Next Question
RSS
Wal-mart builds where they want to build, I remember back when there was a controversy about them building on an ancient Hawaiian burial site.
I wish this would embed, but it's certainly worth the click. It explains how Wal-Mart will build a store in one community, take advantage of the tax breaks and then get up and move once the tax breaks expire, in some cases they move just a couple block away to a new community that will give them new tax breaks.
http://www.vsocial.com/video/?d=4647
<embed src="http://www.vsocial.com/ups/eae7abef5565d2948fe038ad033f2c80" height="400" width="410"></embed>
I think practice like this should always be considered when a controversial new store is about to be put in. In a world that makes sense this would tilt the decision against letting them build.
Source(s):
http://www.tolerance.org/news/article_tol.jsp?id=1087
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2004/Mar/26/ln/ln12a.html
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3836296181471292925
http://www.walmartmovie.com/
Permalink | Report
Source(s):
ChaCha.com
Permalink | Report
Does any part of the country really need another Wal-Mart?
Permalink | Report
Permalink | Report
Answered Question
M$4
January 03, 2009 12:23 AM
Should Wal-Mart be allowed to build a store near the Wilderness Battlefield?
Wal-Mart says that it's not building on the actual battlefield itself. Historians and scholars feel it's an important landmark that should remain untouched. With whom do you agree? What should be done?
http://www.mahalo.com/Wilderness_Battlefield_Wal-Mart
http://www.mahalo.com/Wilderness_Battlefield_Wal-Mart
Interesting Question?
Yes (0)
No (0)
RSS
Best Answer Chosen by Asker
| January 03, 2009 12:51 AM |
I wish this would embed, but it's certainly worth the click. It explains how Wal-Mart will build a store in one community, take advantage of the tax breaks and then get up and move once the tax breaks expire, in some cases they move just a couple block away to a new community that will give them new tax breaks.
http://www.vsocial.com/video/?d=4647
<embed src="http://www.vsocial.com/ups/eae7abef5565d2948fe038ad033f2c80" height="400" width="410"></embed>
I think practice like this should always be considered when a controversial new store is about to be put in. In a world that makes sense this would tilt the decision against letting them build.
Source(s):
http://www.tolerance.org/news/article_tol.jsp?id=1087
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2004/Mar/26/ln/ln12a.html
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3836296181471292925
http://www.walmartmovie.com/
| Asker's Rating: |
• Yes, this is pretty much how I feel. If this were a case between historians and any other company, I think it would boil down to whether or not the ground itself has historical significance or not. But with an enormous, questionable enterprise like Wal-Mart, there are other considerations.
Permalink | Report
Other Answers (4)
January 03, 2009 12:35 AM
I did not know the answer to this question, so I asked ChaCha, and it said, "Wal-Mart points out that the store would be right behind a bank and a small strip mall, a full mile from the entrance to the strip." Therefore, I can conclude that Wal-Mart should be allowed to build a store near the Wilderness Battlefield because it's not directly in the historic location, so it should not be a problem.
Source(s):
ChaCha.com
Permalink | Report
January 03, 2009 01:17 AM
Has Wal-mart considered other locations that might be suitable and less controversial? They wanted to put a store in New Orleans, and tried to essentially bribe the city to re-zone the area for them. They eventually did get their location, but they had to pay for a whole lot of improvements to the neighborhood and surrounding streets. Perhaps they should be told no until a similar deal can be reached? Does any part of the country really need another Wal-Mart?
Permalink | Report
January 03, 2009 02:48 AM
I have heard that sometimes walmarts strategy is to pretend to build in a controversial site so that when they concede and build on a different site everyone thinks they won the big walmart battle, when in reality they were always planning on building in a different site all along. If you think this sounds like a crazy conspiracy theory, watch the documetary that was made about some of walmarts very sneaky tactics to get people to feel good about them moving to town. I do not think walmart should be allowed to build near historic sites, because the masive amount of traffic that is generated by walmart will interfere. my town is currently involved ina battle against walmart, they want to build right on the county line so that they pay the cheaper rural taxes but get all the business from the large town next door, very sneaky. Don't get me started on walmart though if you have netflix you can find that walmart documentary it's really interesting.
Permalink | Report
Answer this Question
Related Questions
Ask a Question
Buy Mahalo Dollars with Credit Card or PayPal
Top Members
Most Popular Tags
Categories
- Anonymous
- Arts & Design
- Beauty & Style
- Books & Authors
- Business
- Cars & Transportation
- Consumer Electronics
- Coupons Deals
- Education
- Entertainment
- Environment
- Fitness
- Food & Drink
- From Email
- From Iphone
- From Twitter
- Health
- History
- Hobbies
- Home & Garden
- How Tos
- Humor
- Jobs
- Legal
- Local
- Love & Relationships
- Mahalo Answers Community
- Money
- Music
- News
- NSFW
- Parenting
- Pets
- Science & Mathematics
- Services
- Shopping
- Social Science
- Society & Culture
- Sports
- Technology & Internet
- Travel
- Video Games
Welcome New Members
- britni, November 09, 2009 11:48 PM
- sandy37, November 09, 2009 11:47 PM
- mikesquires, November 09, 2009 11:44 PM
- dee12dee, November 09, 2009 11:33 PM
- mpgore, November 09, 2009 11:24 PM
Mahalo Dollars are the currency of Mahalo Answers.
Each Mahalo Dollar costs $1.
Once you earn more than 40 Mahalo Dollars, you can request to be paid via PayPal. Each Mahalo Dollar is currently worth $0.75 when paid out via PayPal. Learn More