smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Michael Bennett" <mrhonorama@hotmail.com> |
| Subject | Re: All I'm sayin' |
| Date | Thu, 04 Dec 2003 07:53:55 -0600 |
[Part 1 text/plain (7.1 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
For an off-topic debate, I find this Wal-Mart thing to be more fascinating
than the norm. What I find troubling in the jousting over what Wal-Mart's
role in the demise of the downtown is the all-or-nothing tone reflected
below. Whether or not Wal-Mart is the root cause of said demise, if
Wal-Mart has exploited conditions that made the demise of the downtowns
possible, then it is in part responsible for it. (Analogy -- in autopsies,
a medical examiner will note a cause of death and also contributing causes
-- Wal-Mart (and McDonald's, etc.) may very well qualify as a contributing
cause).
The two positions (urban sprawl/town planning v. evil Wal-Mart) do not
necessarily have to be diametrically opposed. Since it seems, at some
level, that they are interrelated, it would be more informative to figure
out how they fit together than to get into a 'my johnson is bigger' type
argument where neither side (or at least one of the most vocal arguers on
one side) is able to concede that the problem is far too complex to state
with absolute certainty that you only blame one thing on the demise of the
downtown.
Mike Bennett
Record reviews and more at http://fufkin.com
>From: Stewart Mason <flamingo@theworld.com>
>Reply-To: audities@smoe.org
>To: audities@smoe.org, audities@smoe.org
>Subject: Re: All I'm sayin'
>Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 02:06:04 -0500
>
>No, I just had forgotten that all downtowns everywhere were doing just
>swell, goshdarn it, until 1962, when the first Wal-Mart opened in Arkansas,
>an event so cataclysmic that just about every downtown area -- even in
>towns that wouldn't get a Wal-Mart until a quarter-century later -- went to
>shit overnight.
>
>In response to Josh's Stewart's Just A Big Meanyhead post below, I can only
>offer the possibility that Josh is just upset that when confronted by
>counterarguments by myself, Ron, Bobby, Jason and others -- not one of whom
>is claiming that Wal-Mart is the greatest thing since sliced bread, even
>the one of us on their payroll -- his initial statement that "Often
>Wal-Mart will open up outside of town on a highway or intersection between
>two towns-- to draw retail traffic from each-- and destroy the downtowns of
>both in the process" doesn't really hold water. It does not take into
>account that the vast majority of American downtowns were already dying by
>1962, when the very first Wal-Mart opened in Arkansas, and were well and
>truly shot to shit LONG before Wal-Mart started its major national push in
>the mid-'80s. It does not take into account the fact that Wal-Mart builds
>its stores on the outskirts of town and in unincorporated areas between
>towns (see footnote below) for a variety of factors that are far more
>important to their business model than some cockamamie Doctor Evil glee at
>putting the screws to the mom-and-pops, such as: 1. land is much cheaper
>there; 2. that's closer to where people actually live; 3. zoning laws are
>much more relaxed there; 4. there's enough room to build an enormo-box
>store and the acres of parking without having to buy two dozen small
>parcels of land in the process. It's a simplistic, reductive argument that
>transfers people's anger towards those companies who are exploiting the
>real problem instead of directing their anger where it really belongs: at
>city charters and zoning laws that encourage urban sprawl instead of the
>infill and mixed-use development that it has been proven time and again is
>absolutely necessary to revitalize downtowns, and at people who would
>rather have a McMansion on a 1/3 acre lot 30 miles from downtown so that
>they have room for their big honkin' SUVs rather than living in a smaller
>house in an urban area where they might be able to (you freaks!) WALK to a
>supermarket or a restaurant and (goddamn commies!) TAKE PUBLIC TRANSIT to
>their jobs.
>
>I know that Wal-Mart in particular and urban sprawl in general is a
>hot-button topic for me -- I spent the entire six years I lived in
>Albuquerque as part of an active lobbying team that I'm proud to say has
>done one whole hell of a lot to revitalize Albuquerque's downtown in the
>face of various kinds of opposition -- and I apologize for any offense I've
>caused on the topic. But I firmly believe that limiting your outrage just
>to the corporations misses the most important part of the problem. It's
>not just Mega-lo-mart's fault. It's the fault of the city planners and the
>city councils, and ultimately, as Ron so eloquently said, it's the fault of
>the people who don't even recognize that there are possibilities other than
>living in Pinewood Estates, shopping at Wal-Mart, eating at McDonalds and
>driving 24.6 miles to work every morning. If that's what people genuinely
>choose to do and they have their reasons, great, more power to 'em.
>Personally, I grew up in suburbia, I shop at Wal-Mart sometimes, I have
>consumed *way* more than my fair share of Big Macs over the last 34 years,
>and I understand that you have to go to where the job is. But the
>fundamental underlying problem is that too many people don't even think
>that they might have other options out there. If you're going to be angry
>at anyone, they would be my first suggestion.
>
>They're the same people who only listen to the music that the major labels
>and Clear Channel have chosen to push this quarter, because they don't
>bother to spin the radio dial or venture past the front CD displays at Best
>Buy. There, I even made this vaguely on-topic.
>
>(Footnote: As Jason pointed out, Wal-Mart hasn't penetrated Massachusetts
>much (pun most definitely intended), and that's largely because this state
>HAS no unincorporated land! There is not a single acre of Massachusetts
>that's not part of a city or town, which makes it impossible for Wal-Mart
>to work in its accustomed manner. There's only one Wal-Mart Supercenter in
>all of Massachusetts, in Ware, in the south central part of the state.
>Even it's about 2/3rds the size of the average Supercenter. And I admit
>that I shop there when I happen to be in that part of the state. Because
>that Wal-Mart Supercenter is the only place within 400 miles of
>Massachusetts where I can buy Ranch Style Beans, Pioneer country gravy mix
>and White Lily flour, and by god, I'm a southern boy and I need the food of
>my people. If they carried frozen green chile and Mrs. Baird's cherry
>pies, hell, they could erect a statue of Sam Walton in the middle of
>friggin' Boston Common as far as I'm concerned.)
>
>S
>
>PS: 8-P (orright, Greg?)
>
>
>At 10:07 PM 12/3/2003 -0800, Greg Cagle wrote:
> >Looks like Stewart forgot the emoticons again 8^).
> >
> >- Greg
> >
> >Josh Chasin wrote:
> >
> >> Of course, the possibility that I understand you perfectly and that it
>is
> >> you who aren't hearing me, is too absurd to even be on the table. So
>I'll
> >> just shut stupidly up now. Thank you for the free lesson though. You
>do
> >> seem to dispense them freely, and I felt like I wouldn't be one of the
>cool
> >> kids till I got one.
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Cell phone ‘switch’ rules are taking effect — find out more here.
http://special.msn.com/msnbc/consumeradvocate.armx
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.