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

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



A slim majority remains a majority.





It actually was put before the Voters:


Dre, you sure took some selective sentences out of that research poll and you might want to consider reading it again.

Hell, I have a major negative bias against Wal-Mart. I hate shopping there, I hate standing in lines, I hate trying to find a place to park and god forbid if you have to return something you have to clear your calendar yet if I need something that Wal-Mart has at a much better price I will go there. How much prejudice is in the polls from those factors alone. How many of the people poll are in direct competition with Wal-Mart? I'm sure if you gave a survey to 1000 people and 100 of them are in direct competition with Wal Mart then there would be an immediate 10% that didn't want anything to do with them, just like if you gave a survey about Target to 1000 people and 100 of them worked for Wal Mart then their would be an immediate 10% that showed up on the survey. Should New York run surveys to find out what people think of stores that sell Islamic Religious items and base whether or not businesses should be banned?

The next thing you have to look at is the negative media and advertising against Wal-Mart and people's biased opinion. I know people that wouldn't shop their unless the stock market crashed and all the sudden the extra couple of dollars would become important. What exactly are these people putting on the survey. It is documented in many different economic research papers that Wal Mart's only weakness is among the upper class. Most of the reasons Wal Mart's proffits have finally planed is because they have run out of areas to cater to the lower and middle class. Wal Mart has also started marketing to the upper class and have done so with aggression, I'm sure you have seen the big screen TV commercials.

IMO, this is exactly the reason American politics is corrupt and this is nothing more than local lobbyist, political leaders with their best interest and the interest of their campaign supporters at heart instead of the majority of the voting public. The politicians know they can get the votes back through advertising while lining their pockets. This is everything that is wrong with our country today and this is coming from a small business owner. Wouldn't you love to see Wal Mart shut their doors tomorrow and just see what type of economical impact they have in our country?

I don't even think this should be put to a vote. The only reason this would be put to a vote is because Wal Mart's competition knows that is the only way they can beat them. They know once the stores are there that people will go there. I just don't understand how anyone anywhere could even consider this. The entire theory of free enterprise is based on competition, without it there is no such thing.
 
Well, why didn't you say so earlier?

It actually was put before the Voters:

Actually, that was put before a suburb of San Diego. It hasn't been put to the people of San Diego yet. Also, it was a vote on whether to put a SECOND store there, so there was already a store there. Perhaps they thought one was enough for their area. Not exactly a referendum that the entire city of San Diego doesn't want any Super Walmarts.

If it was put to a vote by the people of San Diego, then I wouldn't have as much of a problem with it. Even so, I am sure that all of the special interests would pour millions of dollars in advertisements that said "Vote Yes to Prop. 9 to save local jobs" or some sort of other nonsense and the people wouldn't have any idea of what they are voting on. The same thing happen here in Texas on a law that was sold as "saving the doctors" but was nothing more than a law that benefited insurance companies. Amazingly, doctors insurance rates never went down.

With that said, my other question wasn't really addressed. If the people of San Diego wouldn't support Walmart, why not let them build their store and give it a try? Why even put it to a vote that will cost the taxpayers money? Let the people vote with their pocket books. This is the essence of the free market system. Walmart should have the opportunity to compete with the supermarkets. I can tell you why the supermarkets don't want Walmart there. They know once they are built, the people will start to shop there. They are avoiding the competition that they know they will lose.

Lastly, the poll you referenced isn't very clear. It says that 46% "favored community zoning laws that would prohibit large super-stores" doesn't really say that they don't want the Walmarts in San Diego at all. My interpretation of that is that people favor zoning laws in which the communities could designated that areas could not be used for super-stores. I think that most people like the ideas of zoning laws. We have them where I live. There are certain areas where the super-stores can be built and others where it can't. If I was asked this question, I would say I favor those types of zoning laws. But, as we see from the discussion on this thread, I don't think a whole sale ban on Walmarts is a good idea. So, citing that poll as "evidence" that the majority of the people of San Diego don't want the Walmarts is misplaced. As always, a poll is only as good as the question that is asked.
 
To me, it is unconstitutional and more of you should be outraged. Forget that it is Walmart. I don't have problems with zoning ordinances and the proper use of them to
protect certain areas. If you want to zone an area so there are no large commercial businesses over a certain size, fine. However, you go over a line when you draft a law that only applies to one business or 1 person. I forget the exact reason, but it is unconsititutional, and probably related to due process and equal protection. For example, I think most of you would realize how horrendous it would be if a state passed a new law that said no people born on July 5, 1958, with the 1st name Eric, left-handed and blue eyes may purchase a house in Springfield. Laws have to be designed to apply to all people or businesses equally. Sham legal constructions that pretend to be drafted neutrally, but are worded to only really deprive the rights of 1 person or business are one of the worse abuses of power by government.
 
Don't like Wal-Mart or the wages they pay? Then take a stand and don't shop there! Leave the government out of it.

Free enterprise meets freedom of choice...what a couple of novel concepts! Back when we were still the United States of America, we used to believe in quaint little concepts like that.

Lucky for us, we have politicians and special interests to do all of our thinking for us now!
 
Sandman, bclemms- let's agree to disagree on this. There are strong arguments on both sides and I can understand where you are coming from. Having lived 10 years in San Diego however, I feel like I have a pretty good grip on what works in the community and how many locals feel about the issue.

This excerpt from an article written three years ago captures local sentiment well...

