Jump to content

AtticaFlinch

Full Member
  • Posts

    2098
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    59

Everything posted by AtticaFlinch

  1. Lots, especially if your selfishness can unnecessarily harm or disadvantage other people. That said it may be refreshing to hear it anyhow. In fact, it would be the first time on this thread someone opposing the Walmart construction was honest about their reasons. I really wish someone would say that rather than continue to wrap up their disdain in the same-ol' retreaded sanctimonious BS of which we're becoming so familiar. Agreed. I'm not a fan of Walmart. On a macro level, I have a huge problem with Walmart. Their blatant disregard for valuable archaeological sites is like a knife in my archaeologist heart. Then again, I recognize this isn't entirely Walmart's fault. (Hell, this article lists the Tennessee Titans, the state of Georgia and Whole Foods (?!) as also being bad corporate stewards to important American Indian burial and other heritage sites.) Our lax laws, our disregard for our past and the ridiculously high cost of living makes Walmart and its practices an inevitability. If you want to protest Walmart as a company, I'm right there with you. If you want to protest our values as a nation, I'm on board. If you want to protest our paucity of corporate restrictions, I'll join the picket line with you. But, on a micro level, I appreciate my Walmart. Having one nearby sure has freed up my disposable income. If you were smart, you'd let it free up your disposable income too. Edit: I can't think of a better selfish reason than that. Can you? I know! What jerks we are! How dare we put the welfare of others before you! Edit: Also, much earlier in the thread I proofed out how this Walmart would be better for the environment than forcing people to drive farther out. It's not necessarily altruistic, but it is planet positive and falls in line with my KPFT membership. No, there aren't. But the ones who are there sure are loud.
  2. Alright, let's run with this. Let's say you're successful. Let's say the Walmart doesn't build. If that happens, what have you accomplished? All your talk of corporate tyranny, democracy and noble and just causes, what did you do? What did you achieve? How did preventing the Walmart from building make the world better? Preservation of a neighborhood's character isn't making the world better, and that's all you've achieved. Stop mythologizing your quest. You're slaying windmills, not giants. Your quest isn't noble, it's a farce. Preventing this Walmart won't make Walmart a better corporate citizen. It just robs poor people within the loop of their hard won earnings, and it robs your neighbors of convenience. Your goal isn't noble. Your goal is selfish.
  3. Well, rather than continue to just naysay my understanding of what little context was present, why don't you explain what you meant, but this time clearly? Clear communication is a good way to avoid being misunderstood, if I was indeed misunderstanding you. Perhaps it'll help if I explain the path to my own conclusions, and you can tell me where I erred. In reading your statement, my initial thought was that you must be saying since Walmart's supposed building plan included the bulldozing of one single solitary low-income apartment complex, then that must be wryly conclusive evidence Walmart doesn't actually benefit any and all people who live in low income housing. Am I right so far? Because I didn't think so. I thought, "How ridiculous that I'd think that's what dbigtex meant, especially as he's proven to be reasonable and generally above bad logic and hyperbole." But what else could it have meant, what else could it have meant? I stretched the openings into the darkest recesses of my brain hoping that somewhere within would lie a clue as to what you meant. You're above piss poor logic and inflated exaggeration, at least you have been in the past, so surely you must have an alternate reason, something I hadn't considered. I clambered through my brain searching for other permutations in logic, and I followed individual thought patterns, though mostly to dead-ends. At one point, near the end of my patience, I stumbled across the assumption that indeed, surely dbigtex understood this to be the only possible set of poor people this Walmart would benefit. Otherwise, his (your) statement could only possibly be pointless and wrong. I knew there was no way for you to avoid being wrong, but I didn't want your statement to be pointless and wrong. Yes, this is an accurate retelling of how I reached that conclusion as, like you, I never hyperbolize. And resultingly, that's what I went with. That's what I wrote for the whole world to see. That's how I publicly interpreted your words. But, you've told me I was wrong, and you told be I'm being wrong deliberately. So I asked you to clarify your statement, but again, you just told me I'm being deliberately wrong. You haven't given me any insight into this "context" of which you speak so elusively, but hopefully someday perhaps we can reach those dizzying heights of lucidity. Hopefully someday I can know just what the hell you meant. For now, you just appear churlish, and as if you're avoiding giving an explanation for what you meant. But I pretty sure I'm probably being deliberately wrong about that too.
  4. No. I think most of the people opposed to the Walmart think Walmart's shoppers are inferior. Otherwise, I have a hard time justifying the numerous references to peopleofwalmart.com, crime increases and property devaluations.
  5. Awesome, but still, I can't help wishing they'd build more. There is still a shortage of Walmarts accessible to the innerloop compared to the number of Targets.
