Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Walmart didn’t kill the small town, it is the small town

discoursemagazine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 181 posts

Re: Walmart didn’t kill the small town, it is the small town

#171

Post by newswasboring »

scottLobster wrote: post #162
newswasboring wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sounds like you don't get out much Just completely unnecessary ad hominem. Why?

I was responding to a guy saying anyone under 50 has probably never walked down a Main St. Which I took as yet more "old man yells at cloud" sentiment. It's not just where I grew up either, the town where I went to college had a literal "Main St" with privately owned shops/bars/etc, and a permanent population of ~35,000. All of the ~20,000 students walked down it at some point because that's where the University book…

> Which I took as yet more "old man yells at cloud" sentiment.

This is the uncharitable assumption which you didn't have to make. Someone was describing something they observed, you can counter them without making silly snide comments.

Re: Walmart didn’t kill the small town, it is the small town

#172

Post by derekp7 »

coreyp_1 wrote: post #104
no_wizard wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I consider it the fact that Walmart for a long time had a mostly rural and suburban strategy that skews demographics to people 40+. It’s a Sam Walton hold over that I think is being slowly replaced. What WalMart hates the most is that they can’t get people of affluence who want to save money to shop at one though. When I worked there the complaint out of HQ I heard the most is that Michelle Obama and Oprah would shop…

I H-A-T-E going to WalMart. I have to go every once in a while, because that's the only place that I can find one particular item that I use frequently, and that's only if I forget to buy it online where it costs a bit more. I do my normal shopping at a grocery store where everything is probably 10-15% more expensive. Why? 5 reasons. 1. Paper bags. I hate plastic ones. 2. I'm not forced through the self checkout. Wal…

Speaking of checkouts, there is a chain of mega-sized employee-owned grocery stores in the upper Midwest that has the perfect checkout system. You pull your cart up to the register, and they pull items directly out of the cart to scan/bag them, and put the bags in another cart at the foot of the register. You don't event have to lift a finger until you go to put the bags (paper or plastic) in your car trunk.

The parking lot is another item. Instead of the rows going perpendicular to the front of the store, where you are constantly crossing at the pedestrian entrance, the parking is lengthwise across the store. So you can cruise up and down the aisles without driving by the front of the building. And no matter where you park, you are only 2 - 4 rows back from the building.

Re: Walmart didn’t kill the small town, it is the small town

#173

Post by joshspankit »

gtowey wrote: post #77

This article is pure corporate propaganda. Walmart isn't good for small towns no matter how you look at it because they turn entire small town economies into a line item on a gigantic global multi national's ledger. And once done, there is no going back. They build a new store and then sell at a loss to bankrupt the competition. They can do this because they have billions of dollars in reserve and are subsidized by o…

You’ve missed mentioning another effect on the area: siphoning cash out.

No matter how big their local profit is, the only money reliably returned to the local area is a portion of those minimum-wage incomes.

And of those, a not-insignificant amount comes right back in to Walmart as the employees shop for basics. The rest of the money gets pulled out for corporate capital expenditures never to be seen by the local area again.

Walmart basically runs like a giant cash-vacuum.

Re: Walmart didn’t kill the small town, it is the small town

#174

Post by batch12 »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #169
afavour wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure if you’re knowingly ignoring the OPs point or just ignoring it. Buying two lawnmowers is vastly more wasteful (to the world, not to your pocket) than buying one and maintaining it.

That's the point. To the customer the pocket is all that matters. Reducto Ad absurdum: if you break a bowl, do you spend time learning how to glue back the pieces, take it to a shop expert to repair, or simply go to any store and buy a new bowl for $5-10 (Assuming it's at least a decent porcelain bown)? Option 1 will take a lot of time and have a flimsy result, option 2 may cost $100+ upfront, so would only be used f…

9 months x $15 = 135. Even at double or triple, It's still a better deal and less hassle than having to juggle junk mowers every season just because they can't be bothered to learn simple hygiene/maintenance.

Also, I've done the bowl repair you mention here a few times actually.

Re: Walmart didn’t kill the small town, it is the small town

#175

Post by Ekaros »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #169
afavour wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure if you’re knowingly ignoring the OPs point or just ignoring it. Buying two lawnmowers is vastly more wasteful (to the world, not to your pocket) than buying one and maintaining it.

