
They can accomplish that by not shopping there. If they shop there they must want it right?

True, but the dynamics of a WalMart are such that they can afford to open stores real close together and lose money on them for months and months and months - all the while only taking a small percentage of market share. Other retail establishments aren't quite so lucky. May small businesses couldn;t last long if their sales go off as little as 3-5% over a period of several months - certainly something like 10-15% would be devastating. So its not like many people have to shop there for WalMart to accomplish its goal.
And in many areas WalMart is trying to accomplish just this - by opening stores that lose money real close to each other and then once some of the competition has dried up - closing a store (they are the country's leading owner of unused retail space, which isn;t all that surprising).

And don;t get me wrong, while I think there are some legitimate concerns about WalMArt's business practices, I don;t think they are evil and a huge contributor to all of society's economic ills. Just that I don;t see a problem with communities deciding that they don;t want that type of big box establishment - something that works in rurual and suburban areas might not work in major cities - or maybe might not work in certain types of urban or suburban areas.
 
Not likely for San Diego County. It bigger than many states.

This is true, and San Diego County is a virtual island. It is bordered by Camp Pendelton to the North, Mexico to the South, the pacific ocean to the West and Desert to the East.

I consider myself a real conservative, and I do not like the move. I don't understand the hatred toward WalMarts...I really don't. They built a Super Walmart not too far from my house. I have been there several times, and I think it is just fine.

What true purpose is gained by excluding the 90,000+ square foot business that have 10% of their space dedicated to foods other than to stop Walmart from building? How many other stores satisfy that requirement. This is just a shot at Walmart. I don't like it when government acts against a specific business because they don't like it, which is what I think is going on here.

This is more than likely being done in some part to protect the grocery workers in the community. They are a strong union and they earn a pretty respectable living. A few years ago they had a long strike that was probably a huge inconvenience for all of Southern California. Walmart is non union so if they start selling food, it changes the game.

If the local community supports this move by local government than by all means it is the right thing to do.
 
Last edited:
True, but the dynamics of a WalMart are such that they can afford to open stores real close together and lose money on them for months and months and months - all the while only taking a small percentage of market share. Other retail establishments aren't quite so lucky. May small businesses couldn;t last long if their sales go off as little as 3-5% over a period of several months - certainly something like 10-15% would be devastating. So its not like many people have to shop there for WalMart to accomplish its goal.
And in many areas WalMart is trying to accomplish just this - by opening stores that lose money real close to each other and then once some of the competition has dried up - closing a store (they are the country's leading owner of unused retail space, which isn;t all that surprising).

And don;t get me wrong, while I think there are some legitimate concerns about WalMArt's business practices, I don;t think they are evil and a huge contributor to all of society's economic ills. Just that I don;t see a problem with communities deciding that they don;t want that type of big box establishment - something that works in rurual and suburban areas might not work in major cities - or maybe might not work in certain types of urban or suburban areas.

Jim, you make some excellent points but they have gaping holes in them. When a communitty decides they don't want a store in the area then the store is told that by going out of business. In this case it was the local political leaders with a personal financial agenda that made the decision. Like you said just a few percentage points can make or break a local business but then again the same can be said of people living in the area. If a family of 4 has the chance to save just $100 a month because of competition then it changes the lifestyle of that person. It also gives them an extra $100 a month in disposable income which would then go back into the community or into savings. I understand the arguments of Wal-Mart and I know they walk the line of ethical business practice but the do not cross that line and I don't think they will because too many people/businesses are waiting for them to do so.

If you think Wal-Mart has a monopoly you should check out what Safelite Auto Glass has going on. They have bought a monopoly through Congress and Senate leaders that had a financial agenda rather than a best interest of the consumer at heart. Once our political leaders begin making decisions in the free enterprise market based on what is best for other businesses and not consumers it is no longer a free enterprise.
 
So is wal mart evil? If providing people what they want/need at lower prices then maybe.

Are they curbing inflation with thier cheap products or send American jobs overseas since they sell so many cheap chinese goods? Look at what happened to the American Car and Electronics manufacturing. Both went down the toilet with little or no help from Wal Mart.

Is wal mart to blame or the people that shop at Wal Mart? ...to blame for what?

do we have responsibility as consumers or do we just blame corporation? Poor quality and customer service has led to lots of new industries and companies. For instance, in the Cable TV market...lack of customer service and over priced product has opened up the markets for DISH and DirecTV. There's also a trend in auto retailing with Carmax and Internet Sales that is squeezing out the small town mom and pop auto dealer. Historically Car Dealers aren't open on Sunday...all those traditions are being challenged.

Wal Mart, Good or Bad for America and why? Wal Mart is the biggest private employer in USA and except for a ridiculous spike in oil prices would have been the #1 Fortune 500 Company again. So to answer your question is Wal Mart good or bad for America, Wal Mart (like it or not) is America.

Answers in Blue
 
So to answer your question is Wal Mart good or bad for America, Wal Mart (like it or not) is America.

That is bad indeed my friend. I know; I was recently in a WalMart. We should be very concerned if this is what we are destined to become.

Thanks for the wake up call...We need radical economic policies now!
 
But its hardly "free enterprise," when Wal Mart moves into a town and drives every other small business out--then the only choice in town is Wal-Mart; which is what has happened in many small towns.

Doesn't sound like free enterprise and competition to me when one of the few places to shop in town is Wal-Mart.

