When have you ever considered the impact on neighborhoods ... the massive traffic stores like this bring and the effect of driving out small neighborhood stores?

Surely, not lately. After all, Walmart will bring jobs (forget that they don't pay that much, that's just a hook for Quinn and the unions).

Maybe they could promise some outside group some benefits and buy their way into an area. That's the ticket!

Start working on your laundry list so you can roll over and get behind the corporation. You don't need a CBA, now you can institutionalize a CSP - Community Standards Platform. Make it a local law!

Hey Yassky is running for something, he'll be an easy one to introduce that. Maybe Avella. He was bought-off on the Yankees with virtually nothing and Carrion's fake CBA. Maybe Rivera? Help out that Bronx slush fund. John Liu would go for it as long as it's not near Flushing. How about Willets Point? That's right. make it a world class destination. Walmart can be part of that and so can all the poor people. Oh, sorry, there already are poor businesses in Willets Point. Well, it's OK to move them. After all, what's a little shuffling and forcing people out of business?

To be serious, I agree with you. Walmarts are bad for the city ... but your argument is constructed around one issue only. And give your other statements, if they were to deal with the jobs issue, you would roll over.

And you need to rise above the apparent reality that shoppers are looking for lower-cost alternatives.

It's an interesting question - if Wal-Mart paid good wages and was unionized, would it be as much of a problem? There's a good argument to be made that if Wal-Mart were bringing wages up - much like major employers like the auto companies did during the 40s and 50s thanks to the UAW - rather than leveling wages down it would be a much less problematic company.

If that were to happen (along with better health benefits), then one argument goes away. But there are other arguments against Wal-Mart, which these progressives seem to ignore: the impact on neighborhoods with traffic (they are what's known as regional stores, not local stores) from any store of considerable size, and the impact on local retailers. In one small town I know, A Wal-Mart opened up and within a few months put a Kmart on the other side of town out-of-business. You can easily kill off a local shopping corrider which would irreparably hurt the stability of a community. On the other hand, especially in NYC, local retailers are not always cheap, and getting even less so with the policies being advocated by some of the posters on this blog.

So the reasoning of Crains is one that needs to be confronted. How do you preserve your local retailers (in some areas they have been there for generations) while opening up more affordable shopping?

Can someone enlighten a conservative free-marketer from the midwest (where almost everybody shops at Wal-Mart)? I don't get all of the anti-WalMart stuff. As long as they are not breaking any laws (and this requires vigilance) what's wrong with low wages and benefits in order to keep the business profitable? If they are attracting employees, then they must be competitive with other employers. Aren't they contributing by providing jobs? If the wage benefit package isn't adequate, people can go elsewhere. If Wal-Mart is the best option, then aren't they a benefit to th ecommunity, not an evil corporate giant?

Much of that might be true in the midwest, where there are free markets to be had. That's not the case in NYC. In many midwestern cities you have your nice residential areas with all the shopping centers with Kmarts, Walmarts or whatever, located on the outskirts, surrounded by huge parking lots. The older model had a Macy's-like store in the central city, with satellites. Many such cities had a Northland, Eastland and so on. Pick your city ... many were like that.

But if Walmart succenly decided to open up in the middle of your residential area, across the street from you, turning your nice neighborhood block into a congested grid-locked highway, then presumably you would have a fit. That's the case here.

Some of the people on this blog, however, do not look at this issue, or the impact on local stores (which are the lion's share of a local economy). They concentrate on jobs, deciding that any bad development is OK as long as it gets jobs for lower-income people. And they want equity and parity.

Nothing wrong with that as they don't roll-over when they get a little parity and say it's OK to put it on your tree-lined street (that's the problem with fake liberals in NYC).

But on the parity issue, is that so different from auto workers in large midwestern industrial plants that demand fair wages? Look at Detroit, or Flint, MI. The UAW spent decades establishing fair wages for their members there (and in surrounding states).

You also have a more diversified economy in the midwest. Other than Detroit, the mid-sized midwestern cities are more diverse. That leads to a better market for jobs. NYC is more like Detroit in that they are putting their economy in one or two baskets. So when one industry tanks, it impacts the entire region.

So to answer your question that if jobs/benefits aren't adequate, they can go elsewhere. Well there really is no elsewhere. Wal-mart is monopolistic. It may be difficult to see some of this through your perspective, but live here a few years and your perspective may change.

Thanks for the 'NYC' perspective. I hadn't considered the local economic side as much as the 'worker exploitation' argument that I tend to hear more often. Anyway, hope things work out for the best - if they don't, come on out to the midwest - there's plenty of room.

Hey Anon- do you actually read this blog or do you just harp on one thing and pay no attention.

Its clear that DMI is anti-walmart period. You are conflating organizations you have beef against with every organized group in NYC. DMI isn't a membership based organization, its a think tank not a constituency group. There has been stuff on this blog before about the need to preserve local businesses, against chain stores and to preserve the uniquness of place. All that stuff. But you have beef against the world so you didn't even notice that.

Nobody here's supporting stadiums and development boondoggles. Hell I saw Mark at DDDB events.

Have you read Mark's classic post "Calling the Question of ACORN" ?
I'm tired of this straw man fight you are waging. Pay attention to what people are actually saying and stop just projecting your worst suspitions everywhere.

I'm a DDDB member and I think your attacks on Adrianne are totally unwarrented.

thank you arg.

Whether or not DMI is a membership group or not isn't an issue -- the contributors here are a mouthpiece for DMI whether you like it or not. I haven't seen much here about preservation, but to the extent there has been some, it's belied by the agenda of certain groups who -- even if they aren't explicit in their claims, nevertheless are supporting displacement agendas. And one of those groups is Jobs with Justice.

Yes, I'm familiar with Mark's Question on Acorn, but I haven't questioned Mark's intentions or actions. I think you are the one conflating criticism against some as the same against everyone. The criticism is not against Shropshire personally, but some of the agendas his group pursues.

I HATE WALMART!!!!!! It's a parasite.