One thing at a time. If politicians who you elect, give a property tax holiday to Walmart, that's your problem. Un-elect them and elect people who think that taxes should apply to everyone.
Then go to Walmart, if it pleases you, and enjoy the service, the goods and the pleasant atmosphere. I must say that my only experience of Walmart comes in Poway, near San Diego.
A daughter's family is there and when I go for my morning walk around Poway, I am wont to drop in at Walmart to look around - along with other places on a two mile walk.
I very rarely buy anything. I can get most things I want cheaper at other places, but my daughter pops in there to get things and she is a good shopper.
What is noticeable is that people seem to enjoy shopping there.
This "so-called" loss of community argument is without merit, perhaps stimulated by nostalgia. If people sensed any loss they would continue to pay higher prices at the corner store. But, they don't. Given the opportunity, they go to Walmart.
I know they are inferior people unable to appreciate the community feelings from which superior people take pleasure, but I happen to think that inferior bargain-seeking people have rights too.
(I note that both left and right stand stoutly on the side of democracy - but are rather selective as to the rights the Great Unwashed may be allowed to have.)
TAXES
I don't know anything about the Fraser Institute, but they are making a good point. I notice that when more tax money is wanted, failure to supply it always becomes the death knell for education, or the road to fewer police and firemen - or, in your case, the end of clean water.
But, the con isn't working so well in the States. There is heavy suspicion in the electorate that the money goes to establish bureaucratic empires rather than into actual service.
In Los Angeles, the Catholic School District and the Board of Education work in parallel - except the Catholics get far better results from their students. They do this even though proportionally they only have one third of the bureaucracy of the Board of Education.
However (you have to be inside to know these things) the BOE bureaucracy is under-counted. If you teach one period a week before spending your time in the office - you are counted as a teacher in the statistics. This, though you spend 90% of your time being a bureaucrat. (You know - dam-ned lies.)
The average cost per student is now an annual $6,700. In other words, A classroom of 35 brings in revenue from the state of some $235,000 (I've seen many classes with as many as 42 - or $281,000.)
Doesn't that seem a lot of money to run a classroom?
I wonder if Keith knows how much is spent on an English student?
Is it understandable that people turn up a quizzical eyebrow at such an expense and are not eager to pay taxes.
According to the government's 2000 National Assessment of Education Progress report, only 30% of students were proficient in science at their grade level, while about one of four high school graduates were functionally illiterate. (I earlier pointed out that of the cream of the crop of high school graduates entering the California University system, something like half require remedial reading.
If your private school turned up results like that, you would fire them - but it's not exactly what you can do with a public school. When better alternatives are suggested the teachers union spend scads of money to stop them. Showing, of course their deep and abiding interest in the education of kids.
Since the inception of the Department of Education in 1980, more than $550 billion has been routed through the federal bureaucracy. The result? Since, the Feds began poking their noses into the pot in the 60's, SAT scores have dropped by 100 points.
Not that that money was all spent on education. The DOE Inspector General admitted to Congress that during the last three years of Clinton they had "misplaced" $450 million.
Well, as Dirksen said . . . .
Harry ------------------------------------------------------- Stephen wrote:
Arthur: It's interesting. Most of these arguments were and are used against foreign ownership in Canada. With little effect. Canadians voted with their pocketbooks as do most of those in the US who reap short term savings at the longer term cost of loss of community, both literally and figuratively.
Karen: > other points to consider ... as the Institute for Self-Reliance and The Hometown > Advantage (Stacy Mitchell) document ...
SS: This is excellent stuff. And yet, Arthur is completly right - people "vote" for these things whenever they're made available. The only cases of opposition I know of - such as the town of Greenfield, Massachusetts - occur *before* the fact when political leadership takes a stand, such as a city council refusing a zoning or building permit.
It occurs to me that in this as in so many things there is not a proper ACCOUNTING. The reason WalMart has low prices is because you're paying for that propane barbecue everywhere else where its cost is disguised (as Stacy & co. say, in property taxes, etc.).
I'd like to see some creative accounting put out that shows, say, - the real "price" of a propane barbecue at Wlamart - the real "price" of a litre/gallon of gasoline
This would be, like, a progressive rebuttal to the right-wing think tanks - like BC's Fraser Institute - that have learned to garner publicity with dishonest crap like TAX FREEDOM DAY (when to much fanfare on the day they put out a news-release explaining that "until today everything you have earned has been taken by the government; only today do you get to keep your own earnings ..." I always want to say - OK you buggers, have your tax freedom on 1 January and we'll follow you around and BILL you whenever you cost us money ... rise & shine! - flushing the toilet - 3�, brushing your teeth - 1�, use of sidewalk - 4�, traffic light - 1� ... and so on. My goodness those guys make me mad.
Has anyone done this proper kind of "social cost" accounting?
THEN people would have a better idea of whether they're saving money or whether the convenience is worth it when they choose Home Depot.
Stephen Straker
**************************************************** Harry Pollard Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: (818) 352-4141 -- Fax: (818) 353-2242 http://home.attbi.com/~haledward ****************************************************
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.486 / Virus Database: 284 - Release Date: 5/29/2003
