[Vision2020] Wal-Mart cause and effect

[Saundra Lund]

Hi Jeff & Other Visionaries:

As I think all of us recognize, this is a very complex situation not just
from an economics standpoint but also from a community standpoint and a
quality of life standpoint.  I hesitate to wade into the fray because I'm
certainly not an economics expert, but I did want to comment on some of what
Jeff has posted.

I'll start off by saying that we don't shop at Wal-Mart.  At all.  They went
a bridge to far one too many times for us.  Others think differently, and
that's their choice.  Not surprisingly, Wal-Mart has survived the loss of
our purchasing dollars  ;-)

I will also say that not one single of my investment dollars is in Wal-Mart
-- not in mutual funds, retirement funds, or investment accounts.  Nothing,
nada, zip.  I don't care how "profitable" an investment Wal-Mart might (or
might not) be -- I personally don't want to be making any money off an
investment I think is wrong.  To me, that would be like those who invested
in apartheid South African krugerrands.  Could I have made money?  Sure, but
at what cost?  Others think differently, and that's their choice.  For me,
profit and prosperity are about much more than the almighty dollar.

Finally, Jeff wrote:
"The myopic (and selfish) view she is trying to argue is that because she
doesn't want to shop at the store in Moscow, everyone else should be denied
the opportunity to shop there - the old "greatest good for the fewest
number" shuffle.  This is very much like the old "less is more" argument -
in this case, less choice for you and more cost for you."

Jeff, I think the same argument can hold the other direction as well.  If
Wal-Mart puts a Supercenter here, I am very worried that our choices will be
fewer.  My understanding is that grocery stores operate with a very narrow
profit margin.  We've already lost Tidyman's, and I fear that a Supercenter
will drive Safeway and/or Rosauers out of Moscow.

To me, that looks like fewer choices.

And, when Wal-Mart decides that putting two Supercenters in this area wasn't
as "profitable" as they'd like, what happens?  Even less choice.

I can't help but wonder if Wal-Mart disclosed to Pullman that they were
hoping to put a Supercenter here in Moscow as well?  I've talked to a fair
number of people who wanted Pullman to get a Supercenter, and one of the
reasons cited by every single one of them (IIRC) was they thought it would
pull a significant amount of Moscow shopping dollars to Pullman.  I can't
help but wonder if their thoughts have changed with the revelation of the
possibility of a Supercenter in Moscow.


JMHO,
Saundra Lund
Moscow, ID

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do
nothing.
Edmund Burke

***** Original material contained herein is Copyright 2005, Saundra Lund.
Do not copy, forward, excerpt, or reproduce outside the Vision 2020 forum
without the express written permission of the author.*****


-----Original Message-----
From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
On Behalf Of Jeff Harkins
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 8:51 PM
To: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Wal-Mart cause and effect

At last, Ms Opyr gets it - or at least part of it. The point being made in
my previous post is that Walmart has little or no impact on those businesses
prepared to compete.  A local economy is a complex entity.  Our local
economy survived the existing WalMart store and will survive the new WalMart
store.  Some businesses found a symbiotic relationship to build off of
WalMart's presence here.  Some became challenged by the competition and
lost.  Some came and some went for a variety of reasons.  By the way, Ernst
entered bankruptcy because of fractured business processes across their
system (the local store did ok).

But at the end of the day, WalMart is one of the largest profit making
employers in the County - because it satisfies their customers' demands.  No
one is expecting Ms. Opyr to shop there and I am certainly not trying to
persuade her to "give it a go".  The myopic (and selfish) view she is trying
to argue is that because she doesn't want to shop at the store in Moscow,
everyone else should be denied the opportunity to shop there - the old
"greatest good for the fewest number" shuffle.  This is very much like the
old "less is more" argument - in this case, less choice for you and more
cost for you.  

I won't use tawdry sexual references to entice you to a position - there is
enough of that on network tv.  This is a debate about choice and who should
or should not determine your consumption decisions.  I think it is pretty
clear where I stand.  Let WalMart, an existing business, expand their
operations with additional investment so that our local consumption choices
get the benefit of their product lines at reasonable prices.  Let
competition work - because it works.

At 07:27 PM 11/16/2005, you wrote:


	Jeff Harkins, in his list of businesses that have opened in Moscow
since the arrival of Wal-Mart, makes the most common of logical errors,
i.e., post hoc, ergo propter hoc, meaning because of ABC, XYZ happened.
I'll give you another example of this logical fallacy: all of the businesses
that Jeff cites have opened since Melynda and I moved to Moscow.  Therefore,
lesbians are good for business!  If it weren't for sodomy, you straight folk
wouldn't now be shopping at Winco, Staples, or the fabulous expanded
Tri-State.  Just for the record, Tri-State is *the* store of choice for
lesbian fashionistas! That's where we all get of our guns, knives, and prom
attire.  
	
	Here's a question: what Moscow businesses have closed since the
existing Wal-Mart opened?  K-Mart.  Tidyman's.  Ken's Stationery.  The
Beanery.  Creighton's.  The Main Street Deli.  The Nobby.  The Spudnik.
Myklebust's.  Karen's Ice Cream.  The Army Navy Store.  The Emporium.  The
JC Penney's.  Ernst Hardware.  The Chevron on the corner of Third and
Jackson.  Is Wal-Mart to blame for all or any of these?  I don't know.  And
who -- apart from Jeff Harkins -- is willing to make a post hoc, ergo
propter hoc argument regarding these closures?  
	
	I'd be willing to argue that Ernst is a direct casualty of Wal-Mart,
but I'd use another rationale for my analysis: proximity.  The study I
forwarded to the list earlier suggests that proximity to a Wal-Mart has a
direct effect in terms of both benefit and detriment. Restaurants near
Wal-Marts often see an increase in business; hardware stores, on the other
hand, go tits up. 
	
	Jeff asserts that hard data should win this argument.  Well, there's
an old saying among accountants: figures lie, and liars figure.  We don't
need a Wal-Mart Supercenter period, but we sure as hell don't need one
across from the Moscow Cemetery.  What a disgusting, tacky, trashy prospect.

	
	Joan Opyr/Auntie Establishment 
	www.joanopyr.com