Walmart Supercenter At 111 Yale St.

[AtticaFlinch]

And the particular Wal-Mart you mention is more like a 40-minute round-trip for those of us just to the east of you; and the only closer Wal-Mart is also not especially convenient and is obsolete.

Currently Dunvale is the only reasonable choice Walmart for inner-loopers, and when I lived in Greenway, without traffic, that journey took at least 20 minutes one way. Unfortunately, as I work for a living and don't like being inside of Walmarts, particularly that Walmart, at 3 am, I had to share my road space with other people... which made my drive considerably longer. When I lived in Montrose, at minimum an additional ten minutes was necessary for the one way trek to low price territory.

I'd have shopped at the Meyerland location more often, but I hated getting in and out of the parking lot there.

I really don't see what the big problem is. This is Houston, not Bumfart, Massachusetts. There are more than enough people here who will continue to shop at the smaller, local retailers. All that's happening now is the people who would spend their Walmart dollars in the Heights location are apending it in Dunvale or Meyerland, simultaneously increasing traffic congestion and, by default, air pollution. In other words, building a Heights Walmart will help to save the environment.

[heights_yankee]

Granted, I wish that there was a smaller increment than 20-99, but being what it is...my feeling is that that's a medium-sized firm. When a firm has enough staff to take an entire floor of an office building, that's not exactly mom-and-pop in my mind. But hey, these terms like "small business" and "middle class" are so subjective, anyway, as to render the discussion meaningless. That's another valid criticism of HeightsYankee's rant, so thank you.

Wal-Mart has 2.1 million employees, or approximately 21,212 times the number of employees per CEO than a 99-employee "small business".

The owner of a firm that can take up a whole floor is probably not "middle class" but certainly many of his/her employees are. Also, my argument is not solely for "mom & pop" which someone else brought in to the dialogue. My support is for local.

Rant: this word proves the great irony of the conversation happening here (other than irony that this is all just rumor and speculation at this point). I am defending my opinion that I don't want a Walmart near me because I don't like them as a company and I prefer to not see their corporation grow anymore because I think they do more harm than good on several levels. You (and even more so our friend Red) on the other hand rant while stating your opinions as facts and leave no room for anyone to have a differing opinion. It wouldn't get so tired and obnoxious if there was more "You're entitled to your opinion but I think that it's a good thing for X,Y,Z reasons and am happy"... There is a way of talking about things where everyone can give their opinions from their personal angle without having to disprove what the other person believes. You can't seem to do that. You want to spend all your time disproving my opinions instead of just expressing your own and leaving it at that.

[AtticaFlinch]

Well, I was speaking from my perspective (ie "it seems"). But I suppose if you're going to present your opinions as fact, there's nothing I (or anybody) can say that contradicts you.

I hate Walmart as much as the next guy, but I'm pragmatic about the fact I need to shop there from time to time. Let me put it to you this way, I use Walmart as a last resort always. It's not my first choice retailer, but sometimes I have no other choice. Either I can shop at Walmart or either pay too much for something or go without. I'd love to tell you I can afford to make all my financial decisions based on my personal ethics and political beliefs, but that's not the case. If shopping for my pork chops at Walmart means I can take my family, including my 7 year old stepson, to see Toy Story 3 this weekend versus sitting at home with our thumbs up our butts, I'm going to shop at Walmart. It's pretty simple math and not an opinion. When you live on a budget, sometimes you have to make choices you find personally detestable in order to satisfy others around you. This isn't spite. This is simple economics, and fairly understandable at that.

Wow. Project much?

I do on a number of things, but I don't know how calling your characterization of all those not opposed to a new Walmart as being driven by "spite" hyperbolic reflects me projecting at all. Perhaps you and I are using different definitions of the word hyperbole. So you know, I'm using it to reference heightened exaggeration. Perhaps you could provide a different definiton to help me understand your position.

It's happened before. Usually there's more in consideration than simply that a handful of people hate Walmart (ie. ecological or cultural concerns with the construction site).

The vocal minority doesn't have the right to dictate the lifestyle for everyone, and when it comes to Walmart, if they think they'll be able to turn a profit, they'll build the store.

Now THIS is a good example of framing and mischaracterization, right on cue. Thanks for a good laugh!

