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.
