Your Economically Antediluvian City Of The Day Is . . .
Wait For It!
By Pejman Yousefzadeh Posted in Economy | Featured Stories — Comments (5) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The lovely city of San Diego (read on):
The City Council here voted late Tuesday to ban certain giant retail stores, dealing a blow to Wal-Mart Stores Inc.'s potential to expand in the nation's eighth-largest city.
The measure, approved on a 5-3 vote, prohibits stores of more than 90,000 square feet that use 10 percent of space to sell groceries and other merchandise that is not subject to sales tax. It takes aim at Wal-Mart Supercenter stores, which average 185,000 square feet and sell groceries.
Mayor Jerry Sanders will veto the ban if the Council reaffirms it on a second vote, which will likely happen in January, said mayoral spokesman Fred Sainz. The Council can override his veto with five votes.
"What the Council did tonight was social engineering, not good public policy," Sainz said.
Supporters of the ban argued that Wal-Mart puts smaller competitors out of business, pays workers poorly, and contributes to traffic congestion and pollution. Opponents said the mega-retailer provides jobs and low prices and that a ban would limit consumer choice.
"Quite simply, I do not think it is the role of the San Diego City Council to dictate where families should buy their groceries," said Councilman Kevin Faulconer, who opposed the ban.
Quite so. Furthermore, as we know, larger retailers help drive business for smaller retailers, so in fact, the smaller stores in San Diego would likely benefit from the arrival of Wal-Mart in the long run.
But don't tell that to those whose outdated and outmoded brand of economic "thinking" causes them to limit consumer choice and engage in a pernicious form of municipal protectionism. They do not appear to be predisposed to changing their thinking on economic issues such as this one, no matter how much the evidence may weigh against their anachronistic philosophies.
« Rethinking the Goals of a National Mortgage Bailout — Comments (45) | Quotes That Catch My Fancy — Comments (79) »
Your Economically Antediluvian City Of The Day Is . . . 5 Comments (0 topical, 5 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
The main problem with Wal-Mart is how they treat their suppliers, not their employees or the competition. If you can't compete, it's because you didn't try. It's easy to compete with Wal-Mart. Look at Target: Offer a cleaner, friendlier atmosphere, and you don't even have to improve on service!
With other retailers, they compete with Wal-Mart by offering better service. Even though these competitors have prices that are higher, the service makes up for the difference.
Better quality products makes a big difference. Anyone ever bought formal evening wear at Wal-Mart? Okay, a few people probably have, but for them "formal evening wear" probably means the jeans that don't have holes in the knees. People are willing to pay a bit more for quality, so if you have a good quality product, you can compete with mega-giant Wal-Mart.
In my home-town of Kansas City, a Wal-Mart moved in next to a Food-4-Less and down the street from a Hy-Vee grocery. A year later, the no-frills, no service Food-4-Less was out of business, but the service- and quality-oriented Hy-Vee is still there to this day. Further, lots more stores have moved in nearby. Why? Because the Wal-Mart draws shoppers, and even Wal-Mart can't carry everything.
"In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock."
--Thomas Jefferson
... yet another screwed-up thing from our city government. How are we supposed to convince people that San Diego isn't full of kooks unlike those other coastal cities in California if they're doing stuff like this?
Don't they have a massive pension fund problem to fix? Or if they're going to muck with private businesses, how about getting something done with a stadium for the Chargers?
Why don't they have some cohones and specifically name Walmart. How phoney can you be copping out by some "generic" description of big box retailers who just happen to have groceries.
Folks....the slippery slope is coming home to roost. Letting crazy socialist elites get in an inch is allowing them to grab a mile. Now that they have their claws in our country they will be much more difficult to remove.
I'm all for letting Walmart build and then nobody show up once their doors are open, if that what the consumer wants.
I am growing very very tired of elitists thinking they know whats good for me.
If you most often find yourself arguing the exceptions rather than the rule you just might be on your own slippery slope to irrelevance. -CommonCents
Whatever they paid, it was certainly worth it.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
This analysis gets through the smokescreens and pious rhetoric and identifies the driving force behind this vote - grocery unions.
Key quotes:
A Wal-Mart Super Center differs from a large Wal-Mart mainly in that is sells groceries. And in fact the legislation does not ban all super-large stores, just ones that sell groceries... [This] tells us that the politicos are not against large stores, just against large new stores that compete with existing grocery stores.
And this puts the lie to supporters statements that their concern is that Wal-Mart "puts smaller competitors out of business." There aren't any "smaller competitors" in California grocery stores, they are all large chains run by corporations... This is about protecting grocery retailers from competition. Why? Well, there is one other thing we need to know, and that is that California grocers all have extremely powerful and politically connected unions.
Read the whole analysis.