Walmart reneges on DC store deal.

[Ishmael]

The politicos in DC are furious that Walmart has decided not to build some stores in poor neighborhoods.

Walmart v. DC


I wonder if Walmart ever intended to build them to begin with? They're money losers.

Ishmael

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Another victory for the minimum wage movement.



Keep notchin' that belt...



Then, there's also the Ferguson effect.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Have you seen the list of retailers closing stores?

For some reason, the Obama economic miracle has left people with less money to spend...



That's a victory for the ACA and its elimination of full-time workers.

So, the minimum wage movement will demand more laws to give employees more money.

 

[lovecraft68]

Wal-mart and DC? That's like people thinking Stalin and Hitler were actually going to keep getting along.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

It is an amazing study into the hate Walmart culture...

 

[kbate]

Except that the decision had nothing to do with minimum wage and a lot do with the city's need to change laws to remove anti-competition clauses in other contracts.

And that Walmart is closing stores nationwide where more than one store is in a locality or when a Walmart Supercenter can replace a smaller store.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

kbate, is Forbes a credible source?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timwors...ost-jobs-at-walmart/#2715e4857a0b2e20146057b0

Evans said that, behind closed doors, Walmart officials were more frank about the reasons the company was downsizing. He said the company cited the District’s rising minimum wage, now at $11.50 an hour and possibly going to $15 an hour if a proposed ballot measure is successful in November. He also said a proposal for legislation requiring D.C. employers to pay into a fund for family and medical leave for employees, and another effort to require a minimum amount of hours for hourly workers were compounding costs and concerns for the retailer.

“They were saying, ‘How are we going to run the three stores we have, let alone build two more?’ ” Evans said.

 

[Busybody]

kbate, is Forbes a credible source?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timwors...ost-jobs-at-walmart/#2715e4857a0b2e20146057b0

no

its OWNED by WHITE MALES

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

no

its OWNED by WHITE MALES

Pretty much.

Just opinion.

I saw the quote somewhere else this morning, but that would be dismissed as a right-wing source so I did a quick look-around for something that did not include a Beltway bias in its reporting.

 

[Ishmael]

Another victory for the minimum wage movement.



Keep notchin' that belt...



Then, there's also the Ferguson effect.

Among other things, but a good deal of the problem is a problem that goes back years.

A long time ago there was an article in the Miami Herald concerning how chain stores in poorer neighborhoods had higher prices than stores from the same chain in more affluent neighborhoods. Being the curious sort I checked it out and by golly they were right. The reason was that stores in the poorer neighborhoods had a much higher loss from theft that had to be made up for.

Flash forward.

There are three different Walmart Super Center's locally that I shop at from time to time. One is located in an affluent neighborhood, one in a middlin' neighborhood, the last is in an area of decline. I noticed several months ago that the store in the area of decline had a significantly higher presence of security and 'Stop Loss' people wandering around. So I talked to the manager and was told that the increased security was part of a corporate wide effort to reduce losses in high loss stores. So I asked if it was working? He said that they were recovering approx. $30,000/mo. in attempted theft goods!!!!!! Almost a half a million a year at that one store. The store in the affluent neighborhood? No discernible increase in security. Only a moderate increase at the middle of the road store.

Now, I have no idea as to what the increased security is costing, certainly not $30k/mo. but it's still increased overhead that has to be covered in subtle pricing strategies.

Ishmael

 

[FGB]

When Wally world has to close any size stores the economy can't be that good.

True the Dollar and Dollar General stores in this area have been trying their best to hurt those fuckers.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

Hillary is doomed because the economy is crap and getting worse.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

KCMO has a brilliant plan to get some diversity into the white 'burbs which ring it.



They extended the bus routes all the way out to Bannister Mall, a very popular shopping destination back when malls were new and fresh. Well, the inner city folk came in droves, bringing their bad habits with them and turned the former popular mall into a virtual wasteland; the good people of the 'burbs soon learned to avoid it like the plague. Before too long, it required an almost continual police presence. And this isn't racism, there was plenty of inner-city white trash involved too.

 

[Busybody]

Pretty much.

Just opinion.

