Walmart Supercenter At 111 Yale St.

[august948]

I didn't say it would close, I said I'm interested in seeing the sales tax revenues from that time period.  Yeah, plenty of access without Yale street. 

Don't worry too much about it. Walmart will be generating lots of tax revenue for both the city and state at that location for many, many years to come.

[Leonard]

Enron

[Leonard]

Yeah, there was millions of unspent dollars just sitting around inside the loop.  If only I had somewhere to spend my money, people said.  This new retail merely moves tax dollars from one location to another.  From Target to Walmart.  It's not new tax dollars, merely moved a mile. 

[JJxvi]

Enron

lmao

[Leonard]

And what was that accounting firm?  Remember them?  Arthur Anderson. 

[RedScare]

BTW, just got home from Walmart. For those who are not afraid to shop there, their fruit and veggies blow every other store away lately. It isn't even close. For the rest of you, I hear Jeff Skilling is getting out of prison early and becoming Walmart's new CEO.

[TGM]

Enron

So you're suggesting that Walmart has a ton of great ideas, many years ahead of their time that will never be realized due to the actions of those who traded the long-term, big-picture view, for something that looks better on a yearly performance review?

I better stock up on frozen peas before the next audit.

Edited July 11, 2013 by TGM

[TGM]

On the other hand, this kind of law puts the enforcing municipality at a disadvantage to neighbors with no living wage policy.

I say the best living wage policy is a municipality that offers a low barrier of entry for those wanting to start their own business or relocate their business to said municipality.

The real question to ask is why the hell is it harder to live in some places rather than others?

The laughable circular disfunction is that the Walmart haters want them to pay a living wage, yet don't want these workers to be able to purchase discounted goods at stores like Walmart!

Edited July 11, 2013 by TGM

[Leonard]

Walmart workers can't afford health care, and cost $900K a year per store for welfare for it's workers.  I imagine many Walmart workers shop at Walmart now.  It's not really helping them, and it's not really laughable. 

[august948]

Walmart workers can't afford health care, and cost $900K a year per store for welfare for it's workers. I imagine many Walmart workers shop at Walmart now. It's not really helping them, and it's not really laughable. 

And, of course, the solution to this problem is to avoid shopping there and encouraging others to boycott as well, deny Walmart building permits, establish fringe protest groups to grasp at every bogus reason to block it, and complain about caliper inches and misplaced fire hydrants. Because, of course, mixed-use developments employ far, far more people. I'm sure driving the world's largest private employer into bankruptcy will improve the lot of the 2 plus million Walmart workers and make health care more affordable for them. But wait, isn't Obama already taking care of that?

I am curious, though, where you got the $900k welfare cost per year per store statistic from. Not from a Michael Moore movie, I hope.

[august948]

Yeah, there was millions of unspent dollars just sitting around inside the loop. If only I had somewhere to spend my money, people said. This new retail merely moves tax dollars from one location to another. From Target to Walmart. It's not new tax dollars, merely moved a mile.

No kidding? So you are saying that tax collections inside the loop are stagnant? I'd like to see the basis for that claim.

[Leonard]

Google it. 

 

I don't want to deny Walmart anything except tax rebates.  I don't encourage anyone to boycott.  I'm not a fan of mixed-use.  I'm not driving anyone into bankruptcy, just mentioned a couple of big companies that have failed. 

 

I want my elected officials to live up to their promises, even those about trees and sidewalks. 

I'm not saying tax collections are stagnant.  I'm saying people would spend about the same amount of money in the city limits of Houston without that particular walmart. 

[august948]

Enron

That's an even worse example than Woolworth. What's the correlation? At least Woolworth was a retailer.

[august948]

And what was that accounting firm? Remember them? Arthur Anderson.

hahahahaha! You're killing me here with your bogus examples.

[august948]

Google it.

You'll have to google it yourself. I don't have time or interest to track down the backup for your arguments. Until you do, I'll assume you're pulling it out of your posterior.

I don't want to deny Walmart anything except tax rebates. I don't encourage anyone to boycott. I'm not a fan of mixed-use. I'm not driving anyone into bankruptcy, just mentioned a couple of big companies that have failed.

And what is the context for listing big companies that failed on the "Walmart to invade the Heights" thread? Is collecting names of bankrupt firms a hobby or something? Here's a list that goes back to the 1340's.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_business_failures

Pick a few and tell me how they apply to Walmart.

I want my elected officials to live up to their promises, even those about trees and sidewalks.

So what are you doing about it, other than complaining on the internet? There's a lot more to be pissed about with the local, state, and federal government than caliper inches of trees and placement of ADA compliant fire hydrants.

I'm not saying tax collections are stagnant. I'm saying people would spend about the same amount of money in the city limits of Houston without that particular walmart.

In your previous statement you stated "inside the loop". Now it's "in the city limits". You are aware, aren't you, that the city doesn't end at the loop? Regardless, what's your point here? The same might be said for any individual store vs all expenditure inside the loop or inside the city limits. Edited July 11, 2013 by august948

[Leonard]

Because it doesn't increase the taxes the City gets.  Get it?

 

Someone at some point said Walmart would never fail.  I was just responding to that.

 

Good bye August. 

[august948]

Because it doesn't increase the taxes the City gets. Get it?

Assuming that is true, we can then assume that ANY business that comes into the city limits doesn't increase tax collections as well. Therefore we can assume that tax collections do not and cannot increase and are therefore stagnant. Matter of fact, following this line of logic we can assume that businesses don't generate taxes at all since if there were no businesses in Houston and a Walmart opened as the very first business in the city limits but did not increase tax collections (from the previous zero) tax collections would still be zero. Get it?