That's the point. To the customer the pocket is all that matters. Reducto Ad absurdum: if you break a bowl, do you spend time learning how to glue back the pieces, take it to a shop expert to repair, or simply go to any store and buy a new bowl for $5-10 (Assuming it's at least a decent porcelain bown)? Option 1 will take a lot of time and have a flimsy result, option 2 may cost $100+ upfront, so would only be used f…

If 200$ is reasonable price point. We can ask what is the normal rate of people who repair lawnmowers? How many hours you can actually buy with it? 2? 4? and then we aren't even at parts. Are they available, what is the lead time?

Labour costs are likely so high now that just replacing something makes lot more sense. And you get certainty that it works.

Also shouldn't there be some sort of warranty? At least for year or two?

Re: Walmart didn’t kill the small town, it is the small town

#176

Post by frumper »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #163
frumper wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've now re-invented the mall killer.

TBH loitering killed malls more than a centralized checkout. They became one of the few places for teens to hangout and teens don't have much money. No coincidence that the remaining malls tend to be in high income areas. But I digress. The removal of hangout spots in the country (especially post pandemic) can be its own topic.

Except that doesn’t make sense. Malls were teen hangouts for 2 decades and thrived. What killed our mall was that all the anchor stores were getting killed by Walmart and target.

Re: Walmart didn’t kill the small town, it is the small town

#177

Post by mbg721 »

frumper wrote: post #176
johnnyanmac wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TBH loitering killed malls more than a centralized checkout. They became one of the few places for teens to hangout and teens don't have much money. No coincidence that the remaining malls tend to be in high income areas. But I digress. The removal of hangout spots in the country (especially post pandemic) can be its own topic.

Except that doesn’t make sense. Malls were teen hangouts for 2 decades and thrived. What killed our mall was that all the anchor stores were getting killed by Walmart and target.

The areas that were "high-income" (cheap for white commuters aspiring to the upper-middle-class) a generation before got more and more developed, and at some point in trying to attain big-city convenience, gained the big-city problems they were trying to avoid.

Re: Walmart didn’t kill the small town, it is the small town

#178

Post by frumper »

mbg721 wrote: post #177
frumper wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that doesn’t make sense. Malls were teen hangouts for 2 decades and thrived. What killed our mall was that all the anchor stores were getting killed by Walmart and target.

The areas that were "high-income" (cheap for white commuters aspiring to the upper-middle-class) a generation before got more and more developed, and at some point in trying to attain big-city convenience, gained the big-city problems they were trying to avoid.

Our mall lost 2 major department stores when we got a Walmart and target. They lost 2 more after Amazon got big. The target and Costco a few blocks away are thriving with the affluent families. The mall isn’t economically competitive anymore.

Re: Walmart didn’t kill the small town, it is the small town

#179

Post by scottLobster »

newswasboring wrote: post #171
scottLobster wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was responding to a guy saying anyone under 50 has probably never walked down a Main St. Which I took as yet more "old man yells at cloud" sentiment. It's not just where I grew up either, the town where I went to college had a literal "Main St" with privately owned shops/bars/etc, and a permanent population of ~35,000. All of the ~20,000 students walked down it at some point because that's where the University book…

> Which I took as yet more "old man yells at cloud" sentiment. This is the uncharitable assumption which you didn't have to make. Someone was describing something they observed, you can counter them without making silly snide comments.

I don't think it's uncharitable at all. Anyone who makes a statement like "most people under 50 have never experienced a Main St" is making assumptions so large, so unexamined and so obviously incorrect that it has to be emotionally driven, especially when it's phrased along the lines of "kids today don't understand X".

If it is a legitimate observation, they must really, literally, not get out much and I would recommend driving to the nearest town with a population north of 10,000 and look around a bit to broaden their horizons. That's the generous interpretation.

Re: Walmart didn’t kill the small town, it is the small town

#180

Post by mbg721 »

frumper wrote: post #178
mbg721 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The areas that were "high-income" (cheap for white commuters aspiring to the upper-middle-class) a generation before got more and more developed, and at some point in trying to attain big-city convenience, gained the big-city problems they were trying to avoid.

Our mall lost 2 major department stores when we got a Walmart and target. They lost 2 more after Amazon got big. The target and Costco a few blocks away are thriving with the affluent families. The mall isn’t economically competitive anymore.

There are malls that are competitive...one near me survived by anchoring itself to a Nordstrom's and then aiming higher. But that isn't "the mall".
Post reply on HN