"Target is better than Walmart since it is prettier"

Before they drop off the front page, I just wanted to share some more comments on TV Reed's letter last week that appear on the Moscow-Pullman Daily News website. They are even more hilarious (and scary) than before.

Walmart is just ugly (I'm making an aesthetic point here not a moral one). I think that Target is better than Walmart since it is prettier and sells better quality products. But we can do better still.

*singing* "I feel pretty, oh, so pretty, I feel pretty and witty and bright!" Is this guy serious??

I also worry about being forced to deal with workers who have no incentive to be nice other than to keep their minimum wage jobs.

I love it when a plan comes together. Does this not prove what snobbish jerks these people are having to hold their noses and "deal with" the little people, the workers they supposedly are supposedly so concerned about?

With Walmart it isn't just the fact that they are a chain but the worry that they might drive out some of the other businesses that are already here.

Like ShopKo, Safeway, Rite Aid?

The people should and will make the decision. But not by democratic vote. I know that many folks SAY that these things should be settled by the market but that is a bunch of junk. If it were up to public opinion alone, then why not crack houses and sex slaves?

Kinda creepy really. Liberals are positively obsessed with dictatorships, smoking crack, and sex slaves.

Get a phone book and look at all the businesses in Pullman and Moscow. Those are pretty much the ones that are at risk should a Super Walmart move to town.

If you can't cite a study of your own, just throw the book at them, the phone book. Just like Citizen Hosick and her infamous phone book economic impact study.

Other businesses, like Target, are also bad in some of these ways but not all of these ways. Walmart is the worst of the worst.

Yeah, Target sells COOL sweatshop made stuff!!

It includes some issues which should be decided by voters and other issues which should not be decided by voters. I believe in our country but it is all the better precisely because the issue of slavery was not left to democratic vote. I think that Pullman would be better off were the issue of Walmart not left to majority vote.

Welcome to the Palouse. You are now entering a Democracy Free Zone. (Actually, I don't believe in a vote on Wal-Mart either, as we don't vote on ANY business that chooses to open in Pullman. But this does show how much PARD and the anti-growthers know the majority is against them, despite their claims to the contrary, and don't trust the democratic process to achieve their means.)

I believe in our country and in our form of government. I just think I have a better understanding of how it works than you do. Moreover, I think if it worked the way that you seem to think that it works I wouldn't love it so much.

The intellectual elite ALWAYS have a better understanding of how it works than the hoi polloi. Move over and let them drive.

Consider this. Most violent crimes are committed by men ages 18-35; most voters are women. Suppose that an election was held and the majority of people voted to makeincarcerate all men ages 18-35 given their risk for violent behavior. Would that make it right? Are you in favor of majority rule when the majority rules against your best interests?

This explains why the felons elected Queen Christine back in 2004.

I don't believe that Pullman has a local sales tax. Don't almost all of the sales tax go to Olympia? Pullman would not see much for local parks, streets, police, fire, and schools

SHEESH! CAN IDAHO RESIDENTS PLEASE STAY OUT OF THIS ARGUMENT? Thank you.

There are a lot of studies out there. Regions vary. Results vary. The payer for the studies vary. You read the studies that prop up your preconceived opinions; I, mine. Yes, there are obviously both pros and cons to having a "Super" Wal*Mart come in. Exactly how one coming to Moscow and one to Pullman would play out, we can only speculate. We can speculate intelligently if we choose to, but it is still speculation.

When conservtaives make the same point about global warming, we're labeled as "global warming deniers."

Just pointing out that (and I hate to use cliche terms) "a level playing field" would make for better (in some sense) shopping choices by consumers.

Ah, the socialist Golden Fleece of the "level playing field" rears its ugly head.

One can already purchase pretty much everything one might need locally. I do not shop in Spokane, Clarkston, or Lewiston. Have never found a need to in over 30 years.

C'mon, does anyone really believe that sanctimonious BS?

We don't have a Super Walmart and most people get along just fine. I for one moved here precisely because it was relatively low on that kind of crap. If I wanted to live in a city like that, I could just move to Lewiston. Where do I and others like me go once Pullman/Moscow turns into Lewiston?

How do I avoid the Tyranny of the Majority?

How about North Korea?

It has nothing to do with being elitist. It has to do with valuing something more than making money and saving money.

*singing* "Imagine no possesions, I wonder if you can, No need for greed or hunger, A brotherhood of man, Imagine all the people, Sharing all the world...yooo hoooo" Only someone that works for the government and has plenty of money already could make a statement like that. Explain to a poor family that shops at Wal-Mart to make ends meet that there is more to life than saving money. What imperious a$$holes these people are.

Maybe you can't tell the difference between the goods sold by Target and those sold by Walmart, for instance, but I can. Maybe you can convince yourself that purchasing goods from a company that exploits foreign labor is OK since everyone does it but I can't.

Sorry, I'm laughing too hard to comment on that one.

Technorati Tags: wal-mart walmart