www.ditl.org

People over estimate the damage companies like Wallmart does.

They say more Mom'n'Pop stores are better. Wallmart and like stores have more product range, lower prices and services smaller stores cant offer. I get sick of people bitching about big chain stores ruining the world.

Teaos wrote:People over estimate the damage companies like Wallmart does.

They say more Mom'n'Pop stores are better. Wallmart and like stores have more product range, lower prices and services smaller stores cant offer. I get sick of people bitching about big chain stores ruining the world.

I don't give a crap about Mom n Pop. I maintain that there should always be a number of options in any market. Any one company having sole dominance in any given market eliminates the element of competition - the only thing worthwhile about capitalism at all. Without it, you have a corporate dictatorship, or monopoly, which used to be illegal in this country. Thanks, deregulation!

No competition? Just here in my city of 400k people we have Kmart, Briscoes, Warehouse, Supershed. I believe in America you have several other such as Target ect. There is plenty of competition.

I agree that one big company is not great but 4 or 5 is bloody good for the comsumer.

Heres something for you to ponder. If Standard oil had never been broken up a hundred years ago we most likely wouldnt of had the oil crisis of the 60's and today.

Teaos wrote:No competition? Just here in my city of 400k people we have Kmart, Briscoes, Warehouse, Supershed. I believe in America you have several other such as Target ect. There is plenty of competition.

I agree that one big company is not great but 4 or 5 is bloody good for the comsumer.

Heres something for you to ponder. If Standard oil had never been broken up a hundred years ago we most likely wouldnt of had the oil crisis of the 60's and today.

We have a few Targets around here, and Sam's Club (also owned by Wal-Mart), and that's it in terms of that type of business, besides Wal-Mart.

And, if there was only one oil company for the last hundred years, you don't think they would've raised prices as much as they want by now? We'd just have a different type of crisis. I'm really just pissed off at the deregulation of power companies, and other utilities. They know we don't have any other choice but to pay what they ask, since there is no longer any government oversight. Uzume's power was out for 16 days this month, but they sent her an "estimated" bill (they aren't reading meters this month) for $200. There's nothing she can do but pay it, because there's no one to complain to.

My gripe with Wlmart and such isn't just that they close down small stores and put people out of work, its that they promote the shipment of manufacturing jobs overseas which cost even more jobs. Think about it, back in the day things costed more but you made a lot more in comparison, now you make crap and prices haven't gone down that much really.

And, if there was only one oil company for the last hundred years, you don't think they would've raised prices as much as they want by now? We'd just have a different type of crisis. I'm really just pissed off at the deregulation of power companies, and other utilities. They know we don't have any other choice but to pay what they ask, since there is no longer any government oversight. Uzume's power was out for 16 days this month, but they sent her an "estimated" bill (they aren't reading meters this month) for $200. There's nothing she can do but pay it, because there's no one to complain to.

And if prices had been higher 50 years ago maybe we would have alternative energy now?

We would have alternatives if people with massive stakes in the oil business weren't in office.

The government isnt to blame for everything.

If the public had wanted it they would have got it. If you want to blame people for our reliance on oil look in a mirror (referring to everyone, not you especially)

Teaos wrote:...If you want to blame people for our reliance on oil look in a mirror (referring to everyone, not you especially)

Certainly not. If people like me were the only voters, this would've been a moot point twenty years ago. I don't believe every moron in America deserves to vote. Or have children. Or even drive. In fact, they're lucky to be allowed to occupy space at all.

At the very least, a battery of tests should be administered to anyone who wants to vote. I'm sick of idiots making major policy decisions, or at least, choosing what issues are important. Who cares what issues are important to imbeciles?

KuvahMagh wrote:

Monroe wrote:And add a freaking Protective Tariff to EVERYTHING we import.

That won't do much, then you get smuggling and the fact that some 80% of your Oil Supply is not American, Oil prices then go up, Heating goes up, gas goes up, food goes up. All your prices rise in turn and there is no guarantee it will create jobs. Putting conditions on certain trade would probably help more than an outright tariff on everything. You also need to look at your Capitalistic System. Companies like Walmart have done so much to destroy your economy, some people don't even realise it until someone points out that you don't see alot of smaller shops around anymore.

Oh forgot about oil. I suppose all nonenergy goods should get a protective tariff.
It'd generate a ton of federal revenue and bring back jobs to the US as American becomes cheaper.

As for ruining economies like Mexico, China, and India.. meh

Even if I had to spend 5 or 10% more for goods, I'd rather pay American workers than have everything come from China or Mexico for sure.

Tsukiyumi wrote:Even if I had to spend 5 or 10% more for goods, I'd rather pay American workers than have everything come from China or Mexico for sure.

Exactly. I think that's the majority of American's thinking. If the tariff increased foreign good prices above that of American it would force companies to return jobs to America. And people would still have the choice to buy foreign. The extra money would funnel into the federal government. To say pay off the huge debt.

This whole topic amuses me a bit at times. I make my living in big-ticket sales, and I have ALL of my future in equities, yet I still fail to see what some of the drama is. Look at the stock markets; over any ten-year period, even from 1925 to 1935, the markets have ended higher than they started. Secondly, the current recession is largely comparable in cause to 1987 - high-risk loans, prevalence of ARM's, lending over LTV, etc. - and that huge removal of liquid money from the markets righted itself with a comparable influx within weeks. Thirdly, the failing of CMO's, CDO's, etc. - while certainly based on shady practices - has a critical mass; there is a definite, and relatively close IMHO, point at which the total possible losses from those dealing will have been realized and that particular chapter closed.

The fact that people my age and younger - who should rightly have their futures in equities, because over that time frame they WILL grow despite current snapshot appearances - are going into things like near-zero T-bills because of a gut feeling of security rather than the strength of will to look at the long haul is really what is going to extend and magnify the crisis, rather than the actual spec trading and dummy rating of junk loan funds.

Wow Mikey, most of that went over my head... I would just like to point out in the wake of Mikeys intelligent answer that I still dislike Walmart for what it has done to local economies lol.