It is maddening how we don’t have a Walmart in Boston. This hurts people who live in Boston by making it more difficult to save a few on daily essentials. On top of that Walmart employees are often given benefits they would not get at a small business.
Comments
drtywater OP t1_ixzdcmh wrote
Walmart should pay more but they do offer 401k how many of these small businesses offer those to employees
TotallyNotACatReally t1_ixzgni7 wrote
I mean, it's been a while since I was on food stamps, but I can absolutely say that when I was, I definitely couldn't afford to have any of my income earmarked for retirement. Might as well offer free fuel for private planes as a benefit.
aimed_4_the_head t1_ixzhzrb wrote
Oh hooray, a severely underfunded 401k in exchange for my food security, how can I resist that offer?
drtywater OP t1_ixzidrx wrote
What small business was paying more though? I always think this argument was dishonest as the pay was typically more then what a small business would be paying
HoneydewOk1731 t1_ixzvcfa wrote
Yep just a bunch of smarmy elite liberals with their WFH jobs who have never actually worked retail. It’s just cool to hate on corporations
SkiingAway t1_iy3pk9y wrote
Uh, a lot of them. If your employer is large enough to offer benefits in general, it's probably going to have some kind of retirement account option.
Anyway, a 401k isn't money. It's just an account you can put money into with tax benefits for retirement. A worker at Walmart is unlikely to be able to save more than the IRA contribution limits, which is an account they could open on their own.
Google suggests Walmart will match up to 6%, which is decent but nothing exceptional. Regardless, that's basically the entirety of what their benefit amounts to.
If you make $15/hr, and save 6% to max out the match, with Walmart's match it's like you make....$15.90. Not exactly earthshaking.
BeastCoast t1_ixzbgsd wrote
You work in their PR department or something?
SteamingHotChocolate t1_ixzf4dd wrote
Disagree, but just to indulge the topic: where do you propose putting one and which businesses are ok for it to displace in doing so?
Yak_Rodeo t1_ixzxhz5 wrote
there are plenty of open lots along blue hill ave or american legion
drtywater OP t1_ixzi95i wrote
It doesn’t need as much space. It can be setup similar to Target in Fenway. Tremont Crossing would be one area. I would also say West Roxbury, or even Watertown could work. For who it would impact itd be more Target, BJs, Ocean State, and Home Depot that would feel the pressure from it
Pinwurm t1_ixzs81v wrote
Wal-Mart has tried to build “city stores” like Target, and they all mostly failed. Within cities like Boston or NYC, Wal-Mart simply has too bad a reputation of ruining local economies and paying substandard wages. They weren’t drawing enough customers to justify expenses, they weren’t attracting enough workers. Most city residents preferred groceries at an actual grocery store - and other goods at Marshall’s and TJ Maxx (which, btw, do great here). For everything else, there’s Amazon.
As well, there is a Wal-Mart in nearby Quincy, Lynn and a massive one in Saugus. These are Boston suburbs no different than Watertown, and heck - Quincy has T access. You don’t have to go far to get your Walton fix.
comphike1 t1_ixzmd13 wrote
There is one in Quincy, and its relatively easy commute.
seinfeldfiend83 t1_ixzvco6 wrote
watertown already rejected a walmart once iirc.
Victor_Korchnoi t1_ixzny2e wrote
You can order stuff from Walmart.com
threwawaywaywayway t1_ixzphay wrote
As a working class person - Fuck Wal Mart. I consider it a point of pride to not shop there.
mshelikoff t1_ixzdpba wrote
My view is that you're only considering primary effects with no consideration of secondary and tertiary impacts. In addition to not having any Walmarts around here, local governments should do all they can to not welcome or get rid of other big-parking-lot monsters from the last century like Home Depot and BJs Wholesale Club. They all have the net impact of delivering wealth from the poor to the already-super-rich.
How many decades does the local, regional, national, and global economy need to suffer from increasing inequality before people like you finally figure out that the key to helping working class folks is systemic change that intentionally decreases the Gini Coefficient instead of giving people the so-called-freedom to only throw money at the rich for daily essentials after all other options have disappeared?
HoneydewOk1731 t1_ixzwhos wrote
Try explaining to a single mother buying diapers why she should care enough about the Gini coefficient to go spend more money somewhere else. Corporate leadership is paid too much. Aside from that, they are cheaper to consumers because they are more efficient with their resources. Environmentally and economically. Economies of scale and all that
mshelikoff t1_iy0vfyu wrote
Yes, with modern systemic hypercapitalism and citizen powerlessness in the US, corporate leadership is paid too much. That's one part of the story. You forgot every other part of the story.
Investors and venture capitalists are also paid too much, and workers are paid too little. Those are other important parts of the story.
But the most important part of the story you forgot for your particular example of explanations to a single mother buying diapers about why she should care about the Gini coefficient is the complete absence of cash benefits in the US for being parents. Luxembourg, Belgium, Austria, Germany, Canada, Ireland, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Norway, Netherlands, and France ALL pay THOUSANDS in cash each year to single mothers for being single mothers in addition to the free child care and the huge period of paid time off they receive if they choose to raise their kids in their own home without using the free child care.
Do you believe the single mothers in those civilized places are upset when they see American mothers paying a few pennies less for diapers in Walmart than they pay for local products when their local governments support them as parents instead of abandoning them?
Idiot.