I don't see it. Please explain. What have I mischaracterized here that's so hilarious?

[RedScare]

You want to spend all your time disproving my opinions instead of just expressing your own and leaving it at that.

Guilty as charged. When the opinion is based on flawed logic or incorrect information, I feel compelled to point it out. Sorry if it is offensive to you. This is similar to the gentrification arguments that were all the rage a few years back. It was popular to decry gentrification on the grounds that it forced old people and the poor out of their homes. None of this was based on actual facts, just that it seemed logical. When studies were actually done, it was found that few people were ever forced out by gentrification. Some chose to cash out, profiting on the increased home value, using those profits to improve their living conditions. However, most stayed and benefited from the increased development and more choices in retail offerings that the gentrification spurred....like new nearby low price stores.

The same can be said with other Heights arguments, but I'll leave them out of a Walmart discussion, though it is topical to the Heights.

[heights_yankee]

Guilty as charged. When the opinion is based on flawed logic or incorrect information, I feel compelled to point it out. Sorry if it is offensive to you. This is similar to the gentrification arguments that were all the rage a few years back. It was popular to decry gentrification on the grounds that it forced old people and the poor out of their homes. None of this was based on actual facts, just that it seemed logical. When studies were actually done, it was found that few people were ever forced out by gentrification. Some chose to cash out, profiting on the increased home value, using those profits to improve their living conditions. However, most stayed and benefited from the increased development and more choices in retail offerings that the gentrification spurred....like new nearby low price stores.

The same can be said with other Heights arguments, but I'll leave them out of a Walmart discussion, though it is topical to the Heights.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but, again, you think any opinion different from your own is illogical or incorrect. Take for example a discussion that happened here about Yale being widened. You saw the widening of Yale as something to benefit you and therefore you deemed it "right." People who had concerns about it were deemed "wrong" and their reasons invalidated by your opinions, not by facts because there are no facts to say what will or won't happen if/when the road gets widened because it hasn't happened yet. It's all supposition. Yet you treat it like it's a forgone conclusion that it will be wonderful when actually it could really suck. You do not have the ability to ever say "I am for something and these are my reasons" without adding "and you are incorrect and your reasons invalid. They have to be because they differ from mine."

Same with this. You think because you see a benefit in WalMart for yourself that having it built HAS to be the right answer, which makes other wrong rather than just a different side of the coin. Truly closed minded. You also seem to change your opinions about things just so you can argue with people and that isn't lost on us- even people like me who waste too much time volleying with you.

[N Judah]

This isn't spite.

Well had I known you would take it so personally I would have included a disclaimer. All generalizations (and, in fact, all posts of mine in the future) are hereby NOT directed at you, and should never be taken to reference you specifically in any way, shape or form.

I do on a number of things, but I don't know how calling your characterization of all those not opposed to a new Walmart as being driven by "spite" hyperbolic reflects me projecting at all. Perhaps you and I are using different definitions of the word hyperbole. So you know, I'm using it to reference heightened exaggeration. Perhaps you could provide a different definiton to help me understand your position.

I may be guilty of generalization (which was my intent, which seemed like it would be obvious but clearly was not), but certainly not "heightened exaggeration." To parlay this into an accusation of "love of hyperbole" goes beyond some kind of cognitive bias and into hyperbole itself.

I don't see it. Please explain. What have I mischaracterized here that's so hilarious?

sigh. Implicit in your paragraph are the notions that:

-- it's just a handful of people who don't want the Wal-Mart

-- these handful of people are driven by hate

-- these people are a minority

-- these people are vocal

-- these people seek to "dictate the lifestyle for everyone"

-- these people seek to dictate a lifestyle for anyone

-- these people seek to dictate a lifestyle

-- these people don't "have the right" to do such things even assuming these are their intentions

-- "having the right" to do something has anything to do with an end result

-- ecological/cultural concerns with the construction site must usually be considerations to block out a Wal-Mart

-- Wal-Mart only builds stores where they think they can turn a profit

If you had prefaced it with "I think that" instead of presenting your opinions as fact, it would not have been quite so hilarious. I guess the humor factor dissipated a little when it became clear to me that you weren't just saying these things to be obnoxious.

[TheNiche]

...you think any opinion different from your own is illogical or incorrect.