  6. Because none of what you just said has been proven. None at all. And, it's a little weird you point to the 'burbs as a hyperconformist area, but in another thread you support the hyperconformity of historic districts. It's not that you don't want hyperconformity, you just want the hyperconformity to fit within your vision. Turning the tables on the rhetoric, huh? No, it's not class envy. Especially considering the majority of the people who will be positively affected by this won't be in whatever class you consider yourself. Another wickedly elitist talking point from S3mh though. I wonder if you can even understand how douchey the accusation of class envy sounds. Everybody wants more money. I don't understand where you're going with that. Oh, that's where you're going. Well, how about this? I'll admit to exacting a little bit of pleasure out of seeing some prissy, hipster elitists squirm because their vision of utopia is being forced to allow other inferior people in. But, that doesn't motivate me to support the building of this Walmart. I support it because as I now take advantage of Walmart's low prices (and they are considerably lower than the competition), I also wish I'd been able to take advantage of those low prices while a Montrose or Greenway resident. I'm certain there are plenty of people, maybe outside your social circle, who feel the same way. No. But if you'd read many of the supporters' comments rather than ignore them as seems more obvious, you'd find there is a strong commitment to independence and personal responsibility. We do support the builders and the land owners doing with their property what they deem fit. It is, after all, their property. By your logic, non-religious people should be able to tell churches they can't build nearby, and homes without children should be able to tell school districts they can't build nearby. For that matter, since a home doesn't have kids, they should be able to choose whether or not they pay school taxes. It is all up to the individual to determine everything about the environment that immediately surrounds him, right? Wrong. The individual can control what happens within his house, so long as he doesn't violate the law and doesn't hurt anyone. That's it. Any more than that, and you become the very thing that you're complaining about. Oh please. Protesting a Walmart building near your neighborhood is nowhere near on par with those movements. It's embarassing you continue to make this comparison. Well no, but then again, there is no evidence overwhelming against this Walmart! And you have a bad perception problem, because these attacks against your weak arguments aren't attacks against you personally. Unless you are a racist or a classist. In which case, you do suck at life. And you can mischaracterize the support all you'd like, but that doesn't change anything either. If you think two weeks will stop the Walmart, then clearly you've never witnessed community opposition to a Walmart before play out in the local press and the courts. I said it near the beginning of this thread, without an ecological or cultural reason to oppose this store, the community has no chance in defeating it. If over half of all residents of the Heights and all other areas within a ten mile radius opposed it, and signed a petition to prove it, this store wouldd still get built. Houston, TX is the wild west of real estate, and cronyism still exists, but it exists for those with the deepest pockets. There's no other way to say it, but you're SOL. Redirect your energies to a fight worth having. If you don't like Walmart's business practices, pressure your congressman into passing some retail reform laws. Otherwise, you're hurting people this store could benefit in your zeal to make your neighborhood just a little more pretentious.
  7. I'll grant you the word change to symptom. I actually struggled with what word to use, and at the time, guise seemed best. In retrospect, you're right about that. But, I don't think it's symptomatic of our society alone. I think the fear of the others and, to a lesser extent, the protection of our own are what's motivated all human social interaction for most of human history. I also think it wasn't until the Age of Enlightenment and the rise of individuality that we humans started learning to be motivated by ideas far less insular. However, that doesn't mean we're all at that point, or even that any one of us is at that point always. If we were conflict would disappear, and everybody would have a let and let live attitude about pretty much everything. If I remember correctly, I positive repped that post - mostly because I wish I'd thought of it first. I also wonder how many of the pigs even caught the reference.
  8. I'm pretty sure I didn't, but to be safe, perhaps you can give a little detail into what exactly you meant. The quote in question for ease of reference: "So, the building of this Wal-Mart is going to benefit low-income citizens ... by demolishing their affordable housing?" There was an article posted previously that said Walmart's average customer earns $35k/year and Target's average customer makes $50k/year. To me, this is clearly a class and race struggle, but those on the disgusting, offensive side of the struggle have been doing a pretty good job of maintaining the appearance of legitimacy by disguising it as being about traffic, property values and crime. As a student of nuance and of getting to the core of what drives human behavior, I can tell you almost invariably whenever the canards of property values and crime are brought up as reasons to oppose something, they're ALWAYS a guise for latent racism or classism.
  9. Sorry. I should have been more clear. I was referring to the vocal opposition, not the majority of Heights residents.
  10. Where'd Dallas get all those trees? Are those fake too?
  11. I can count the number of times Marksmu and I have agreed on something on one hand, but I totally agree with him on this. Without clearer language, the ordinance is ready to be abused by those in power. Dismissing Marksmu's concerns as irrelevant and as little more than a conspiracy theory won't do anything to win you friends, especially with people who feel the same as him. Demanding a better, more secure product from lawmakers shouldn't be considered unreasonable or ridiculous, and imposing this on people who bought land prior to this ordinance taking effect just seems wrong as well. Maybe if the W in George W Bush stands for Walmart.
  12. Well it's either hipster elitism or racism. Or a combination of both. Yeah, you did: "So, the building of this Wal-Mart is going to benefit low-income citizens ... by demolishing their affordable housing?" Or maybe you were trying to prove Walmart is evil and not concerned about the poor by drawing an analogy of no relevance whatsoever? I mean, you know, since Walmart isn't building this new supercenter to benefit just the people who live in that one single apartment complex. Edit: Unless you're suggesting this Walmart will be mobile and sentient, wandering around the innerloop devouring any low-income housing it comes across.