[TGM]

I would be curious to see how many hidden taxes that Walmart pays in the way of fees, permits, surcharges, and assesments.

I bet Mayor Parker gets all hot and bothered every time she drives by and sees that big impermeable concrete parking lot chock full of F150's.

[livincinco]

August, new retail in this particular market doesn't generate much in the way of new sales taxes.

And we've given up about 10 years of that and property taxes too. So less taxes for 10 years. AND they said they would have built with or without the 380.

So let's assume that you're right about everything and then put it in perspective. Let's assume that (and I don't agree) that the city made a poor investment of $6 million and could have achieved the result without the investment. I don't know if you're in the business world, but bad decisions happen. They happen at every level of business and at every level of government. You accept them, move on, and try to make a better decision the next time.

The annual budget of the CoH is approx. $1 billion, so we're saying that the city potentially made a poor investment decision on 0.6% of its annual expenditures. That is not significant. It's done. Move on.

[RedScare]

Actually, the City budget is $3.9 Billion, of which $2.0 Billion is for the general fund. Over the course of 10 years, we are talking about in excess of $20 Billion of general fund budgets. $6 million into $20 Billion is 0.03%. That's about 2 Starbucks cappucinos on a median budget in a year.

 

And, we are not losing Walmart's taxes. Walmart, Ainbinder and everyone else still pays their taxes. Some of that tax money goes to pay off infrastructure improvements. I realize that Leonard is a fan of driving over potholes, but I like the repaved streets and sidewalks that I got out of the deal. This is all a bunch of manufactured outrage that less than a dozen residents express. In a city of over 2 million people, that's an even smaller percentage than the 380 is to the budget.

 

This is a small price to pay for my one stop shopping. Too bad Leonard cannot enjoy it.

[samagon]

That's an even worse example than Woolworth. What's the correlation? At least Woolworth was a retailer.

 

Enron did some retail, after a fashion. Sort of.

 

You'll have to google it yourself. I don't have time or interest to track down the backup for your arguments. Until you do, I'll assume you're pulling it out of your posterior.

 

cite sources?

 

100% of people who shop at walmart want to buy something

- source: my bum

[Leonard]

cinco, that's a good point.  But for the City to not make the same mistake twice, it has to realize it made a mistake.  For example, if I don't realize that posting on HAIF is a total waste of time (which I could spend affecting government on all levels instead), then I'll never stop.

 

Or, if these 380 are really good, they should figure that out too.  I think Austin has to put all their 380 payment info on a website (I think because they got in trouble). 

 

Houston should do the same.  It should be easy for us to look and see who our City is handing out tax dollars to and how much. 

 

And if these are dirty deals, it's irrelevant what portion of the budget is involved - I only stole 0.6% of the City's total budget isn't a good defense. 

 

[JJxvi]

It actually works the other way.  The Wal*Mart will generate new sales taxes at other establishments within the city of Houston because their employees will spend their paychecks which they wouldn't get if Wal*Mart didn't employ them.  No doubt you will now claim that everybody would be employed regardless and no less have a higher paying job if they weren't forced at gunpoint to work at Wal*Mart but I guess there's just no reasoning with some people.

[august948]

Instead of buying soap somewhere else in the city, you buy soap at Walmart. No new net sales taxes. Yes, maybe some of the people shopping at this particular Walmart would have bought their soap outside the City's sales tax area, but most of it is just moving from one store to another inside the same taxing area. Yes, maybe some people were sitting on mattresses full of money and buying no soap at all until the Walmart came along, but most of the people were buying soap somewhere before the Walmart.

Maybe that's how it works in your household, but in mine if my wife goes in for a bar of soap she comes out with clothes, groceries, toys and maybe, if we're lucky, a bar of soap. Some of those purchases she might otherwise make online or not at all. It's not a zero-sum game.

[Leonard]

Manufacturing, engineering - that kind of work might deserve some kind of tax incentive.  The incentive for retail should be market-driven. 

[august948]

Enron did some retail, after a fashion. Sort of.

I would have chosen something like Montgomery Wards.

cite sources?

My posterior, of course.

100% of people who shop at walmart want to buy something

- source: my bum

99% of people who shop at walmart want to buy something. The other 1% wander around in the parking lot asking for money.

[Leonard]

AND they said they would have built the Walmart without the 380 money.  It's a total waste. 

 

Then, the taxes could have been spent on the most important thing on the list of things.  If that thing was potholes where Red drives, great.  If that thing is giant bandaids on the Yale Street Bridge, great. 

[august948]

Manufacturing, engineering - that kind of work might deserve some kind of tax incentive. The incentive for retail should be market-driven.

If only they could have built a refinery on that land instead of a Walmart...what a lost opportunity.

[Angostura]

August, new retail in this particular market doesn't generate much in the way of new sales taxes. 

 

Instead of buying soap somewhere else in the city, you buy soap at Walmart.  No new net sales taxes.  Yes, maybe some of the people shopping at this particular Walmart would have bought their soap outside the City's sales tax area, but most of it is just moving from one store to another inside the same taxing area.  Yes, maybe some people were sitting on mattresses full of money and buying no soap at all until the Walmart came along, but most of the people were buying soap somewhere before the Walmart.

 

Clearly, once a particular item is available somewhere within the city limits, any additional availability is redundant and doesn't actually result in incremental sales taxes. We should probably just have one store that the entire city of Houston shops in then, right?

[Leonard]

It depends on the market.  In this case, there were already available options.  Walmart should not have gotten an incentive to build. 

 

Guys, it's been fun, but I'm taking Augusts advice and doing other things with my time.