Yes. Isn't that the point of holding an opinion is that you've considered the alternatives and determined your preference?

Besides, it's not like we're arguing over whether brunettes are more attractive than blonds or whether my farts stink. That kind of thing is 100% subjective, and there's no accounting for taste. The Wal-Mart or Yale Street issue can be formulated and argued logically based upon mutually-agreed-upon values and criteria. And that's what we're doing.

[AtticaFlinch]

Well had I known you would take it so personally I would have included a disclaimer. All generalizations (and, in fact, all posts of mine in the future) are hereby NOT directed at you, and should never be taken to reference you specifically in any way, shape or form.

Well then, perhaps you can explain where you got the word spite to describe the position of those not opposed to the Walmart rather than spend your time responding directly to me. As it is, going forward, I'll let your own words respond to your remarks. I won't bother thoughtfully typing out replies as it clearly *yawn* takes too much of my time and I don't want it to be construed as in anyway personal - regardless of the fact I may (or may not) have made it so. If you try to call me to task on it in the future, I'll just claim it was an "opinion" and feign incredulity that you were annoyed or offended at something that was so clearly not directed at you or anyone who shared the same viewpoint that I criticized. If I call all people stupid for holding a thought that I disagree with, and if you happen to be one of those people who I'm supposedly calling stupid, just take a chill pill, because I'm not specifically calling you stupid. I won't ever do that directly. Passive-aggressive comments are a much more effective way of getting that across, amirite?

I may be guilty of generalization (which was my intent, which seemed like it would be obvious but clearly was not), but certainly not "heightened exaggeration." To parlay this into an accusation of "love of hyperbole" goes beyond some kind of cognitive bias and into hyperbole itself.

Well had I known you would take it so personally I would have included a disclaimer.

sigh. Implicit in your paragraph are the notions that:

-- it's just a handful of people who don't want the Wal-Mart

-- these handful of people are driven by hate

-- these people are a minority

-- these people are vocal

-- these people seek to "dictate the lifestyle for everyone"

-- these people seek to dictate a lifestyle for anyone

-- these people seek to dictate a lifestyle

-- these people don't "have the right" to do such things even assuming these are their intentions

-- "having the right" to do something has anything to do with an end result

-- ecological/cultural concerns with the construction site must usually be considerations to block out a Wal-Mart

-- Wal-Mart only builds stores where they think they can turn a profit

Wow. Project much?

If you had prefaced it with "I think that" instead of presenting your opinions as fact, it would not have been quite so hilarious. I guess the humor factor dissipated a little when it became clear to me that you weren't just saying these things to be obnoxious.

Now THIS is a good example of framing and mischaracterization, right on cue. Thanks for a good laugh!

[heights_yankee]

Yes. Isn't that the point of holding an opinion is that you've considered the alternatives and determined your preference?

Besides, it's not like we're arguing over whether brunettes are more attractive than blonds or whether my farts stink. That kind of thing is 100% subjective, and there's no accounting for taste. The Wal-Mart or Yale Street issue can be formulated and argued logically based upon mutually-agreed-upon values and criteria. And that's what we're doing.

This is another area where I think a very, very, verrrrry large majority of people would be in complete agreement.

And for the record, brunettes are also empirically more attractive.

Now we're getting somewhere.

[chester77008]

Oh, so it's a chip on your shoulder that makes you act like this. Makes more sense now.

Whether or not it was inevitable doesn't invalidate my feelings about it.

And I don't believe it was inevitable as the only other Walmart in Western Ma is in Pittesfield, population roughly 100,000, and many of the other clusters of small towns around there which have kept Walmart out continue to thrive. Even now that they have opened the largest contemporary art museum in the country in an old factory, the town can't recover and many locals will point to Walmarts destruction of the local economy as part of it.

And, again, I also dislike Walmart as a company due to their employment policies which keep thousands of people on their "payroll" below the poverty line. They use sweatshop labor. They discriminate against women in their power structure. They even dictate the size of home their corp staff can purchase (i.e. regardless of the size of his family, an inhouse lawyer for Walmart was told that he could not buy anything larger than a 3/2- in Arkansas, mind you- because they didn't want it too look like they pay their lawyers too much). I don't like them as a company and I don't have to support or be happy about them moving so close to me (maybe, this is all just rumor at this point no matter how much HeyHatch hears it's a done deal). And I don't have to change my mind just because you are excited about the prospect of having cheap, Chinese made products made so much more accessible to you...

