4 votes

Is it ok for Walmart to build here?

So there is a new Walmart going up near a school in my city of Albuquerque. The school is ultra liberal (but a very expensive private school). The school and the neighborhood association are starting a petition to stop the Walmart, because it will increase traffic and will be bad for the environment. I was curious, is Walmart wrong to build there? I would think when jobs are in dire need it would be a good time to build more businesses. The middle class and upper class people who are making this petition will take away jobs from the lower class people...seems a little wrong to me : / Here is the petition they were going to put up.
http://www.change.org/petitions/the-abq-environmental-planni...
Opinions?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Yes they should be allowed to build....

The Bosque school has been there for over 15 years. If they didn't want the land between them and Coors to be used for a Walmart they should have bought the land over that time. It's not like it has been a surprise that it would be developed since there has been business development all along Coors for a long time. The shopping plaza across Montano has been there for at least 20 years, maybe longer and that area zoned commercial for many years.

What we have is a a very small constituency trying to enforce their will on the neighborhood via government. If you don't like a business, don't shop there, encourage others not to shop there, etc. However, the fact that Walmart wants to put a store in that location tells me they think there is a unmet demand.

My guess is that very few of the students that attend the school live in the Taylor Ranch neighborhood. It's the wealthy telling those in the neighborhood that would actually benefit from a closer Walmart that it's not good for them. That it will harm the esthetics of those that can afford to drive their kids across the river to the very expensive Bosque school. Many of those parents sending their kids to the Bosque School would not stoop to shopping in a Walmart where they would have to mingled with the unwashed masses.

Sure they can build there

I have heard of certain cases of eminent domain being used to take property for Walmart or other economic development purposes.
If that were the case, I would oppose it.

Yes, it's OK

Yes, it should be OK from Walmart to build. I'm skeptical with protest due to increase traffic. If the school is consistent, then it should protest every single new businesses because each has the potential to increase traffic.

I do not share the concern that Walmart is driving out businesses. That's what happens in the real world. Sears drove many businesses out. Then it was K-mart. And then Walmart kicked K-mart out. What's next? Amazon maybe? A new entrepreneur with innovative supply chain system to outprice Walmart? That's how free market should be. I foresee that Walmart will no longer be dominant someday. Look at the Dow Jones Industrial Average (stock index of 30 huge US companies) in 1900 vs 2012. General Electric was the only one remained in the index from start to now. The others either went bankrupt (such as GM) or were no longer dominant (Eastman Kodak).

I have two businesses. If I big player come to my neighborhood, my choices are to run business as usual, find a way to compete (find a niche), go online, etc. I don't want to grab torch and pitchfork with the labor union, and community organizers to stop the big player from coming.

Walmart is government subsidized whereas mom and pop are not

In watching a documentary on Walmart recently, we learned that one of the ways Walmart has virtually dried up every thriving downtown shopping area(central social hub, place for locals to organically gather and discuss politics, religion, etc. etc.) in the U.S. is because the local governments give them kick backs that they refuse to grant the local mom and pop places of business.

At our own local Walmart, the police closed it down "for" Walmart on Christmas eve 2011. Several cars and officers were out front of Walmart with blue lights flashing... Who paid for that?

The documentary portrayed a creepy surveillance subculture within the employment hierarchy of Walmart as well.

The documentary should be still available on Netflix(surprisingly.)

One thing that is nice about Walmart is that they allow truck drivers and RVers to stay overnight in their huge parking lot.

I am for peace: but when I speak, they are for war. Ps 120:7
--
Better to be divided by truth than united in error.
--
The local church(not a building -a people) is the missing link. The time to build is now.

Always

.

=======
RON PAUL 2012

Why would it not be OK?

Or why does anyone presume to have the right to forbid Walmart from building?

A private entity building on private property. Why would anyone believe they should have the right/power to "allow" or deny this from happening?

That's not to say you can't try to persuade Walmart to do something different. But do you believe in freedom of only things you approve? Doesn't sound like freedom to me.

The founders believed in we, the people

Unlike the SCOTUS, the founders understood that corporations are not people. As I've said elsewhere, they were against big government and also big corporations; today we not only have both, we have them working in collusion.
http://www.reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate_accountability/his...

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

I own two corporations

Does that mean that I, as a sole member of both corporations, do not have the same right as I, a US person? If I a bureaucrat wants to investigate my business, can it do so without warrant? If the bureaucrat then obtains a warrant, don't I have the right to consult with an attorney?

If Noprivacy Inc does not have the same right as Noprivacy, the person, then bureaucrats should be able to look through my books without my consent or warrant, get inside my business office without my consent or warrant, etc.