  13. Gooch, this is where I disagree with you. The owners who bought bungalows bought knowing full well they owned in an area without the rules. Why can't the city grandfather an exemption for current owners? That seems to me the only fair compromise.
  14. Wrong on two assumptions. One, I'm no lady. I realize my nom de HAIF can probably be construed as the feminine form of Atticus, and in fact part of the inspiration for my name was based on Harper Lee's brilliant portrait of true American nobility, but it was also inspired by a successful prison riot. It's not feminine, it just looks that way. Two, I am unchanging and immutable. I'm godlike in that way.
  15. But that's not Ebert's lament. He's pissy because he sees the grandiose old next to the utilitarian new without thinking about context. In other words, he doesn't recognize old once had utilitarian buildings too, but that those have invariably spent time with the business end of a bulldozer. He's under the false impression the past was somehow better than the present. It's a malady that affects all older people. I think his problem is that he views his surroundings through the eyes of an old man, not that he views his surroundings through the eyes of a modern man. I'm much too spartan for that. My office and my home pretty much meet the definition of the word utility as it applies in modern day America.
  16. It will certainly make the neighborhood more exclusive. It's a good plan B if you fail to stop the Walmart construction.
  17. Turn what exactly? I went to an Aldine elementary school. And now, if I don't move in the next decade and a half, my kids will go to Bammel High School. I like my neighborhood a great deal, and I can't foresee moving unless my job takes me out of Houston. Then again, I gladly devote my evenings to my child (with another on the way), and I have never been convinced that subpar schools have subpar students. The teachers may not be the best, and the schools themselves may have difficulty competing with students' cultural misplacement of values - otherwise not supporting a strong need for education. But all these things can be fixed at home. In fact, that's where I think the biggest difference between average students and exemplary students can be found. I don't think it's a race issue, although I'm not blind to the statistical fact that minority races tend to value education less than affluent whites. Regardless, competing for the top 10% will be easier for my kids in Bammel than it would be in Klein, Katy or Memorial. And considering my kids are most likely to go to a public university, that 10% is all that really matters. Plus, Houston is a multicultural city, and 1960 is a microcosm of that diversity. I like that my kids will grow up outside of a homogenized white enclave. It'll put them at a distinct advantage, with the accelerated social development they'll receive, over their whitebread raised peers. The world's a different place than it was even 20 years ago. Old social constructs that once defined American life no longer do. Comfortability within diverse groups will be a key factor for future success (that, being fluent in Spanish and having a solid understanding of math and science).
  18. Yeah.... I don't have any AMEX black stories. Unless (I mean until) I hit the lottery, I probably won't either.
  19. Weird. So you two thought the low prices were intended only to benefit low income residents of just this one apartment complex? That's weirder than the idea that this Walmart is being built to service just Heights residents.
  20. The big difference between rail and the auto, even if electric, is that rail is completely connected to the grid and is tied into the central power source. No matter what, autos cannot achieve the same connectivity, and will need some way to refuel. These considerations must be included as part of the cost in developing the non-gas automobile infrastructure. Sure, a substantial portion or the infrastructure already exists in the form of roads, but transitioning to an alternative fueled automobile won't be free. Streetcar suburbs, the way Heights and Montrose once were. That, and a punch to the mouth every time someone complained about how it was too hot to be outside. Humans are tropical animals. Houston's heat is our natural environment. People who don't want to sweat should live in Alaska (but not in the summer - sometimes it gets hot there). Individually manufactured solar panels for automobiles, which will likely continue to have an effective life of no more than five to six years, will be far too costly as to be economically sound. So no, that doesn't work. Basically, with autos, we have the promise that one day technology will improve to meet our current demand for environmental responsibility. So, we'll wait till that promised future date to make any necessary changes to the way we do business. Meanwhile, our fuel supplies dwindle and costs skyrocket and we continue to dump massive amounts of carbon into the atmosphere. No thanks. Electric rail technology exists now, and it'll be a lot cheaper and much more efficient to make improvements to the power source that runs that as technology permits.
  21. We'd adapt. Humans are much better at that than some people will give us credit for.
  22. With gas-powered automobiles, more goes into infrastructure than just the development of pavement. No matter what, moving away from gas-powered automobiles will require significant infrastructure investment. And my point is rather than continue to build crap on top of crap to fix the problems our myopic ancestors foisted upon us, let's rebuild with something altogether better. As for your argument to time efficiency, I disregard it altogether. The savings of a handful of minutes to an individual is secondary to a long-term solution to provide ecologically and economically sound mass-mobility.
  23. It's not irrelevant. Our infrastructure is built to support gasoline powered automobiles. Moving away from gasoline to another combustible fuel, or even away from the internal combustion engine altogether, would require a substantial investment in new infrastructure development.
  24. Walmart is more environmentally conscious than many other retailers: link
×
×
  • Create New...