Liberals and Walmart

sangha · Mar 5, 2016

Oozlefinch said:
Here is something that got me thinking a bit ago.

One thing I have noticed is that whenever a big box store like Walmart opens, a lot of the brain dead Liberals start to scream that it is going to destroy local businesses. This is repeated so often it is a cliche. They scream and rant and protest that they are doing it to destroy the economy. Yet the people still flock to them, and get 10 applicants for every job opening.

Well, recently had the announcement that the company is closing some stores. Mostly the older or smaller ones that are under performing in areas. You would think that these same people would be applauding, right? Wrong, now they are screaming that these stores are being closed from corporate greed.

Well, if what they said earlier is right, then these closures should create an opening that will allow smaller stores to open and flourish, right? Smaller stores that will employ more people and pay higher wages. These closures should create a huge number of new jobs, that were destroyed when the store was first opened.

Yea, and I have prime ocean front land for sale in Arizona.

Let me tell a fast story about one such store. First opened in 1988, it was one of the first Walmarts to open in California. Located less then 4 miles outside of a Navy Base, the location thrived. In the early 1990's my family and I shopped there regularly, it was far better then the other stores in the area. Then in 1995 the Navy base closed, and people and businesses started to leave as the economy tanked. Because of that and other issues, the store closed in 2006.

Well, here it is 10 years later, and the store is still closed. Nothing else moved into the location (not counting the homeless that break into it on a regular basis). And half of the store fronts in the rest of the plaza are now also vacant. No revitalization of the economy, it just continued to sink.

So I would like to have somebody explain to me this paradox. How a store opening will destroy a local economy, then the same store closing will also destroy the local economy. Because you can't have it both ways. And why it is evil for a company to build new stores, then evil again when it feels the need to close stores.

Where exxactly did you hear liberals complaining because a WalMart closed?

James972 · Mar 5, 2016

sangha said:
Where exxactly did you hear liberals complaining because a WalMart closed?

liberals like it because it means the fired employees can get better jobs at little old hardware, clothing, and grocery stores that reopen when Walmart leaves. In reality, a few might jobs at Amazon where ambulances line up in summer to carry away those who faint on the job in summer. whoops Walmart looks pretty good after all!!

Oozlefinch · Mar 7, 2016

James972 said:
It is like when they hated IBM as it was being put out of business by Microsoft.

Actually, IBM was not put out of business by Microsoft, they wrote their OS after all.

IBM was put out of business by the flood of less expensive computers. Like Dell, HP, Compaq, Gateway, E-Machine, and thousands of others. Until just a couple of years ago, Microsoft never sold computers. And IBM is hardly out of business, they are still one of the world leaders in servers and corporate computers. They simply left the home market, to much competition.

And ironically, Apple saw IBM as "Big Brother" and the enemy. Yet IBM created a true open-source system, and allowed anybody to copy it and make a version of their own. This created tens of thousands of other companies, from the "clone" manufacturers, to companies that made everything from printers and keyboards, to sound cards, CD-ROMs, and multiple operating systems.

Apple on the other hand maintained 100% control of every aspect, requiring their approval to sell just about anything that would be connected to their equipment. They even sued any company that might even be close to competition. A perfect example is Diamond Multimedia. Diamond made the Rio, the first MP3 player sold to the public. They did this in 1998, and after Apple made the iPod in 2001, they promptly sues Diamond, claiming that they stole their idea from Apple.

Oozlefinch · Mar 7, 2016

sangha said:
Where exxactly did you hear liberals complaining because a WalMart closed?

Trying to find the article again, since this is now over a month old I have been unable to find it.

But it had to do with how the decision to close many was due to them being in minority neighborhoods, and because they were afraid that their lying about being able to pay "living wages" would be revealed for the world to see.

Last minute, was able to find one of the articles I read several weeks ago.

Walmart Closes LA Store Over $15 Minimum Wage - Breitbart

sangha · Mar 8, 2016

Oozlefinch said:
Trying to find the article again, since this is now over a month old I have been unable to find it.

But it had to do with how the decision to close many was due to them being in minority neighborhoods, and because they were afraid that their lying about being able to pay "living wages" would be revealed for the world to see.

Last minute, was able to find one of the articles I read several weeks ago.

Walmart Closes LA Store Over $15 Minimum Wage - Breitbart

Either you're very confused, or I am:

That article says nothing about liberals protesting the closure of a WalMart

James972 · Mar 8, 2016

Oozlefinch said:
Actually, IBM was not put out of business by Microsoft, they wrote their OS after all.

IBM was put out of business by the flood of less expensive computers. Like Dell, HP, Compaq, Gateway, E-Machine, and thousands of others. Until just a couple of years ago, Microsoft never sold computers. And IBM is hardly out of business, they are still one of the world leaders in servers and corporate computers. They simply left the home market, to much competition.

And ironically, Apple saw IBM as "Big Brother" and the enemy. Yet IBM created a true open-source system, and allowed anybody to copy it and make a version of their own. This created tens of thousands of other companies, from the "clone" manufacturers, to companies that made everything from printers and keyboards, to sound cards, CD-ROMs, and multiple operating systems.

Apple on the other hand maintained 100% control of every aspect, requiring their approval to sell just about anything that would be connected to their equipment. They even sued any company that might even be close to competition. A perfect example is Diamond Multimedia. Diamond made the Rio, the first MP3 player sold to the public. They did this in 1998, and after Apple made the iPod in 2001, they promptly sues Diamond, claiming that they stole their idea from Apple.

so your point is a Republican one, namely, that govt with their guns and violence should stay away and let the market sort things out faster and better. You are missing the point about Apple. Jobs was a maniac who tried to built a monopoly everywhere then one day he just gave it all up and went into business with AT&T and lost all control. The sands are shifting all around govt and they have no clue what is happening. This is why USSR and Red China slowly killed 120 million. Stalin Mao, and Sanders, thought they understood!!

Oozlefinch · Mar 9, 2016

James972 said:
so your point is a Republican one, namely, that govt with their guns and violence should stay away and let the market sort things out faster and better. You are missing the point about Apple. Jobs was a maniac who tried to built a monopoly everywhere then one day he just gave it all up and went into business with AT&T and lost all control. The sands are shifting all around govt and they have no clue what is happening. This is why USSR and Red China slowly killed 120 million. Stalin Mao, and Sanders, thought they understood!!

Uhhh, what?????????????

For one, who said anything about Republican, or Guns? Not I, I am sure of that. So how about backing off of the sill=stupid attacks and dealing with the issue at hand, eh?
And trust me, Apple behaved no differently from 1985-1997 when Jobs was not involved with Apple in any way then it did when he was in charge. Or once he died and was no longer CEO. And this kind of behavior even dates to long before Jobs became CEO. It dates at least as far back as 1983, when John Scully was the CEO.

So the biggest problem here is that you are jumping in with pre-concieved notions, without knowing a single thing about the company itself. But thank you very much for jumping up and trying to defend one of the most nomopolistic companies in US history.

And what AT&T has to do with this, I have absolutely no idea. Thank you for playing though.

James972 · Mar 9, 2016

Oozlefinch said:
one of the most nomopolistic companies in US history.

And what AT&T has to do with this, I have absolutely no idea. Thank you for playing though.

Apple has tons of competition and a PE ration of 10 which means the future looks bleak compared to most tech companies. Where is the monopoly??