Outlier Solutions
Be The Outlier
LabGrab
Last.fm
Del.icio.us
Facebook
Flickr
LinkedIn
Myspace
Upcoming
Twitter
AIM: maestrojed
YahooAnti-Walmart? Then Anti-American? Why WalMart and other big business is good for Americans
Clemson has five sub shops in Downtown, three of which are national chains. These chains are everyone’s favorite. I, however, much prefer going to the local sub shop. To me, it is about supporting the local guy. Of course, subs are just an example. I feel this way about other commodities. I would rather buy my bread from a local bakery and meat from a butcher, etc (and I would, if there were such things in Clemson). I think the food quality is better; and did I mention that I like to support the local guy?
I am sure this rhetoric is nothing new. You have heard it a thousand times from a thousand hippies. The point of this rant focuses on this:
Wal-Mart just opened in our small town, despite the huge movement to keep it out, involving re-zoning, legislation etc. Even though I am all for the small guy in most cases, I was on the other side of the fence with regard to Wal-Mart. If I were to join the bumper sticker/yard sign crowd I would have made a sign that said, “I support Wal-Mart’s right to open in Clemson”. Acquaintances who are sick of my boycott of fast food chains have argued with me that this stance is contradictory. I don’t think it is.
I have expressed feelings similar to the ones I have about Wal-Mart before in other rants, but felt my message was lost because the example I used was too controversial. It’s not uncommon for people to attempt to force (via laws) others to adopt their ideas. In the long run, it never works. In my opinion this “legislating beliefs” approach is the definition of anti-Americanism (more so than any person opposing a war). You can, and should, try to inform, teach, and convince others that your opinion is right. But the second you try to force your convictions on others through legislation (re-zoning) you have chosen the wrong path. Think about it: If you have successfully convinced people that Wal-Mart is bad, then you should feel comfortable with Wal-Mart opening a store near you. If you were right, then no one will shop there; it will go out of business and close. Mission accomplished. However, if people wish to shop there then it is their choice, and who the hell are you to pass laws denying them that right?
I hope more people buy from the local guy. It is a better choice, in my opinion. However, I do not think that Wal-Mart is evil and I support Wal-Marts right to open in any town in America. People, make your own choices. Inform others, but do not pass laws forcing them to conform to your opinion.
P.S. Due to my fast typing I found out that “Wal-Mart” is in my word processor’s spell check dictionary. Coffeeman’s Bakery was not.
Tags:
25. February 2005 at 13:05
Just because the local guy is all "small town" ‘n stuff, doesn’t mean the service or the food are better. I honestly feel like I can get a better sandwich at Firehouse than I can at Peppino’s, and with less sour faces staring at me from behind the counter.
25. February 2005 at 22:02
Do we still have to drive all the way to Anderson for Sam’s to get tailgating stuff?
26. February 2005 at 09:41
I am undecided on my final thoughts of the Wal-Mart in Clemson, so I am going to go Kerry on you. I actually voted for the Wal-Mart before I voted for it, or was it the other way around?
The whole reason we have Government is to protect the common man, right? The common man can’t always be trusted to make the most beneficial decision to themselves and their community, thus there is government intervention to aid common man’s demise.
Wal-mart has a history of underpaying workers, violating child labor laws, and generally turning back the progress of communities and creating a lower standard of living. And you wonder why people want to keep it out? If you want to go to Wal-Mart drive to Seneca. Why in my day we had to walk to Wal-mart and back, uphill through the snow, but you didn’t hear me complaining.
The Mayor of Davidson, NC moonlighted as an Economics teacher at Queens University in Charlotte. He frequently talked about all sorts of regulations and zoning laws in Davidson. Only one country club is allowed. Fast food restaraunts were not allowed. Storefronts had to have windows facing the street (in order to encourage foot traffic). If you’ve been there, it’s a very pleasant place to be, and I imagine live. Quaint. Homey. Probably much like Clemson used to be before they had a Wal-Mart, and Quiznos, Firehouse, Roli-Poli and Subway competing for your sandwich dollar not on the 123 drag, but right downtown in Clemson.
So you’d think that I am against this Wal-Mart in Clemson. I dunno, maybe more against it than for it, but I also agree that over-regulation can weigh a community down as much as evil corporations.
On a side note, one of the many hub-bubs in Charlotte is whether or not smoking should be banned in public restaraunts. I personally think it should. But good lord there are so many people that *vehentmently* think that people have the "right" to smoke in these establishments so long as the owner of said establishment allows it. Does your above arguement agree? ("Inform others, but do not pass laws forcing them to conform to your opinion.")
4. March 2005 at 10:15
Well it appears that rather than fabricating vocabulary by sifting through the thesaurus and rejecting his natural speaking style Jed got liquored up for this one and stayed true to himself. Calling people hippies, pretending to demonstrate a higher standard of taste.
I hate laws, stores, and quaint small towns so its difficult to be objective, but I sure think Wal-Mart is a crummy place. Defending the rights of companies is a noble undertaking, I mean lets face it, Wal-Marts teams of acoountants, lawyers, and bags of money are no match for Clemson’s planning committee with their legislative tach and political legacy.
The argument is that allowing a Wal-Mart to develop and then wither on the vine because of a lack of community support- is better than keeping them out in the first place doesn’t seem to win me over.
A) The Wal-Mart will probably succeed.
B) The long term benefit for Clemson is?
1) Job for Jed once maestrojed.com (formally High Five Friday) folds.
2) More asphalt
3) Prestige
C) The long term harms?
1) Wal-Mart now gets a say.
2) Clemson is just even that much more generic
3) More Tailgating.
Thank you
4. August 2009 at 23:04
one word monopoly