Bill
wrote:
Harry, Wal-Mart is cheap and I do shop there. Something about the end of
small stores and the fact that Wal-Mart and others use basically a
temporary work force that will have to live totally off of SS at the end
it would appear.
There
are other points to consider.
As the Institute for Self-Reliance (www.islr.org)
and The Hometown Advantage
(Stacy Mitchell) document, communities dominated by corporate chains are
worse off economically than are diverse economies maintaining small-scale,
locally owned enterprises.
Here is Mitchell's list of why, paraphrased by yours
truly:
1.
Jobs and taxes. A new Home Depot will not sell anymore hammers and nails
than 3 local hardware stores - it's supply and demand. But because the
Home Depot will eventually force the local stores to decline, all the
revenue exchange goes out of town rather than staying local. For every 1 job that a Wal-Mart
provides it takes away 3 previous jobs.
2.
Public costs. Land use patterns accommodating big corporate retail
contribute not just to sprawl but the costs of additional roads, sewers
and fire and police protection. This adds to the costs local taxpayers are
already paying without adding to the revenue base when corporations have
received lucrative tax incentives.
The community bears the brunt of the investment and gets a small
return in the long run.
3.
Multiplier effect. Indie
retailers keep their profits local, and tend to trade goods and do
business with other local operations, such as accountants, lawyers,
advertisers, printers, and of course, local banks. Chain stores not only distribute
from giant national warehouses but produce their advertising and do their
other support tasks outside the community in which they build. Sending your consumer dollars to
Arkansas (much less offshore banks- kwc) is not good for community
sustainability in the long term.
4.
Fewer Choices. Consolidation
of buying patterns reduces choices and the range of products available to
the consumer. You can see
this on your grocer's shelves when mega buyers demand more shelf space or
at the bookstore where one Barnes & Nobles is just like every other in
terms of selection. (What about local culture and color? - kwc)
5.
Monopoly Prices. Surveys
found that prices vary significantly from one major chain outlet to
another and are higher in areas where the local competition has been
eliminated. This includes
Wal-Mart and Home Depot.
(Note lawsuits where unfair business practices are proliferating -
kwc)
6.
Long-term Commitment. Local
merchants are residents of the communities they invest in, it's where they
pay their taxes and raise their children, whereas global chains are highly
mobile. In addition to
demanding tax incentives to come into a community, when they leave with
changing economic winds they leave behind large properties not well-suited
to other development, and in fact often hold their leases for years to
keep competitors from coming in, so that vacant big box stores are now a
common blight - by itself, Wal-Mart has almost 400 empty stores across the
US.
7.
The Big Picture. Economic
research being gathered shows that cookie cutter developments lessen a
community's appeal to entrepreneurs and skilled workers and in the long
run reduces prospects for new investments and jobs.
Too
many of us for too long have assumed that bigger is better, that the
liabilities are offset by the advantages, or this is just "the price of
progress". Aside from the
environmental and social/civic costs to the community when local
businesses are displaced, there is the even broader issue of democracy and
sovereignty, since large corporate chains are wielding their assets
long-distance. What needs to
be addressed here, those who are studying this seem to be saying is, level
the playing field with public policy. For those of us in industrialized
countries staring at sprawl and closed businesses with high unemployment,
we should be addressing the rules of doing business at the local level
more intelligently and aggressively. I am a cultural Globalist but want
to see local businesses have as much given to them as the big corporate
houses. Who needs a
monoculture? It's all about
balance and moderation. -
KWC
Also
see Failed
Empire,
a four part series in the Buffalo News concerning enterprise zones and tax
incentives http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20030608/1048744.asp
or
contact me offline for a compiled Word document.