See, you miss the point. This is, for many people, an emotional issue. We like or dislike Walmart for our own personal reasons, e.g. corp policies, sweatshop labor, discrimination, aesthetics, parking lot safety, etc. So no one really cares that you have anointed yourself the supreme expert on what we should all want. Your education and hodge podge of professional backgrounds isn't going to make HeyHatch feel safe in a Walmart parking lot at night and it's not going to make me go back and say "yeah, I'm sure glad there's a Walmart scarring the face of my quaint New England hometown." Frankly, we don't have to want it and, like you said, this is Houston. It's not like Walmart is the only option and we'd be silly for turning it away. If not Walmart, there are a lot of other ways that land could be developed that would benefit the area as much, if not more, than a Walmart. I'm sure you're aware that there are more options but you pull so hard for this one because it benefits you. Fine. That is your emotional reaction as well, but don't play it off as if everyone else is stupid for having a differing opinion.

I said earlier in the conversation that I don't believe Walmart will close the locally owned businesses in the Heights and surrounding neighborhoods. C&D survives with Home Depot and Lowe's a 5 minute drive away. People who are buying baby gifts at Tulips & Tutus aren't going to switch to Walmart. People who want handcrafted items aren't going to stop going to The Artful COrner and 18 Hands Gallery b/c Wallyworld moved below I10.

And here is a great tip for you: there are also 2 Fiestas, the nice one on Studewood and the giant Fiesta on Shepherd, where you can get all the inexpensive food you want, probably cheaper than Walmart will be anyway.

Yankee,

I thought you were a strong supporter of dictating home sizes. What's the problem? The Mayor is now telling us what we can buy and build...all is right in the Heights.

[CleaningLadyinCleveland]

Was Wal-Mart approached by the owner of the property on Yale between I-10 and Washington to buy the land? This is the same property H-E-B was looking at to build a new store along the lines of the one on Bunker Hill. Is the deal done with Wal-Mart? I've heard yes. What does this mean to the likes of our Heights Mom and Pops? What will that do to the traffic patterns on Yale and Washington? Google "Wal Mart parking lot crime" and let us know our thoughts!

To get back to the topic. Personally, I hate Walmart and do not want one adjacent to the Heights...from their problems with parking lot crime, not promoting women, the $3-a-day workers in China, the closing of small businesses in small towns, the subsidies, the high number of employees on Chips & Medicaid...oh I could go on and on. I'm not saying that other companies are perfect - but Walmart...ahhhh! They have been having a bit of trouble expanding in the 3 largest metros in the US - (isn't Houston #4...?) http://walmartwatch.com/pages/wal_marts_urban_problem/

Does anyone have proof that they are going to build one on Yale & I-10...? If so - I would definitely want to do some sort of action. Let me know if anyone else would like to make their voice heard and a make difference in their city/community.

[heights_yankee]

Yankee,

I thought you were a strong supporter of dictating home sizes. What's the problem? The Mayor is now telling us what we can buy and build...all is right in the Heights.

You thought wrong. And what does the mayor have to do with Walmart?

[TheNiche]

To get back to the topic. Personally, I hate Walmart and do not want one adjacent to the Heights...

You're trying to "get back to the topic" by ranting about issues that have little to no effect on the Heights.

"...from their problems with parking lot crime..."

Parking lot crime (which RedScare has established in the other thread is a dubious concern) would occur in the West End, not the Heights.

"...not promoting women..."

A vacant lot doesn't promote females, either.

"...the $3-a-day workers in China..."

China isn't in the Heights.

"...the closing of small businesses in small towns..."

This is Houston, the nation's fourth-largest municipality and sixth-largest metropolitan area.

"...the subsidies..."

Wal-Mart will contribute to the property tax and sales tax base of Houston and Harris County. Local subsidies for new Wal-Mart stores do happen in some places, however do not happen in Houston.

"...the high number of employees on Chips & Medicaid..."

The Census did not guarantee consistent hours and provided no health benefits, but people like myself from all over the country were happy to accept the work. Low wages are better than no wages. And someone that's employed has less time or motivation to commit crime. That's good for your neighborhood.