I saw the quote somewhere else this morning, but that would be dismissed as a right-wing source so I did a quick look-around for something that did not include a Beltway bias in its reporting.

you wont see it in LIB media

its NOT the narrative

during the height of the debate on having a MUSLIM TERROR PLANNING HOUSE in the footprint on WTC......

NY values said WE MUST LET them do it and we must even help PAY for it

Yet the KNEE GRRRR Bronx Boro Pres said they would rather have people unemployed then allow a WAL MART in

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Ease up on the constant stream of moose-limb drivel...

K?

 

[Saint Peter]

Yeah, that is going to work.

 

[Busybody]

Ease up on the constant stream of moose-limb drivel...

K?

IGGY me

Terrorist

Do what OLDFOOL did, (aka, PishMeal) IGGY ME

 

[kbate]

kbate, is Forbes a credible source?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timwors...ost-jobs-at-walmart/#2715e4857a0b2e20146057b0

Of course a Forbes Opinion piece is the the best possible source. I really enjoy the "$0 is the proper minimum wage" at the evidence?

So you're obviously "Right" and the sole reason for this and the closure of the other couple hundred walmart stores across the nation is "minimum wage".

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I was only referring to the DC phenomenon.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

It's always "the source."


*chuckle*

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Pretty much.

Just opinion.

I saw the quote somewhere else this morning, but that would be dismissed as a right-wing source so I did a quick look-around for something that did not include a Beltway bias in its reporting.

Nailed it.

 

[Disgustipated]

kbate, is Forbes a credible source?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timwors...ost-jobs-at-walmart/#2715e4857a0b2e20146057b0

Maybe, maybe not. Let's review the quote you posted.

Quote:

Evans said that, behind closed doors, Walmart officials were more frank about the reasons the company was downsizing. He said the company cited the District’s rising minimum wage, now at $11.50 an hour and possibly going to $15 an hour if a proposed ballot measure is successful in November. He also said a proposal for legislation requiring D.C. employers to pay into a fund for family and medical leave for employees, and another effort to require a minimum amount of hours for hourly workers were compounding costs and concerns for the retailer.

“They were saying, ‘How are we going to run the three stores we have, let alone build two more?’ ” Evans said.

You see those big red parts? That denotes that FORBES DIDN'T SAY SHIT. They typed some words with no attribution.

Get it?

 

[Ishmael]

Of course a Forbes Opinion piece is the the best possible source. I really enjoy the "$0 is the proper minimum wage" at the evidence?

So you're obviously "Right" and the sole reason for this and the closure of the other couple hundred walmart stores across the nation is "minimum wage".

Most of those closures are because "Walmart Express" was a stupid idea to begin with.

Ishmael

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

The politicos in DC are furious that Walmart has decided not to build some stores in poor neighborhoods.

Walmart v. DC


I wonder if Walmart ever intended to build them to begin with? They're money losers.

Ishmael

C :kbate:

The OP; the TOPIC! Not your expansion of the topic.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Among other things, but a good deal of the problem is a problem that goes back years.

A long time ago there was an article in the Miami Herald concerning how chain stores in poorer neighborhoods had higher prices than stores from the same chain in more affluent neighborhoods. Being the curious sort I checked it out and by golly they were right. The reason was that stores in the poorer neighborhoods had a much higher loss from theft that had to be made up for.

Flash forward.

There are three different Walmart Super Center's locally that I shop at from time to time. One is located in an affluent neighborhood, one in a middlin' neighborhood, the last is in an area of decline. I noticed several months ago that the store in the area of decline had a significantly higher presence of security and 'Stop Loss' people wandering around. So I talked to the manager and was told that the increased security was part of a corporate wide effort to reduce losses in high loss stores. So I asked if it was working? He said that they were recovering approx. $30,000/mo. in attempted theft goods!!!!!! Almost a half a million a year at that one store. The store in the affluent neighborhood? No discernible increase in security. Only a moderate increase at the middle of the road store.

Now, I have no idea as to what the increased security is costing, certainly not $30k/mo. but it's still increased overhead that has to be covered in subtle pricing strategies.

Ishmael

In both examples (Florida and wherev you live now) there were multiple stores you could get to, once people found out where the lowest prices were, wouldn't they all shop there?