That's correct.

You (and I) have certain human rights, rights that we as Americans believe were endowed by our Creator. It's reflected in the Declaration of Independence. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights..." It's what distinguishes us from other governments, i.e., our government doesn't grant us those rights; we grant the government the authority to protect them. As the government didn't grant them, the government cannot take them away.

Rights that belong to corporations are a different entity altogether. God didn't create the corporation. Man did. WE grant corporations their rights. I hope you will read this article that briefly explains things.
http://www.reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate_accountability/his...

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

wtf

This is one of the most ridiculous comments i've seen in the dailypaul, " the founders understood that corporations are not people" what are you talking about? were there even any decently sized corporations at the time? I'm not even sure branding existed. The constitution is a great piece of legislation , however, the thought that the founders could be against big corporations is laughable, Washington had hundreds of slaves yet those corporations were the scum?

Anyway walmart has the right to build wherever it can, given they have the proper permits.

Uhhmmm Ever hear of the East

Uhhmmm

Ever hear of the East India Company...

"Wisdom, Tenacity, Focus"

Assuming that's what you meant, thank you for the compliment. But if you found my comment ridiculous, I guess we're not on the same wavelength. What I find ridiculous is that, in the case Santa Clara County v. The Southern Pacific Railroad, in a sidebar note (not even that the case was ruled based on this argument), it was opined that the Fourteenth Amendment, i.e., the equal protection clause - that applied to "natural persons" - should be enjoyed by corporations as well. Thus was set a dangerous precedent still causing problems today. That slippery slope! As Americans, we believe our rights were endowed by our Creator; and God created all men as equals. God did not create the corporation, limited partnership, or fiduciary trust. And it's absurd to consider you, me, Walmart, and Monsanto as equals. Please read: http://www.reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate_accountability/his...
As to corporations at the time of the founding era, here's one I can think of offhand: The East India Company. Remember how people disguised as Indians dumped its tea into Boston Harbor, sparking the American Revolution?

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

Government is the Problem.

I think a lot of people tend to disbelieve that Corporations are comprised OF people and thats an important fact. Corporations who successfully supply the Demand of Good's & Services to people at lower prices are to celebrated. this is the full meaning of Capitalism [Which DOES NOT mean you are Pro-Business]. The Problem is when Government see's Corporate taxes as a source of revenue to make big bucks and give special privileges because Corporation make a lot of money. However, who receives the burden of these high Corporate taxes and Special Privileges...WE DO! Corporations are comprised OF people whom ultimately receive the shit end of the stick when Government sticks its ugly foot in the door distorting the Free Market.

Are Corporations People?
http://youtu.be/9b-w7GOTqSY

What should we Think About Chain Stores?
http://youtu.be/IwvscMJNM5U

His name is Edward Snowden

What is Capitalism?
http://youtu.be/yNF09pUPypw

GIANT CORPORATE BANK HOLDING COMPANIES ARE THE PROBLEM

Large Corporations are just as inefficient as government.

Yes Government Runs a total Protection Racket for Walmart, a large corporation.

Hillary Clinton was an attorney who sat on the corporate board at Walmart for decades under Sam Walton.

She was instrumental at getting Walmart access to cheap goods out of China through protectionist trade agreements named to fool people into thinking it was free trade... but the policies were all about creating a protectionist framework for Walmart to operate without international competition from small business owners who were already at a economic disadvantage due to economies of scale... the trade agreements/treaties saw to it that there was no viable competition for Walmart and other favored global racketeers in their international trade schemes.

Global Bank Holding Companies (who own Walmart) and their corporate business (Walmart) OWN GOVERNMENT. Government is merely their hired guns... thus Clintons call for 100,000 more militarized police officers.

BANK HOLDING COMPANIES ARE THE PROBLEM
.

you are completely right

you are completely right about some entities owning gov'ts.

Do you have any links you'd recommend so I can look into bank holding companies a little more?

We don't need...

....More American Capitalism from Walmart - we all know what that means (massive corporate profits for the few, outsourcing jobs by the thousands, part-time labor with little benefits). What we need is true blue American Capitalism from manufacturing and innovation

Preparation through education is less costly than learning through tragedy

Seems to be coming down to free market but anti corporatist

Is Walmart free market innovation or another government-corporate merger?

There is nothing strange about having a bar of soap in your right pocket, it's just what's happening.

i suspect it's the latter

i suspect it's the latter

Historically, WalMart

Historically, WalMart destroys local small businesses in the areas they build. I've watched it happen in my area. They sell cheaply made items at low cost so that the better businesses can't compete in price. The local businesses have to offer higher wages to keep their help and simultaneously lower their prices to compete. Eventually, it drives them out of business entirely. I watched a thriving little main street in my area become a run down haven for bars and thrift stores instead of retail businesses because of WalMart. The town overall became poorer which caused more subsidized housing etc. The retail stores couldn't compete, and some that had been there for a hundred years went under once WalMart moved into town. WalMart is a slippery slope.

