[at-l] Confusering

[the_rev_mrf at kingcon.com (Martin Fors)]

Hi Skylander,

Methinks you simplify this too much in your post below.  May I recommend
that you purchase and read The Case Against Wal-Mart by Al Norman [2004.]
ISBN: 0-9711542-3-6
That little book may hugely enlighten you.  It is published by:

Raphel Marketing
118 South Newton Place
Atlantic City, NJ 08401

'I pledge my income
to The Store
of the United States of Wal-Mart,
and to the stockholders
for whom it expands.
One workforce, underpaid,
with Barbie Dolls
and cheap underwear for all.'


rusty, who lives in Vermont
~~~~~~~~~~~





Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 17:21:45 EDT
From: Bror8588@aol.com
Subject: Re: [at-l] Confusering
To: GoVolsKelly@aol.com, AT-L@backcountry.net
Message-ID: <86.cc6d33f.2de512e9@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
In a message dated 5/25/04 16:54:36 Eastern Daylight Time,
GoVolsKelly@aol.com writes:

> I heard on NPR yesterday that Vermont was on an endangered list. I caught
> the tail end of the interview with somebody, and I'm very confused. What
> does
> this mean?
The NY Times had an article about Wal-Mart wanting to expand their business
in Vermont. Some people feel that it would ruin the rural nature of Vermont.
The Burlington Area has many large businesses in their city and in the towns
surrounding it.
Of course, the store in Williston is doing well, which must mean that the
people there like the low prices and the convenience. Wal-Mart is a success
because they offer good prices. Who wants to pay more than they have to pay
for
necessities?
The news article came about because a store in St. Albans was proposed and
there is some opposition yet there are people who will travel to Williston,
VT,
to take advantage of the offerings there.
It is only those who have too much money that want to do away with stores
that people who are financially challenged find salvific, and it must be
nice to
be in a position where price is no object.
Besides, Vermont is a long way from Miami!
Skylander