They have been having a bit of trouble expanding in the 3 largest metros in the US - (isn't Houston #4...?) http://walmartwatch.com/pages/wal_marts_urban_problem/

The link cites that they've had difficulty expanding in particular cities, not metropolitan areas. Seeing as how Houston is about twice the size of NYC and has one seventh the density, comparisons between these fair cities aren't exactly apples-to-apples. Moreover, our dirt is cheap and our politicians are keenly attuned to their constituents' pocketbooks. The Wal-Mart business model will work here, as it has and does.

Edited June 28, 2010 by TheNiche

[RedScare]

Let me know if anyone else would like to make their voice heard and a make difference in their city/community.

If you need any suggestions on how to make a difference in your community, let us know. In fact, heights yankee probably still has contact numbers for VISTA. And I know the guy who runs the End Hunger Network over by the freeway.

[chester77008]

You thought wrong. And what does the mayor have to do with Walmart?

Yankee,

I was referring to your previous post on the subject of the new Heights Historic District South Application and the new moratorium passed by the Mayor and City Council regarding demolitions and new construction in Houstons Historic Districts (the HPO, or Historic Preservation Ordinance)...A different thread here on HAIF, where you expressed your opinion.

You stated that you supported the regulation of property rights in Houston historic districts yet you are bashing corporate America for limiting home size of their employees (sounds like a stretch but anyway...)

Is there any way you can walk both sides of that fence? If so, please explain how.

The mayor, City Council, and the HAHC now have the power to dictate property use, home size, and new construction in the Heights and other historic districts in Houston. On the same hand you are quoted as blaming a corporation for regulating what their employees can buy and or build.

I honestly don't see the difference.

[TheNiche]

The mayor, City Council, and the HAHC now have the power to dictate property use, home size, and new construction in the Heights and other historic districts in Houston. On the same hand you are quoted as blaming a corporation for regulating what their employees can buy and or build.

I honestly don't see the difference.

...and at least the employees of Wal-Mart have the ability to opt-in or opt-out of employment there.

[CleaningLadyinCleveland]

If you need any suggestions on how to make a difference in your community, let us know. In fact, heights yankee probably still has contact numbers for VISTA. And I know the guy who runs the End Hunger Network over by the freeway.

Thanks for the info...FYI - I have been doing volunteer/community work since high school.

Edited June 28, 2010 by CleaningLadyinCleveland

[heights_yankee]

Yankee,

I was referring to your previous post on the subject of the new Heights Historic District South Application and the new moratorium passed by the Mayor and City Council regarding demolitions and new construction in Houstons Historic Districts (the HPO, or Historic Preservation Ordinance)...A different thread here on HAIF, where you expressed your opinion.

You stated that you supported the regulation of property rights in Houston historic districts yet you are bashing corporate America for limiting home size of their employees (sounds like a stretch but anyway...)

Is there any way you can walk both sides of that fence? If so, please explain how.

The mayor, City Council, and the HAHC now have the power to dictate property use, home size, and new construction in the Heights and other historic districts in Houston. On the same hand you are quoted as blaming a corporation for regulating what their employees can buy and or build.

I honestly don't see the difference.

Thanks for clearing up for me what I believe.

[CleaningLadyinCleveland]

You're trying to "get back to the topic" by ranting about issues that have little to no effect on the Heights.

I am not ranting - I'm stating my opinion and some information that Walmart has had lawsuits about and lost. Did you read that title of this thread?

"...from their problems with parking lot crime..."

Parking lot crime (which RedScare has established in the other thread is a dubious concern) would occur in the West End, not the Heights.

hmmmm....I think the future will say differently about parking lot crime if Walmart does not have golf cart security in the parking lot.

"...not promoting women..."

A vacant lot doesn't promote females, either.

Other businesses that promote fairly could be built there.

"...the $3-a-day workers in China..."

China isn't in the Heights.

It's a Walmart factory that I was referring to....oh and there are other developing countries that Walmart has factories in as well...Bangledesh for one. Last I had read - 80% of Walmart goods come from China

"...the closing of small businesses in small towns..."

This is Houston, the nation's fourth-largest municipality and sixth-largest metropolitan area.

Where do you think people go for work when they have to leave small towns?