If you don't even know what systemic change is then don't waste pixels arguing against it.
HoneydewOk1731 t1_iy103w2 wrote
Alright your first point didn’t stick at all so now you are all over the place, assuming you know what I think about socialist policies
mshelikoff t1_iy110x6 wrote
My first point:
> the key to helping working class folks is systemic change that intentionally decreases the Gini Coefficient
Your blathering idiocy:
> Try explaining to a single mother buying diapers why she should care enough about the Gini coefficient to go spend more money somewhere else.
My second point:
> If you don't even know what systemic change is then don't waste pixels arguing against it.
You think my first point didn't stick because you don't seem able to read for comprehension.
drtywater OP t1_ixzil1s wrote
Its not quite that simple. They do offer some benefits you can’t get at small places. People blame big box retailers for poorly run businesses going out
mshelikoff t1_iy0xylv wrote
Oh it's all so very complicated when wealthy investors from faraway lands with authoritarian rule put some of their wealth into NYSE:WMT instead of investing it all in nearby oppression. What those investors with connections to Erdogan's AKP party in Turkey or to the Qatari government want is for Walmart to help local working class folks in small-town USA because that's the community they care about, right? It's all about those benefits that you can't get at small businesses. Consumers like me should be so grateful to foreign investors when a big box store pops up nearby. What a great point. It's all so complicated. When will I realize that business owners who live near me is a bad thing because they deny these opportunities for people far away to have a diverse investment portfolio?
Maxpowr9 t1_ixzjibf wrote
I do think Boston needs more grocery stores but not necessarily a Walmart.
willzyx01 t1_ixzg31e wrote
No thank you
M_Shulman t1_iy05hhp wrote
No thanks; Wal-Mart pays substandard wages, sells substandard goods and is vehemently anti-union.
robomassacre t1_ixzzrcp wrote
Wal mart is the last thing Boston needs. God forbid you support local small business.
bobby_j_canada t1_iy1l5g8 wrote
There's a kernel of truth in the complaint that small businesses don't necessarily treat their workers any better than MegaCorps do. MegaCorp HR will randomly lay you off because of some number in a spreadsheet somewhere, while Small Business Tyrant will get all up in your personal life and badmouth you on the local Facebook Group if you're a "difficult" employee.
Both types of businesses will also happily underpay you (small biz because they don't have the revenue to pay you decently, MegaCorp because they can get away with it and another spreadsheet tells them they should underpay you).
It's sort of similar to the mom n' pop vs corporate landlord discussion. Both can be bad in very unique and different ways.
raabbasi t1_ixzuqho wrote
Walmart isn't even much cheaper for most things anyway.
Wtf_is_this1234 t1_iy1l356 wrote
They are usually the cheapest option for most things they sell.
Peeeculiar t1_ixzbsk5 wrote
Given the loss prevention issues Target is dealing with at South Bay I can’t imagine the folks in Bentonville are in any hurry to put a full size store in the city proper.
Psirocking t1_iy2ej3v wrote
are you telling me the guy I saw putting 7 bottles of tide into a duffel bag in the parking lot outside of it didn’t just have a lot of dirty clothes?
Dukeofdorchester t1_iy1e8sc wrote
Ooooh, I love hot takes! That's a good one!
Prageek t1_iy21pon wrote
Trader Joe still sells for the same price tag 3 years ago! Plus good quality stuff!
-Im-A-Little-Teapot_ t1_iy06no0 wrote
They wanted to put one in Watertown about 10 years ago. It was shot down because...
-
Traffic concerns
-
Target and HD are about a mile up the road and it would impact their business.
-
They're a crime magnet.
4a) Residents thought it would ruin the character of the neighborhood..
4b) Residents didn't like Walmart because they're Walmart and they do WalMart things
Personally, I have nothing against them and would have welcomed them, but I'm also not pissed they got run out of town.
Stirling-Newberry t1_iy2hl0o wrote
I think we should have a Waltection racket in Boston because there's some money to be vacuumed out of po' people.
Kingpine42069 t1_iy4phtp wrote
what exactly would people buy at walmart they cant buy elsewhere? the boston area has market basket which has better prices or very close and also has a ton of tj max/ marshalls cheap clothing places. failing to see what niche Walmart would really fill
Itchy-Marionberry-62 t1_iy15j0v wrote
With all the empty retail space…they could probably move in somewhere. Would be nice to have them.
ppomeroy t1_ixzkjyk wrote
Unfortunately for the working class, all I see in social media is a calling for stores like Walmart and Target close in favor of Trader Joes or Whole Foods. Drop the wages arguments and think of the low income shoppers. It seems that no one considers that.
Classism, ageism, and self-entitlement there. We can also toss in a handful of racism while at it when it comes to that argument.
No matter how you cut this up there are both the plus and minus. No one wins any of these debates.
InfiniteJessica t1_ixzw3a0 wrote
Trader Joe’s isn’t particularly expensive and they’re a decent employer.
aimed_4_the_head t1_ixzcs05 wrote
>On top of that Walmart employees are often given benefits they would not get at a small business.
Walmart pays poverty wages and causes upticks in Medicaid and Food Stamp usage in the local population.
Each new Walmart store decreases the local community’s economic output over 20 years by an estimated $13 million.
The only "good" thing a Walmart does is attract other employers to rural areas that otherwise wouldn't have anything. Boston isn't exactly hurting for name recognition.