In San Diego, Wal-Mart has become a magnet for a disparate coalition of critics who are pushing hard for restrictions on so-called "big box" retail stores: Stores that fear the Wal-Mart Supercenters could put them out of business. Community activists concerned about the preservation of neighborhoods. Smart-growth advocates who want to curb traffic congestion and retail sprawl. And labor unions and social justice organizations that contend Wal-Mart's cheap prices come at the expense of decent wages and benefits for workers.

from...http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20031120-9999_1b20walmart.html


To address the argument that this goes against a free market economy, I ask, where did you get the impression that the US operates a true free market economy? This country has a rich history of interfering with commerce. Many industries are regulated, subsidized, or otherwise manipulated in an effort to protect a given class of citizen.

It is our job as citizens to ensure that what is happening in our community represents a majority consensus view. I can't speak for your community, but I think that in San Diego it does.
 
To address the argument that this goes against a free market economy, I ask, where did you get the impression that the US operates a true free market economy? This country has a rich history of interfering with commerce. Many industries are regulated, subsidized, or otherwise manipulated in an effort to protect a given class of citizen.

Sure the government interferes with commerce and industries are regulated. But here it isn't an "industry" that is being regulated so much as a company. The purpose of the law is to keep a company out of San Diego. In my opinion, that is wrong and goes against the principles of free enterprise and equal protection (as noted by jimwnola).
 
Sure the government interferes with commerce and industries are regulated. But here it isn't an "industry" that is being regulated so much as a company. The purpose of the law is to keep a company out of San Diego. In my opinion, that is wrong and goes against the principles of free enterprise and equal protection (as noted by jimwnola).

This was tested and upheld in the California Supreme court and in a federal court.

The California Supreme Court rejected Wal-Mart's appeal Wednesday of a ruling that allows cities and counties in the state to outlaw big-box superstores.

...It was Turlock's second legal victory over Wal-Mart this month. On July 3, a federal judge in Fresno dismissed the company's constitutional challenge to the ordinance, saying the city was not interfering with interstate commerce or discriminating illegally against one type of store...

...The court, setting a statewide precedent, said local governments can enact such restrictions to prevent the collapse of local businesses and resulting urban blight....

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/07/13/BAG45JU7PR1.DTL


Wal-Mart is in San Diego incidentally. The community just doesn't want any Wal-Mart Superstores.

Here is another interesting tidbit from the article that suggests this is a trend in community thinking throughout California...

Wal-Mart estimates that 20 cities and counties in Northern California have passed ordinances seeking to limit or block the stores. San Francisco, Oakland and Martinez have banned them
 
Last edited:
This was tested and upheld in the California Supreme court and in a federal court.

Wouldn't be the first time I disagreed with a court, and I am sure that it won't be the last.
 
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!

Where were you 20 years ago? Walmart is U.S. and We are Walmart.


btw...I wonder if a lot of this is small town prejudice. Had Walmart been founded in Chicago, NYC, Seattle or Los Angeles, I wonder if they would be seen with the same disdain of a Company founded and headquarterd in teeny, tiny backwards Bentonville Arkansas?
 
To address the argument that this goes against a free market economy, I ask, where did you get the impression that the US operates a true free market economy? This country has a rich history of interfering with commerce. Many industries are regulated, subsidized, or otherwise manipulated in an effort to protect a given class of citizen.


I think this point is a good one. This notion that there is a "free market" independent of regulation or manipulation is specious.

Merchant capitalism got its origins in strict regulation and government sponsorship. Governnments in the western world have long been tinkering with the free market to make it work for the "general will"--this idea that there's a free market which exists in a vacuum or independent of any regulation, manipulation, or control is simply not true.

Think of a laissez faire economy being the same utopian fantasy as a complete, communistic, command economy which has no private property.

Both are impossible to achieve, and don't comport with economic realities.
 
Where were you 20 years ago? Walmart is U.S. and We are Walmart.

No, the U.S. isn't Walmart--actually the foundation of true United States business culture lies in the small mom-pop General stores which sold everything you could ever want or need.

Mail order catalogs, malls, and wal-mart pretty much has ended this piece of Americana. But there are still some of these small establishments left.
 
I'd like to see what US Supreme Court says. It's the 10% part I have a problem with. From this law, a huge Lowes, huge Home Depot, huge Target, huge disgusting auto dealership, huge strip mall are all ok, but not ok is Walmart simply because their business model includes selling groceries. Since when is selling groceries so bad? So, they could knock down a zillion trees and make a disgusting autorama strip center if they wanted, just as long as no Walmart is there. However, even if Walmart agreed to expensive landscaping, an architecurally attractive facade and a multilevel parking lot, it would still be illegal for them to do business. Why? Simply because it is Walmart, really. It just shows that their primary goal is not consistent with traditional zoning restrictions to protect neighborhoods, but to single out and destroy Walmart.
 
...actually the foundation of true United States business culture lies in the small mom-pop General stores which sold everything you could ever want or need.

Mail order catalogs, malls, and wal-mart pretty much has ended this piece of Americana. But there are still some of these small establishments left.

I agree from a historical perspective, Mom and Pop retailing was a very important aspect of the the US economy. However, from an economic perspective, it's clear the overwhelming majority of Americans are not supporting and subsidizing an inefficient distribution and merchandising model.

If you refuse to acknowledge Walmart as a shining example of America, please identify something else. I'll take the small upstart Business from a dinky one runway airport town over Donald Trump, Bill Gates or the Rockerfeller Empires anyday.
 

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