"...the subsidies..."

Wal-Mart will contribute to the property tax and sales tax base of Houston and Harris County. Local subsidies for new Wal-Mart stores do happen in some places, however do not happen in Houston.

Walmart has a history of challenging property taxes - especially in Texas. The two Baytown stores got a $1 mil and a $2.6 mil subsidy.

"...the high number of employees on Chips & Medicaid..."

The Census did not guarantee consistent hours and provided no health benefits, but people like myself from all over the country were happy to accept the work. Low wages are better than no wages. And someone that's employed has less time or motivation to commit crime. That's good for your neighborhood.

Walmart has a history of telling their employees to go on medicaid, food stamps and chips instead of giving them a living wage and/or more hours. Don't you think that you deserve that....? Walmart is going to increase the number of part-time workers that won't get insurance for over a year - but their turnover is so high that it probably doesn't matter.

The link cites that they've had difficulty expanding in particular cities, not metropolitan areas. Seeing as how Houston is about twice the size of NYC and has one seventh the density, comparisons between these fair cities aren't exactly apples-to-apples. Moreover, our dirt is cheap and our politicians are keenly attuned to their constituents' pocketbooks. The Wal-Mart business model will work here, as it has and does.

Besides the 3 largest cities there have been towns in Texas (and all over the country) that have been successful in keeping Walmart out of their towns. If people do not want a Walmart adjacent to the Heights (when there will already be one in Northline Commons), it can probably be done.

Edited June 28, 2010 by CleaningLadyinCleveland

[Jesse]

Wow, so much for a friendly discussion. Y'all need to calm down a bit and discuss this like adults. Lively banter is fine, but this has gone way past rude and obnoxious. Seriously.

[AtticaFlinch]

"...the high number of employees on Chips & Medicaid..."

The Census did not guarantee consistent hours and provided no health benefits, but people like myself from all over the country were happy to accept the work. Low wages are better than no wages. And someone that's employed has less time or motivation to commit crime. That's good for your neighborhood.

Walmart has a history of telling their employees to go on medicaid, food stamps and chips instead of giving them a living wage and/or more hours. Don't you think that you deserve that....? Walmart is going to increase the number of part-time workers that won't get insurance for over a year - but their turnover is so high that it probably doesn't matter.

This is the one point I have a contention with, not because it's not true as for all I know it could be true, but because no one should be surprised anymore when a massive corporation tries to cut costs. That is, after all, the goal of a corporation. To increase profit, corporations must either increase revenue or decrease costs. Playing with health insurance, reducing corporate contributions - or eliminating it altogether - has been a common step for many corporations. With as many people as are in the employ of Walmart (1.2 million in the US alone), health insurance is doubtless going to be one of Walmart's largest controllable expenses - that and overtime. With that many employees, eliminating overtime and cutting health benefits could save them billions of dollars annually, which helps to ensure that I can get my value priced porkchops in bulk without having to concern myself with whether or not I can afford to put fresh diapers on my child.

The point is, this behavior is not unique, and this sort of thing isn't Walmart specific. With the new healthcare law as currently in place, a number of corporations, some thought respectable previously, have mulled options to cut employer subsidized programs in favor of the government imposed penalty. Companies like AT&T, John Deere, Caterpillar and Verizon have seriously considered just dropping healthcare altogether. In other words, you aren't mad at Walmart. You're mad at an economic system that allows companies to act unethically in order to remain competitive with other companies acting unethically. You're wasting your breath protesting a Walmart. Even if you were successful in preventing a Walmart from building in the (near) Heights, it won't solve anything. It's like putting a band-aid on a dismembered arm. What you want is massive corporate reform. You want reform of the nature that will prevent companies like Walmart from doing the things you find so reprehensible.

[AtticaFlinch]

Wow, so much for a friendly discussion. Y'all need to calm down a bit and discuss this like adults. Lively banter is fine, but this has gone way past rude and obnoxious. Seriously.

Walmart brings out the best in people.

[Jesse]

Walmart brings out the best in people.

[TheNiche]

You're trying to "get back to the topic" by ranting about issues that have little to no effect on the Heights.

I am not ranting - I'm stating my opinion and some information that Walmart has had lawsuits about and lost. Did you read that title of this thread? Yes. Did you? We're supposed to be talking about the Heights, which this Wal-Mart would not be located in.