Blessings )o(

Not to sound like a troll,

Not to sound like a troll, but I'm surprised anybody is considering long term development anymore in that part of the country. From what I understand, weather patterns are only going to get worse and that's only going to result in water shortages.

As a new mexico resident...

We are fine on water lol google san juan river project and the aquifer under Albuquerque. Albuequerque is second highest amongst phds per capita. We have a crap load of gray matter here. In fact when the housing bubble bursted new mexico faired much better than anywhere else. Albuquerque is growing a lot actually man :P

That's what I would've

That's what I would've thought, but I keep hearing all this crap from people who keep saying water's going to be a problem in the near future. I'm trying to figure out who's right so I know whether I should invest in these water projects.

I have read

the climate in the SW as it existed when Europeans first
settled (and which has not changed that much, at least until
fairly recently) is/was not representative of what the climate is
like there permanently.

Supposedly, they arrived during what is actually a period of
relatively abundant rainfall, but the overall conditions are usually
much drier. Within the last thousand years there is evidence of
droughts of as long as 50 years - and even longer ones within
the last 2000 years.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/people-places/anasazi.html?c=y...

this page has a 2000+ year precipitation reconstruction for NW New Mexico:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/cliihis1000.html

Note that rainfall is unusually consistent and drought period
minimal for most of the 19th and 20 centuries compared to
the periods before that.

People who live in deserts probably ought to develop lifestyles
that take that into account...

When Wal-Mart

comes to town they will sell thier items at a loss which can be absorbed by the other stores to drive out the mom and pop businesses. After the competition is gone the prices go back up.

They recieve tax deferments from the city for a set number of years.

The majority of thier goods are not made in America, If they were anything but a profit driven corperation they would be damanding that thier goods being sold would be produced in American factories by American workers.

The biggest negative is the money is pulled from the community going to Bentonville, Arkansas and not recycled thru other transactions within the community. If you care about you town or community local businesses then shop them instead of Wally World.

By all means fight to keep Wal-Mart out of your community. Yes they give better prices on some items but at what cost to your locals?

Walmart makes a lot of their

Walmart makes a lot of their money because so many people are unwilling to wait to buy something of quality later when they have enough money, that they'd rather buy substandard junk, have it break, and then turn around and buy it over and over again.

Most of the stuff Walmart has that is very competitively priced is in fact junk. When it comes to the few times they actually sell something of decent quality, there really isn't much difference in price compared to other stores.

As for me, I'm not only extremely picky about what I buy, but also willing to spend extra money for something that will last, which is why, just as an example, instead of buying those Gillette 5 bladed women's razors for men at ten dollars a pop, and then buying them over and over again, I shelled out $250 for a quality Thiers-Issard razor which holds a fine edge and only has to be stropped once every six months. What I spent on that razor is what most men would spend on replacement blades every two years, but I have something which will last forever, that I can hand down to my children, but only have to buy once.

Usually I buy things off of Amazon or specialty websites (classicshaving.com in the case of my Thiers), and about the only things I buy at Wally World are perishables and shaving soap.

Amazon is considered to be the greatest threat to Walmart's market, but again impatient and impulsive buyers will keep them in business at least until human nature changes.

I can't believe

I agree with the king of trolls. Go figure. I guess everyone has some common ground.

i dont know if it's possible....

but do you have any facts to back that up? I use things I buy at wal mart for a long time.

https://twitter.com/#!/Agonzo1

It's all about freedom.

Study what Dr. Paul says about free markets and the intiation of force (through a Planning Commission or Zoning Board) and make your own decision. Keep paying the Main Street merchant a 50% markup on your t-shirt and the local grocer a 50% markup on your food or choose Wal-Mart. My small town went through this about 20 years ago and we won. We have a super Wal-Mart that offers a much larger variety of food at a much lower cost.

Albuquerque Is Desperate

Walmart is indicative of a city desperate for a quick source of tax revenue. It's a lot easier to tax one Walmart than 10 different mom and pops. The consumers will feel richer but the profits will go to outsiders rather than the mom and pops. Yes Walmart is more efficient but then so is a concentration camp.

The solution is for E2e1el to help create an alternative monetary system for his city to keep wealth circulating locally. The easiest would be a debit card backed by gold and silver. If this card were available only to locals it would fix the economy and make Walmart a laughable proposition.