[Winona Online Democracy] Please, let us not do innuendos or guessing-games, and stay with verifiable facts. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert P Kaldunski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "terri hyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 6:35 PM Subject: Re: FW: [Winona] Wal-Mart
> [Winona Online Democracy] > > Terry there is a person in this town has almost a monopoly of a business > Bob K > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "terri hyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 3:49 PM > Subject: Re: FW: [Winona] Wal-Mart > > > > [Winona Online Democracy] > > > > Looking at the 1995 City of Winona Comprehensive plan, under the section > > titled Manufacturing, it lists the Riverbend project. I haven't been able > > to find the original newspaper articles outlining the proposals for the > > sales tax to pay for dredging the lake and filling in the land, so I can't > > verify what was originally and officially stated as the purpose of the > > project. My recollection is that the dual purpose was to improve Lake > > Winona and to provide land for light manufacturing, thus improving both > > Winona's aesthetics and recreational possibilities as well as attracting > > good paying jobs to Winona. > > > > My scan of the on-line articles available on the Winona Daily News site > > reminded me that before Menard's participation, there was a proposed $25 > > Million mall but the developer pulled out, and Menards stepped in, with a > > contingency on the part of the city that other retail establishments would > > be located at the site in addition to Menards. > > > > For me, Wal-Mart operates on a totally different scale than any of the > other > > big boxes because of its enormity. We would all object if a single > > businessman owned every or nearly every business operating in Winona. > Yet, > > Wal-Mart will essentially be a small town business district, contained in > a > > big box, and owned by a single business entity which isn't headquartered > > here and has no local interests here, aside from taking whatever profit it > > can. Wal-Mart will not use our local banks (and will probably try to > > compete with them by opening its own branch of its own bank), our local > > accountants, our local contractors. Unlike locally owned and operated > > establishments, Wal-Mart has no interest in the Winona community of > Winona. > > If Winona's purchasing power dwindles because of the number of businesses > > lost due to WalMart, WalMart will simply abandon its big box and move on > to > > the next town. It won't sell it's vacant property, but will hold on to > it, > > leaving us with an eyesore and empty shops. > > > > Wal-Mart will foist its responsibility towards its employees onto the > city, > > county and state by not providing affordable insurance coverage and by > > paying such low wages that its employees will be forced to turn to > community > > foodshelves and other publicly funded services. If Wal-Mart were not a > > wealthy corporation that could well afford to provide better for its > > employees, perhaps this could be less egregious. Wal-Mart has knowingly > > engaged in deceptive advertising practices, and has a terrible track > record > > with regards to labor laws, gender discrimination, and consumer safety. > > There are murmers of anti-trust lawsuits being brought against WalMart and > > other 'big box' stores that engage in predatory pricing practices. There > > are a number of people who are predicting that in a few years, Wal-Mart > will > > experience an implosion--will collapse. To me, this makes WalMart a bad > bet > > for Winona. > > > > Terri Hyle > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Kathy Seifert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >CC: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Subject: Re: FW: [Winona] Wal-Mart > > >Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 11:18:33 -0500 > > > > > >[Winona Online Democracy] > > > > > >Bryon (I'm assuming and adding a friendly reminder to sign all posts!): > > > > > >Thanks for sharing this to clarify. I had a sense that Bob and David > were > > >on different wavelengths, but couldn't put my finger on it! Now I see > that > > >the decision David referred to was the supreme court's--not a local > > >decision > > >by our county or city officials. This is an excellent example of how > what > > >happens on the national level is significant to us locally! If I'm > > >understanding correctly, this historic decision seems to have been > pivotal > > >to the development of more corporate power in America? I imagine the > > >arguments for and against this decision are as numerous as those for and > > >against Wal-Mart coming to Winona. It seems as though Wal-Mart couldn't > > >exist and the Enron tragedy couldn't have happened without that pivotal > > >decision and others that followed. I can also argue that we wouldn't > even > > >be able to have an online discussion forum without it--the technology > would > > >never have been deveoped without the corporate environment. It still > > >leaves > > >us with the question of what our community wants and what vision guides > the > > >decisions of elected officials. > > > > > >In a sense, it comes down to the "reactive vs. proactive dichotomy"--or > do > > >we as a comminity jump at the chance of a big box coming to town because > > >one > > >expresses interest or are we consciously courting this kind of commerce > > >because it is what we want? Can any one answer the question of whether > > >this > > >was the intention of the city when levying the tax for the dredging? Was > > >it > > >a "Field of Dreams" (i.e., If you build it, big boxes will come") kind of > > >thing or was more of trying to create the opportunity for options where > > >none > > >existed previously? I think those intentions make a significant > difference > > >and I don't really know the answer--plus it's difficult to know what is > > >true > > >and what is conjecture. Maybe Jerome or some of the other media folks > who > > >have followed this more closely can enlighten us with facts? > > > > > >Kathy Seifert > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 9:11 AM > > >Subject: Re: FW: [Winona] Wal-Mart > > > > > > > > > > [Winona Online Democracy] > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wal-Mart is not an individual; therefore, it should not claim the > > > > > "right" of equality. > > > > > Individuals that interact with the corporation such as officers, > > > > > employees, or contractors do and should have rights. > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately, this is not the case and serves to highlight the > > > > > irrational status Corporate person-hood has catapulted itself to > over > > > > > the last hundred years. A court clerk, without prior debate thought > > > > > otherwise and essentially gave corporations person-hood. Over time, > > >the > > > > > precedent has been repeatedly exploited by corporate lawyers, yet > the > > > > > precedent has never been debated. It is time to end what was started > > >by > > > > > the actions of a court clerk. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wal-Mart is not an individual; therefore, it should not claim the > > > > > "right" of equality. Individuals that interact with the corporation > > > > such as officers, > > > > > employees, or contractors do and should have rights. > > > > > > > > I really think this is a fascinating issue. Below is a short excerpt > > > > from a good discussion available here: > > > > > > > > http://www.adbusters.org/magazine/28/usa.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then came a legal event that would not be understood for decades (and > > > > remains baffling even today), an event that would change the course of > > > > American history. In Santa Clara County vs. Southern Pacific Railroad, > a > > > > dispute over a railbed route, the US Supreme Court deemed that a > private > > > > corporation was a "natural person" under the US Constitution and > > > > therefore entitled to protection under the Bill of Rights. Suddenly, > > > > corporations enjoyed all the rights and sovereignty previously enjoyed > > > > only by the people, including the right to free speech. > > > > > > > > This 1886 decision ostensibly gave corporations the same powers as > > > > private citizens. But considering their vast financial resources, > > > > corporations thereafter actually had far more power than any private > > > > citizen. They could defend and exploit their rights and freedoms more > > > > vigorously than any individual and therefore they were more free. In a > > > > single legal stroke, the whole intent of the American Constitution -- > > > > that all citizens have one vote, and exercise an equal voice in public > > > > debates -- had been undermined. Sixty years after it was inked, > Supreme > > > > Court Justice William O. Douglas concluded of Santa Clara that it > "could > > > > not be supported by history, logic or reason." One of the great legal > > > > blunders of the nineteenth century changed the whole idea of > democratic > > > > government. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This message powered by EMUMAIL. -- http://www.EMUMAIL.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy > > > > All messages must be signed by the senders actual name. > > > > No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list. > > > > To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit > > > > http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona > > > > Any problems or suggestions can be directed to > > > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the > Contact > > >page at > > > > http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy > > >All messages must be signed by the senders actual name. > > >No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list. > > >To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit > > >http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona > > >Any problems or suggestions can be directed to > > >mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact > > >page at > > > http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* > > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail > > > > _______________________________________________ > > This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy > > All messages must be signed by the senders actual name. > > No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list. > > To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit > > http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona > > Any problems or suggestions can be directed to > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact > page at > > http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy > All messages must be signed by the senders actual name. > No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list. > To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit > http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona > Any problems or suggestions can be directed to > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at > http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org > _______________________________________________ This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy All messages must be signed by the senders actual name. No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list. To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona Any problems or suggestions can be directed to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