"...from their problems with parking lot crime..."

Parking lot crime (which RedScare has established in the other thread is a dubious concern) would occur in the West End, not the Heights.

hmmmm....I think the future will say differently about parking lot crime if Walmart does not have golf cart security in the parking lot. And how would your hypothetical unsecured parking lot crime in the West End affect the Heights?

"...not promoting women..."

A vacant lot doesn't promote females, either.

Other businesses that promote fairly could be built there. Wal-Mart may be a corporate pariah and whipping boy, but gender discrimination is endemic. It does not stand alone.

"...the $3-a-day workers in China..."

China isn't in the Heights.

It's a Walmart factory that I was referring to....oh and there are other developing countries that Walmart has factories in as well...Bangledesh for one. Last I had read - 80% of Walmart goods come from China Wal-Mart does not and will not operate Chinese or Bangledeshi factories that will be situated in the Heights.

"...the closing of small businesses in small towns..."

This is Houston, the nation's fourth-largest municipality and sixth-largest metropolitan area.

Where do you think people go for work when they have to leave small towns? Probably not at a Wal-Mart in the West End (not the Heights) in Houston; otherwise, they'd stay in small towns where the cost of living is lower and work for the Wal-Mart there. What's wrong with folks from small towns, anyway? Does their presence conjure sounds of banjos in your head? And wouldn't that be more your problem than theirs?

"...the subsidies..."

Wal-Mart will contribute to the property tax and sales tax base of Houston and Harris County. Local subsidies for new Wal-Mart stores do happen in some places, however do not happen in Houston.

Walmart has a history of challenging property taxes - especially in Texas. The two Baytown stores got a $1 mil and a $2.6 mil subsidy. Of course Wal-Mart protests its property taxes! I do it too, and so should you. It's a right provided for by the Texas Constitution, and thank goodness because appraised values often have no bearing on reality. Also, your example of a subsidy is a factual error. Those aren't Wal-Mart stores. They're distribution centers that (unlike stores) add to the core employment of the region.

"...the high number of employees on Chips & Medicaid..."

The Census did not guarantee consistent hours and provided no health benefits, but people like myself from all over the country were happy to accept the work. Low wages are better than no wages. And someone that's employed has less time or motivation to commit crime. That's good for your neighborhood.

Walmart has a history of telling their employees to go on medicaid, food stamps and chips instead of giving them a living wage and/or more hours. Don't you think that you deserve that....? Walmart is going to increase the number of part-time workers that won't get insurance for over a year - but their turnover is so high that it probably doesn't matter. I'll gladly take compensation at such a rate as the labor market will bear. Holding out for a job for which I am optimally suited and for which I will be compensated commensurately has not worked for me in 19 months. And a part time job at minimum wage is better than nothing and no wage...which is what a vacant lot pays.

The link cites that they've had difficulty expanding in particular cities, not metropolitan areas. Seeing as how Houston is about twice the size of NYC and has one seventh the density, comparisons between these fair cities aren't exactly apples-to-apples. Moreover, our dirt is cheap and our politicians are keenly attuned to their constituents' pocketbooks. The Wal-Mart business model will work here, as it has and does.

Besides the 3 largest cities there have been towns in Texas (and all over the country) that have been successful in keeping Walmart out of their towns. If people do not want a Walmart adjacent to the Heights (when there will already be one in Northline Commons), it can probably be done. The West End is in the same City as Northline Commons...and the Heights. If a Wal-Mart can be built so close to the Heights in one direction (and why aren't you livid over that one!?), then why would you believe that another Wal-Mart could not be built close to the Heights in the opposite direction?

[CleaningLadyinCleveland]

to AtticaFlinch and TheNiche:

....and to become our country's new definition of the American working class dream? oh sad day...

Edited June 28, 2010 by CleaningLadyinCleveland

[SilverJK]

I'm sure a walmart would be quite succesful in this location, and I would probably even venture in there from time to time but I must say that I absolutely hate Walmart. I have friends that work at walmarts (limited to 30 hours a week and get screwed), others that are shift managers and are making a very decent living (especially for high school education) and others that work for the corporate headquarters in Bentonville who get paid very well. I could argue there methods of compensation both ways. I find Walmart to be an Evil company, because of their mind games they play on you. Why do they have like 80 registers? Is it just me? I've never seen a walmart with much more than half of their registers open even on Black Friday. If your never going to have more than 40 registers... just build 40. They also are really slow to pick up their baskets. I've had a few dings/scratches in my cars from sailing buggies at Walmart on windy days. This is mostly the customer's fault for being lazy, but they could still make the effort.

So yeah, I don't really care if it opens or not. I'd prefer other businesses but it's not my money. I'm not going to try to tell someone what to do with their property...

[Hartmann]

You say that...but I gather that you've been indoctrinated to a subculture propagated by over-educated white people that features class-based shame and douchey shame-avoidance behavior as a central tenet.

If you were a low-earning Mexican that had called the Heights home all your life, you'd have likely lamented in 2005 that the Target on Sawyer Street was not a Wal-Mart Supercenter and would be thrilled at these rumors because you were tired of packing several generations of family into a car for a day trip to a distant suburban Wal-Mart.

If a Wal-Mart does go in on Yale, my only concern is the traffic. I frequently use Yale to avoid the possibility of a train on Heights Blvd.

As for shopping at Wal-Mart, I generally do not find any deals there that I couldn't find at one of the larger Fiestas and like supporting a local chain. I've actually come to know a few of the workers at the one on 14th and Studewood and will shop there because of them.

The large chains are a product of people wanting cheaper goods, I can appreciate that and take advantage of it from time to time. I can't really imagine what home repair goods would cost if there weren't a Home Depot or Lowes. To be honest, my worst shopping experiences have been in Randall's and Kroger, both of which are big stores but have a total of three lanes open and charge more.

Edited June 28, 2010 by Hartmann

[AtticaFlinch]

to AtticaFlinch and TheNiche:

....and to become our country's new definition of the American working class dream? oh sad day...

Huh? I don't follow. I hate Walmart and quite a number of other major corporations (except for the one that employs me - I love you guys). I just recognize the need for a place like Walmart given the nature of our economy. And, as such, I don't see how eschewing Walmart in the Heights benefits anyone whatsoever. It's like when Rick Perry denied Texan taxpayers our share of the bailout loot because he was grandstanding to his party base. Sure, it made a handful of braindead GOP tea party types feel all warm and fuzzy, but in effect, he hurt a bunch of Texans for no real reason. It was mindless political theater and nothing more. Similarly, why shouldn't people in the Heights also have the same benefit of low prices as the people in the 'burbs? If low prices are available, then everyone should be able to take advantage of those low prices. If you prefer to abstain from Walmart, for whatever reason, then go ahead and abstain. No one will think ill of you for it. Most people only shop at Walmart out of necessity and understand that if you can afford to base your decisions on personal politics and not personal economics, then more power to you because we'd do the same if we could. But with that said, just because you can afford to make that decision doesn't mean everyone can. And who are you to dictate what and where I buy the goods that feed, clothe and otherwise support my family? If you'd like to pay my bills, then you can dictate to me where I shop. Otherwise, butt out of my personal affairs. Remember, not everyone who lives in the Heights is living the high life, and an even greater number who were livin' it up a couple years ago probably no longer are now.

To impose your preferences on everyone around you reeks of tyranny.

On the other hand, if you were to hand me a petition calling for an overhaul of our economic system which would prevent future cases of corporate misconduct such as perpetrated by Walmart, then I'd sign it. Hell, I'd probably volunteer to stand on a street corner and get even more signatures. But I wouldn't waste my time on something so inconsequential as Walmart trying to build on land that has no ecological or cultural value.

I don't think Walmart should be the new "working class dream", but I'm mostly a pragmatist. Let's solve the underlying illness, and the symptoms will sort themselves out.

[Tiko]

If a Wal-Mart does go in on Yale, my only concern is the traffic. I frequently use Yale to avoid the possibility of a train on Heights Blvd.

Ditto - combined with the new ramps....uck.

I like the Northwest Mall location idea, that makes a lot more sense.

[TheNiche]

to AtticaFlinch and TheNiche:

....and to become our country's new definition of the American working class dream? oh sad day...

No, but perhaps the American working-class fallback position. It's good to have options open to you.