Its not selective reading. I read the whole thing, the positive and the negative.
But usually, when someone wants to prove a point, they would not post information that refutes the point they are trying to make. On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Eric Roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > > great selective reading Scott. > > On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 9:39 PM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Did you actually read some of the information you posted? Some of it >> seems to refute claims yo have made about how bad Wal-Mart can be. >> >> > However, >> > he compared the changes to previous competitors small town shops >> > have faced in the past庸rom the development of the railroads and the Sears >> > Roebuck catalog to shopping malls. He concludes that shop owners who >> adapt >> > to the ever changing retail market can thrive after Wal-Mart comes to >> their >> > community. >> >> Bad Wal-mart for making small town shops adapt their business to >> handle competition. >> >> > It >> > argued that while Wal-Mart's low prices caused some existing businesses >> to >> > close, the chain also created new opportunities for other small business, >> > and so "the process of creative >> > destruction<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction>unleashed >> > by Wal-Mart has no statistically significant impact on the overall >> > size of the small business sector in the United >> > States." >> >> Bas Wal-Mart for creating new opportunities for small businesses. >> >> > For the concern of jobs, a study commissioned by Wal-Mart with consulting >> > firm Global Insight <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Insight>, found >> > that its stores' presence saves working families more than US$2,500 per >> > year, while creating more than 210,000 jobs in the >> > U.S. >> >> Bad Wal-Mart for saving families money and creating jobs. >> >> >Another study by Global Insight has found that >> > Wal-Mart's growth between 1985 and 2004 resulted in food-at-home prices >> that >> > were 9.1% lower and overall prices (as measured by the Consumer Price >> > Index<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_price_index>) >> > that were 3.1% lower than they would otherwise have >> > been.[114]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wal-Mart#cite_note-113> >> > >> >> Bad Wal-Mart, again, for saving people money. >> >> > Studies of Wal-Mart show consumers benefit from lower costs. A 2005 >> *Washington >> > Post* story reported that "Wal-Mart's discounting on food alone boosts >> the >> > welfare of American shoppers by at least $50 billion per >> > year."[116]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wal-Mart#cite_note-115>A >> > study in 2005 at Massachusetts >> > Institute of Technology< >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Institute_of_Technology >> >measured >> > the effect on consumer >> > welfare <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_economics> and found that >> the >> > poorest segment of the population benefits the most from the existence of >> > discount retailers. >> >> Bad Wal-Mart for benefiting poor people. >> >> Wow, I can really see why you hate Wal-Mart so much. What with all the >> jobs, saved money and benefitting poor people...and all of that >> without having to use our tax dollars. Wal-Mart should be ashamed of >> itself. We should all go back to paying more money for the same goods >> and then have to rely on the government to bail us out when we can't. >> >> >> >> -- >> Scott Stroz >> --------------- >> You can make things happen, you can watch things happen or you can >> wonder what the f*&k happened. - Cpt. Phil Harris >> >> http://xkcd.com/386 >> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:328945 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