Don't forget...Bricks and Mortar are not the only way to merchandise products. Over the past 5 years there's been an explosion in Sales over the Internet.
 
Let me reiterate... This is about food sales. Supermarkets and their unions. Makin' Groceries Schwegman's style.

The excerpt below is from another article on the subject...

...The effect of Wal-Mart entering the market, union advocates say, would be a vast reduction in the wage pool. One study estimates that if Wal-Mart super centers enter the San Diego area, the competition could drive down grocery wages between $100 million and $200 million annually. “While charging low prices obviously has some consumer benefits . . . these benefits come at a steep price for American workers,” charges a recent anti-Wal-Mart diatribe by California Democratic congressman George Miller. Efforts by Wal-Mart and others to control costs are “short-sighted strategies” that “ultimately undermine our economy” by lowering living standards, Miller’s report claims.

Union-supported policy groups, like the San Diego–based Center on Policy Initiatives, argue that Wal-Mart should be made to pay “sustainable” or “self-sufficiency” wages—wages that they deem adequate to meet basic needs—in order to gain permission to expand in California. The “sustainable” wage has become a popular idea with the Left, which argues that minimum wages should be much higher than the federal $5.15 per hour and should be based on an area’s cost of living. In many parts of California, liberal economists estimate, that means up to $38,000 a year for an adult worker supporting a spouse....


http://www.city-journal.org/html/14_2_what_does_the_war.html
 
Let me reiterate... This is about food sales. Supermarkets and their unions. Makin' Groceries Schwegman's style.

The excerpt below is from another article on the subject...

http://www.city-journal.org/html/14_2_what_does_the_war.html

So this isn't about what the people of San Diego want; this is about what special interests (Unions) and the competitors of Walmart (supermarkets) want. Why do they get to decide which businesses will or will not be able to compete in San Diego? This has nothing to do with what is best for San Diego. This is what is best for the union (its dues) and the supermarket (their higher prices). How does this benefit competition again?
 
So this isn't about what the people of San Diego want

Really? Where did you get that idea?

Those supermarket workers, and the customers who support them, are the people of San Diego.

This will benefit the community by ensuring a decent standard of living for an important part of its citizenry. It's a wonderful concept. I clearly can't speak for all of San Diego, but I strongly suspect that this has wide support by most of the community.

I support it. I like the idea that the people serving me are able to make a respectable living and provide a decent life for their children.

Where do you think the people of San Diego are wrong here?
 
Really? Where did you get that idea?

Does the entire city of San Diego work for supermarkets? Just because it benefits a select group or a special interest in the area doesn't mean that it benefits San Diego as a whole. Here, that select group is using its influence with local political leaders to keep out Walmart, a store that will bring lower priced goods to ALL San Diego citizens.

Why doesn't the union want Walmart there? Because they aren't union. If they were, the union wouldn't give a flip.

Where do you think the people of San Diego are wrong here?

That's just it. There is nothing showing that this is what the people of San Diego want, it's what the supermarkets want, and it's what the unions want, but I haven't seen anything (poll or otherwise) that indicates that this is really what the people want. This is the epitome of what is wrong with politics in America. Special interests decide what is best for us.

If the people of San Diego really want to support the supermarket workers and feel good about the wages of the people that they buy their food from, Super Walmarts will fail, and the supermarkets will continue to thrive. Why not give the PEOPLE of San Diego the choice (and the chance) to make that decision. If the people are truly behind the unions and the supermarkets in this matter, then they have nothing to fear from Walmart putting up a store.
 
Does the entire city of San Diego work for supermarkets? Just because it benefits a select group or a special interest in the area doesn't mean that it benefits San Diego as a whole. Here, that select group is using its influence with local political leaders to keep out Walmart, a store that will bring lower priced goods to ALL San Diego citizens.

Why doesn't the union want Walmart there? Because they aren't union. If they were, the union wouldn't give a flip.



That's just it. There is nothing showing that this is what the people of San Diego want, it's what the supermarkets want, and it's what the unions want, but I haven't seen anything (poll or otherwise) that indicates that this is really what the people want. This is the epitome of what is wrong with politics in America. Special interests decide what is best for us.

If the people of San Diego really want to support the supermarket workers and feel good about the wages of the people that they buy their food from, Super Walmarts will fail, and the supermarkets will continue to thrive. Why not give the PEOPLE of San Diego the choice (and the chance) to make that decision. If the people are truly behind the unions and the supermarkets in this matter, then they have nothing to fear from Walmart putting up a store.


With reasoning like this, I can't understand why you can't win any cases. :dunno:
 
That's just it. There is nothing showing that this is what the people of San Diego want... but I haven't seen anything (poll or otherwise) that indicates that this is really what the people want.

Well, why didn't you say so earlier?

The quotes below are from a KPBS/Competitive Edge Research Poll
http://www.cerc.net/kpbsdata/WalMart Analysis.pdf

...San Diego may like Wal-Mart, but that does not necessarily translate into general support for more super-stores. The adoption of community zoning laws that would prohibit large retail super-stores is favored by a slim majority (46% to 41%)...

A slim majority remains a majority.


Why not give the PEOPLE of San Diego the choice


It actually was put before the Voters:

...results in the north suburbs, where Wal-Mart lost a recent ballot measure to open a second store in San Marcos, show that voters support restrictions...
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom