The Herald reports the megachain is looking to open one OR MORE baby WalMarts (only 42,000 square feet) inside the city limits. They've already been meeting with the BRA and Mike Ross, among others, in pre-hearing meetings, but not to head off any public controversy about how they will destroy neighborhood shopping districts for miles around but to convince city officials that Bostonians would give their first born to shop at a WalMart.
Ed. wager: How much would anybody bet that their first store will be nowhere near Hyde Park?
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
All they have to do is build
By anon
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 12:34pm
All they have to do is build luxury condos on top and the BRA will slobber over the contracts so much they won't be able to sign them without a waterproof pen.
And!
By Kaz
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 1:57pm
If they put it right on the Common, imagine all the cost savings for not having to keep the park up any more!
Not actually a bad idea
By eeka
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 11:38am
You know what WOULD be cool? If Target or Wal-Mart built a scaled-down urban store right downtown. They could sell only things that can be carried home. There's a Target in downtown Minneapolis that's smaller and right on a walkable downtown street, and it's pretty awesome. I think there are other urban Targets too. Don't think Wal-Mart has done this yet.
It could get some of the "flee the city at 4:59 p.m." crowd hanging around a bit and shopping in the city, and possibly bring in some of the Dorchester/Hyde Park/etc. crowd who hop in the car and go to the burbs for all their shopping/entertainment.
(If it were Wal-Mart who opened this sort of thing, I think they'd need to rebrand a little though to be successful with consumers like myself. I'm pretty anti Wal-Mart largely because of the business model of building giant warehousey stores with sprawling parking lots out front and paying no attention to promoting walkable and sustainable neighborhoods. I would have no problem shopping sometimes at a business owned by Wal-Mart if it were a branch of Wal-Mart that was opening downtown/walkable stores, since I'd be supporting business figures for something I agreed with a bit more, instead of just Wal-Mart. I'd have no problem adding to their overall profits if there were also figures breaking down how regular Wal-Mart is doing versus, uh, Small-Mart. And yes, I fully admit there being some brand/image elitism here; I would not become a Wal-Mart shopper, but would become a Small-Mart shopper provided they called it something cooler. And got rid of the giant signs about falling prices.)
I'd much rather get a Target.
By HenryAlan
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 12:45pm
I'd much rather get a Target.
there's one in dorchester...
By anon
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 12:59pm
there's one in dorchester...
There already is a Target in
By paulhma
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 1:13pm
There already is a Target in the South Bay Shopping Center.
Watertown, Also
By Suldog
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 1:20pm
If you don't mind a short bit of travel, there's one in the Watertown Mall, too.
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Yeah, I meant another Target.
By HenryAlan
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 1:21pm
Yeah, I meant another Target. Sorry about not being more clear.
Tahh-git
By John-W
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 3:05pm
And there's one just over the border in Revere behind Suffolk Downs.
Yes, I think there are enough Targets.
For the record
By HenryAlan
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 3:11pm
I don't object to either store setting up shop in Boston, whether it's Wallmart's first, or Target's second. I actually find it kind of annoying that Boston residents have to go out to the burbs for this kind of stuff. But I have a personal preference for Target, so....
Um
By eeka
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 11:39am
What's with the white-trash possessives? The sign does not say "Target's" on it.
apostrophe is correct
By Ron Newman
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 11:50am
as he's talking about "Target's second store".
OHHH
By eeka
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 11:55am
I'm so used to annoying illiterate people that I can't even parse punctuation correctly anymore! ;o)
(I think "Wallmart" threw me off and made me expect others...)
And Union Square, Somerville, too!
By dga
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 3:30pm
Which is not at all far from Boston.
No. Just no.
By anon
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 12:46pm
I really hope the BRA has more sense than this, but I doubt it. Do we really need this? Why not support local shopping areas instead of letting this behemoth come in.
choice
By Rich
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 1:20pm
Why not let everyone decide for themselves where they want to shop?
I don't really care about shopping at Wal-mart myself, but I don't see why they shouldn't have the ability to build here like any other major retailer. We already have Target, what's the big difference?
It doesn't work that way
By anon
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 3:15pm
It doesn't work that way because of externalities. Small stores contribute to vibrant and walkable communities and raise real estate values for neighboring stores. They create more "social profit" than they capture, so they're at a competitive disadvantage compared to Wal-Mart.
Big-Box versus Big-Box
By Rich
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 4:47pm
I see what you are trying to say, but we already have big box stores in Boston and this one would be smaller than many of those. So, again, what's the difference between Target and Best Buy; and Wal-Mart?
Why is Boston discriminating against this store?
A few differences
By Kaz
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 6:07pm
Well, one big difference would be Best Buy.
They're pretty much only electronics (and some home appliance). They're not quite the same "squash all local retailer" type place as a Wal-Mart or Target.
As far as Wal-Mart v. Target, it's a MUCH smaller difference. Targets usually get better marks for cleanliness, friendliness, and customer service in general. But one thing that breaks it for me is that Wal-Mart frequently only sells censored music and other media or refuses to sell the item at all. I haven't heard of many things being banned from sales in a Target...if anything.
Target bans Salvation Army bellringers
By Stewart
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 6:15pm
And my late mother-in-law--who credits the Sallies with her not freezing to death or dying of starvation as a child--was absolutely bullshit about that.
But to your other point...squash WHAT local retailers?
Say I need a tube of toothpaste, a bag of cat litter, some paper towels, and a package of shoelaces. What "local" (meaning, I assume, non-chain mom-and-pop stores) retailers can I go to in the city of Boston where I can buy even two of those items at the same time?
The local retailers were squashed long before Target and Wal-Mart got to town.
Another reason to shop at Target
By eeka
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 11:08am
The City of Boston should also not allow Salvation Army bellringers, since Salvation Army violates Boston nondiscrimination laws. They shouldn't let religious institutions violate laws in regards to employment etc. except as pertains strictly to their religious practice, as in, hiring requirements for clergy and such.
They're a religious organization...
By JPSouth
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 11:11am
that told gays to take it walking at the height of the AIDS epidemic. Plus, they're not selling anything, they're taking. Considering Target's already extensive list of charitable partners, the Salvation Army shouldn't be surprised that their prejudiced posteriors were kicked off target's property.
"Say I need a tube of toothpaste, a bag of cat litter, some paper towels, and a package of shoelaces." Wow, do you ever step out to the world beyond your apartment. Living in JP, I can rattle off a handful of such places in my neighborhood alone. If I think of the South End, Back Bay or Beacon, there are plenty of places on Tremont, Newubury and Charles Street to do such things. You just have to sniff them out, which I understand can be difficult for a suburbanite acclimated to "center" (i.e. mall or strip mall) shopping to comprehend.
"The local retailers were squashed long before Target and Wal-Mart got to town." Maybe this is true in Dedham or Natick, but that's certainly not the case here.
And yeah
By eeka
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 11:20am
You can get all that stuff at most hardware stores, pharmacies, grocery stores. Had the original commenter wanted to make a point about big-box stores, you gotta at least toss in some camping supplies, office supplies, housewares, clothing... ;o)
Levels of localness
By eeka
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 11:17am
I'd also rather see certain chains than others. Chains like Trader Joe's or Whole Foods follow more of a community-minded ethical business model than Target or Wal-Mart (and yes, I know, not direct competitors in terms of range of goods sold). They tend to open in existing buildings without modifying them heavily, get involved in donating to and promoting neighborhood events, and have a corporate culture that encourages people to work there long-term and get to know their neighborhood and their customers. They also tend more toward developing/sustaining walkable and transit-oriented areas.
In terms of threatening local business, the one-stop-shopping model itself is what threatens local business. These places thrive because there are people who'd rather buy all their things at one place and don't care about customer service or expertise. I personally would rather buy a bike at a local bike shop where the people work there for years at a time because they're avid cyclists and believe in providing bikes for the community. I also think that such a place is more beneficial to the community than a big-box store where people can buy bikes, but there's no expertise or customer service because people aren't working there because of their strong commitment to providing all sorts of cheap goods to the community.
I'd go to....
By Not logged in
Mon, 01/31/2011 - 12:05am
My local, independently owned drugstore to buy the toothpaste, and then across the street to my local, independently owned hardware store to buy the kitty litter and the paper towels. They might have the shoelaces, too, or I could go next door to the local, independently owned shoe repair place. Total distance walked and would be less than from the car to the front door of Wal-mart; total time in cashier lines would be less. Price would be higher, but then again I'd run into at least two neighbors I know and enjoy saying hello to them.
Yeah, that's another thing
By eeka
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 11:45am
Politics aside, Target just appeals to me in general because of the hipper image and marketing, but the fundieness of Wal-Mart turns me off as well. The censoring isn't even them choosing to only sell high-quality music/books with positive/empowering/inclusive messages, as many local bookstores do and which I'm fine with -- it's backasswards fundie censoring, where dirty words regardless of context are not OK, violence and objectification of women are OK, discrimination against most groups is OK, any reference to anyone who is not a fundamentalist Christian is a perceived attack on Christianity, etc.
That may be true, but...
By Not logged in
Mon, 01/31/2011 - 12:00am
... people (like me) who believe in walkable, liveable neighborhoods can put our money where our mouth is, and shop at local neighborhood stores. Others may not hold those values, and instead can pursue the lowest possible price by going to Walmart, ignoring the externalities.
It always bothers me to hear "Wal-mart killed Main Street," or "Wal-mart put our wonderful local independent drug store out of business." Wal-mart did no such thing. It is the people who chose to shop at Wal-mart rather than on Main Street that killed Main street, not Wal-mart.
Good for you, Sparkles
By Stewart
Mon, 01/31/2011 - 12:37pm
But here in my walkable, liveable neighborhood in Allston, we have three drugstores: a Rite Aid, a CVS, and a Walgreens. So much for local and independently owned. Same for the hardware stores. There *is* a shoe repair shop, and it's possible he sells shoelaces, so I'll give you that one.
Thanks for playing, though.
Are you a shut-in?
By StealMySunshine
Mon, 01/31/2011 - 12:47pm
If not, how did you miss your independent hardware store on Harvard between Brighton and Cambridge or your little corner shops like Linden Suprette and Sunshine, all of which sell the most basic of toiletries.
Model Hardware--which is a
By Stewart
Mon, 01/31/2011 - 2:34pm
Model Hardware--which is a great store that I do shop at regularly, thanks--does count as a locally-owned business, but its affiliation with Ace precludes it being fully independent. Ace Hardware stores are locked into a specific national distribution system for many of its products, and therefore can't switch suppliers if another distributor is offering a better or cheaper product. Locally-owned, yes. Independent, not entirely. (I don't know if the same is true of Aborn's relationship with True Value, I don't shop there nearly as much.)
I've seen the "most basic of toiletries" for sale at Linden Suprette and Sunshine. Most basic is right. Sure, I could buy a bar of soap there, but then I'd have to go to one of the chain drugstores to buy something to treat the rash I'd break out in after I use it.
All I'm saying is that it's already pretty fucking hard to support local and independently-owned businesses here in good ol' walkable and liveable Allston, long before a Wal-Mart opens anywhere around here. I repeat: Wal-Mart is a symptom, not the disease.
It's tough . . .
By Chris Dowd
Mon, 01/31/2011 - 12:52pm
. . . to support local businesses now . . . because there are just fewer of them in everything. Basically- I try to buy coffee at local coffee houses and a few small grocery shops- and my barbershop. Now- even big hardware stores like Home Depot and Lowes are advertising the services of their in house "contractors". That can't be good for local independent tradesmen. Ehhh- pretty soon everything in this country will be owned by corporations with tax shelter HQ's in Delaware.
Ace and True Value hardware stores are local businesses
By Ron Newman
Mon, 01/31/2011 - 1:02pm
These are brand names of buying cooperatives that many local hardware stores belong to. The national branding helps the stores' marketing efforts, and provides some uniformity of product lines, but the stores are still locally owned and operated.
Here in Porter Square we have an excellent Ace store called [url=http://www.TagsHardware.com]Tags[/url].
Good to know that . . .
By Chris Dowd
Mon, 01/31/2011 - 1:49pm
. . . cause I do go to the True Value on Salem Street in the North End quite a bit.
How about letting local
By anon
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 1:44pm
How about letting local people decide for themselves?
"Local people"
By JPSouth
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 11:12am
I love that it's only anons from Bentonville making assertions about Boston's "local people."
In other words, I'm right.
By anon
Mon, 01/31/2011 - 1:15pm
In other words, I'm right.
In other words, you molest sheep
By JPSouth
Mon, 01/31/2011 - 1:39pm
As long as we're using "other words" whose meaning has no bearing on what was just said.
Spoken like a true Jamaica
By anon
Mon, 01/31/2011 - 4:12pm
Spoken like a true Jamaica Plain hipster.
My work here is done
By JPSouth
Mon, 01/31/2011 - 5:50pm
Now off to pry myself out of these skinny jeans, torrent the new Fleet Foxes album and go to City Feed to have a really invovled conversation with a seemingly disinterested barista just to show I'm a regular there and totally know her. I've got snow tires on my fixie and I'm ready to roll.
Local Shopping
By captaingeneral
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 2:01pm
What local shopping?
My point is that in many towns, local shopping went bye-bye with the advent of the malls and very few people shop local. People shop at Wal-Mart because the stores are cheap and affordable and if you are on a shoe string budget (or not), you shop at Wal-Mart.
Funny, we hardly bat an eye when Starbucks locates all over the place like a cancer but when Wal Mart wants to build, look out. What is that all about?
Reputation
By LifeStar
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 3:37pm
Walmart had gained a reputation of undercutting its local competition by offering prices on items that were significantly lower than what the local mom and pop stores could compete against. Eventually those stores would go out of business and once all the local competition is defeated, Walmart brings their prices up to what the avg. pricing is at the rest of their locations.
People feared that Starbucks would have done the same, but Starbucks also went through the big bloat phase. They couldn't maintain their growth with their actual revenue, so they've shrunk in the past few years.
Another angle though, which isn't popular by any means, is to look at the typical demographics that shop at either stores. Who would be the typical shopper at a Walmart vs. the one who'd shop at Starbucks? I think, unfortunately, there is a bit of underlying classism that we're afraid to acknowledge openly in our society.
Not entirely earned reputation
By Stewart
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 4:14pm
My father was a district manager for another discount store chain in the south and southwest in the 1970s and '80s, just as Wal-Mart was just starting its expansion out of Arkansas. That reputation that "Wal-Mart kills downtowns" is largely unearned, because in the majority of cities and towns that Wal-Mart moved into during this period, the downtown shopping areas were already dead or dying long before--and by long before, I mean years and sometimes decades--Wal-Mart moved into the area. Downtown shopping areas started going into decline in the 1960s and early '70s, a downturn sharply accelerated by the early 1970s recession. Wal-Mart did not start expanding outside of its regional base until the 1980s.
I am by no means a Wal-Mart apologist, but when it it comes to collapse of downtown merchants, Wal-Mart is a symptom, not the disease.
I think the Wal-Mart of today ....
By Michael Kerpan
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 4:34pm
... is rather different than the early Wal-Mart. For instance, Sam Walton placed a big emphasis on "made in America" (and on employee co-ownership) -- not exactly characteristics of the company these days.
Only an urban legend
By Ubermonkey
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 5:39pm
The idea of Walmart raising prices once the competition has been wiped out is a common critique but has no basis in fact. Their whole business model is to be as relentlessly cheap as possible.
"No basis in fact"
By JPSouth
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 11:23am
http://consumerist.com/2010/08/turns-out-walmart-h...
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-15/wal-mart-...
Whatever, dog. I can go all Miracle on 34th Street on you and provide more evidence if you'd like.
I present as evidence
By eeka
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 11:52am
...the United States Postal Service, a branch of the U.S. government, has just delivered all these giant price tags ending in .83 and .47 to Wal-Mart.
Let me translate from English to knuckledragger
By JPSouth
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 11:45am
"What local shopping?"
Hey, that sounds like a personal, suburban problem. Here in Boston, over in Gloucester, out in Northampton and elsewhere in this state of ours, local business is doing just fine. I'm sorry that DedhamNatickistan is overrun with box stores, strip malls and "lifestyle centers," but that was the path they chose. They offered up their town centers to the gods of commerce and paid dearly for it.
Here in our town and Cambridge, however, the Dunks and D&D share space with Jp Licks, City Feed, Espresso Royale, 1369, Darwin's, Tosca's and other shops just fine. Folks who live near Centre and South Streets in JP, Tremont Street in the South End, Coolidge Corner in Brookline, the Fenway, Inman Square, Central Square, Harvard Square, Davis Square, Union Square, etc. have an abundance of local shopping -- despite incursions by chains.
We hardly bat an eye at Starbucks -- far more cancerous -- Dunk's because both at one time or another got too big for their own good and had to contract. Also, because our local shops do a pretty good job of hanging with them on both price and quality. In other words, they're able to coexist. Target, also, keeps its breadth of items reined in and manages to coexist. Wal Mart doesn't do coexistence, which is why they're getting a pretty harsh welcome on this board.
Have you ever been outside
By anonfromboston
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 12:13pm
Have you ever been outside the people's republik? It doesn't sound like it.
Ooh! Am I a "socialist?"
By JPSouth
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 5:58pm
Talk that sweet talk about lib-ruls, "real" jobs and "real" 'mer-cuh. Unattributed talking points thinly disguised as personally ideology really turn me on.
P.S. You're "from" Boston like I'm from Wasilla. I'm guessing the last time your family lived in Boston, your forbears were still scraping the Auld Sod from their shoes.
I bet Menino puts them in the Filenes site
By anon
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 1:11pm
Menino has been begging to get Target into the Filenes site, which is the same type of big box chain as Wal-Mart. Both are big conservative donors and although the branding at each company targets slightly different people, the majority of the products, the neighborhood destroying quality, and low wage jobs are similar.
It always confused me why people didn't care if Target came in and put all the local businesses out of business when WalMart is seen differently. I think its a class thing, that walmart is seen as hillbily and target is seen as Ikea-light. End result is the same.
Another thing to compete with NYC on
By downtown anon
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 1:15pm
So who wins the race, Boston or NYC?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/13/nyregion/13walma...
And is the winner the first to get a WalMart or the one
that holds out the longest?
What-ev
By Roslindalian
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 1:33pm
Although I would probably never shop at Walmart, we already have many big box stores littered around, and within, the City like Target, Home Depo, Best Buy, Staples, the Dollar Store, etc. and it has not killed off local small businesses in areas where people cater to them. That is to say, it has not killed them off anymore than the advent of the shopping mall in the 1960s already had before the big box stores arrived.
I think the stores that are probably more worried about this are the other big box retailers and super market chains. You can bet that Target is dusting off its lease at South Bay right now to make sure there is an exclusivity clause somewhere in there. I think the fact is that if you live in a part of the city that currently has a robust small business community, its probably because the people in your neighborhood like those businesses and are dedicated to going there, as they certainly have plenty of other options already. Walmart isn't so different from the other options that it is going to make those people change their habits.
A large walmart store in a
By anon
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 4:37pm
A large walmart store in a mall would shut down target best buy stop and shop and every thing else in a 10 mile range. in a years time. and if thier profits dont add up. they have no qualms about shutting the store down and moving on like a circus. they get the town to give them tax breaks ect when the stuff hits the fan there gone. one day they will build a complete store in china complete with workers and stock. put it on a barge in boston harbor or international waters and you will have to convert your money to yen and take a ferry out to shop. walmart is china and china is walmart. we bailed out general motors and they have a big foot print in china.dont be suprised if they relocate there to get from under the unions
Comparing Target and Walmart
By MovingForwardor...
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 1:48pm
I have never shopped at a Walmart store. Do they offer anything besides the lowest prices? Are their prices comparable or even lower than Target?
Comparable, yes
By Kaz
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 2:39pm
Besides low prices, they offer "one stop shopping". A "normal" Wal-Mart usually has groceries, electronics, clothing, housewares, auto supplies, a pharmacy, and a little bit of everything else.
Compared to a Target, their prices, selection, and product range are pretty much neck-and-neck. Wal-Mart tends to beat Target in food sales though. Here's a good article from last year's Time Magazine comparing the two.
And that's why Wal-Mart often destroys business districts
By Ron Newman
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 2:57pm
Because it isn't just competing with one of the local businesses -- it's competing with ALL of them.
I think...
By eeka
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 11:26am
that the Wal-Mart/Target comparison is kind of like the Whole-Foods/Stopandshop comparison.
Just anecdotally from having been in both stores (though only in Wal-Mart 2 or 3 times, and Target fairly often), I think they have comparable prices in terms of brand-name identical items, but I think Wal-Mart stocks more ridiculously cheap bottom-of-the-line items. I remember seeing stuff at Wal-Mart like 57-cent piece-of-crap coffee mugs, which Target generally doesn't do. Clothes too; Target seems to have a basic minimum standard, and actually sells a lot of expensiveish brand-name clothes, but Wal-Mart was almost all store brand or unheard-of-brand cheaper than cheap clothes.
Quincy's not good enough?
By Kaz
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 1:56pm
I think it's less than a mile from the Red Line in Quincy and the 225 bus runs right past the place anyways.
If people in Boston were clamoring for an accessible Wal-Mart, then the one in Quincy would be out of stock daily. I'm betting it's not.
Where would this thing go? South Bay somewhere? Allston? (heh, I'd almost wish they'd want to move into Allston so I could hear Berkeley's head explode from my house)
"(heh, I'd almost wish they'd
By anon
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 1:58pm
"(heh, I'd almost wish they'd want to move into Allston so I could hear Berkeley's head explode from my house)"
LOL!!!
Roslindalian
By Roslindalian
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 2:07pm
There are actually a number of vacant or underutilized industrial properties around the City that the City has been trying to get developed into comemrcial retail for a while (including one in Hyde Park). Think of what South Bay used to be (vacant Sears freight station and vacant meat processing plant). Transformation of one of these properties into a commercial, income and job generating, location would probably be an overall boon. However, if they are seeking to put one of these in one of the existing business districts, I think they are going to have a fight on their hands. That just seems impracical anyway.
+1 for the Berkeley
By anon
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 2:07pm
+1 for the Berkeley reference.
Honestly...
By Stewart
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 4:34pm
I suspect Berkeley and his group would support a Wal-Mart in Allston. I'm completely serious. His rationale for the group's opposition to the pizza place on Western Ave was that they didn't want more restaurants in the neighborhood, but that they wanted retail.
I bet you that if Wal-Mart bought a tract at Western Ave and the Birmingham Parkway and built a store there, they wouldn't have one peep of opposition from the ABA.
Dinner at Stone Hearth?
By Kaz
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 5:04pm
They want retail, sure, but at the cost of traffic? Berkeley gave Lowe's the stink-eye in 2007 over traffic. He battered Stone Hearth with the "chain pizza joint" and "treating us like Homer Simpson" broad brushes. Wal-Mart would be FAR worse than a Lowe's on the traffic impact level. It is the chain-iest chain that ever chained a chain. And I think People of Wal-Mart will give you an idea of the kinds of Homer Simpson that shop there.
Besides, the only place in Allston that they'd get the kind of space they want would be part of Harvard's parcels. I don't think the Galactic Empire teaming up with Mordor would create an equivalently evil group in Berkeley's mind as Harvard and Wal-Mart becoming best friends.
not psyched about it but...
By anon
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 2:02pm
...it would create jobs. Maybe they can build it next to the Hi-Lo/Whole Foods in JP ;)
"jobs"
By dga
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 3:33pm
Create the kind of not-quite-fulltime jobs that swell the rolls of the food stamp program. That's the main reason I would never shop at Wallmart
Seriously, anon from Arkansas
By JPSouth
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 11:18am
Do you have any idea what the wage of those "jobs" is or the benefits plans? There are stacks of documentation showing Wal Mart's inability to provide a living wage and the burden it places on already overburdened and underfunded public programs. I'm shocked Bentonville wasn't holding pep rallies for single-payer universal health care, as it would have taken them off the hook completely and made their approach look all the more legitimate.
I didn't know indentured
By anonfromboston
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 12:11pm
I didn't know indentured servitude was still allowed. People apply to work at WalMart. If they don't like the pay or benefits they can quit or not apply. Some people are just happy to have a job. Not everyone can work in the ivory tower you peer down at everyone from.
"Are there no workhouses?"
By JPSouth
Sat, 01/29/2011 - 6:12pm
Oh that ivory, ivory tower where more than half of America works. Tell us again how unless you're digging ditches or smelting ore, you're not working. 'Cause everyone can empathize with that.
People apply to work at Wal-Mart because of a dearth of other options, not because it's one of a tremendous amount of choices for them. They join because the same society that ridicules them into guilt for being on the dole for some reason has no problem with them being both on the dole and at a job that provides them little compensation and no benefits. They could make twice as much working at a Shaw's with better benefits.
Working at Wal-Mart in the 2000's is like working at McDonald's in the 80s and early 90s -- a last resort for those with nowhere else to go. It's a pretty shitty choice, and the reason we folks "in the ivory towers" work hard to get into good schools and hone the gifts we've been given and work even harder to do our jobs well and avoid layoffs. People who go through vocational training do much the same -- attending great schools like Ohio Diesel and taking on a ton of hours that they're well compensated for.
Response to Ed. wager
By Kaz
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 2:03pm
Be careful what you wish for or they'll end up putting it on top of Millennium Park so all of Hyde Park can bask in its giant neon blue-and-white glow! Mwhahahahaha!
Seriously, though, don't jinx yourself.
A betting man, eh?
By adamg
Fri, 01/28/2011 - 2:11pm
We're not going to see a WalMart in Hyde Park or West Roxbury.
Hyde Park's obvious: Look who lives there. West Roxbury because they know how to vote there.
Roslindale Square is out, both because of size (42k may be small for GigantoMart, but it's huge for that area) and because some of the mayor's bestest friends live there (there's a reason there's a Staples on Washington Street and not a CVS; just drive around to Corinth Street to see why).
I could see it on American Legion Highway by the Stop & Shop (with the radio on), and it would be sort of appropriate there, given there used to be a Bradlee's there, but I need to stop giving them hints :-).
Pages