|
September 26, 2009
If there's a "right" to health care, then what about the "right" to buy groceries?
Here's a charming picture from a local news story: When I moved from a relatively affluent Philadelphia suburb to a relatively affluent Michigan college town I took for granted what most of us take for granted -- the easy availability of food. In the form of nearby grocery stores. So it shocked me to see long lines suddenly appear at the nearest grocery store to me without any explanation, and to be see them sold out of not one but three things on my shopping list. Yesterday I learned that another nearby Krogers grocery store (which had been there for 30 years) had closed. It's not that it's a huge deal for me, but still I wondered why. The population and demographics of this town do not seem to have changed. Whether the population base of that particular Krogers had suddenly ceased to support it after 30 years, I don't know. I just hope this doesn't represent a trend towards fewer stores, because that would mean longer lines, things sold out, longer distances to stores. A Krogers closure in Toledo has infuriated patrons to the point where they are actually organizing in protest. I realize there's no right to have a store in your neighborhood, but this is the kind of thing that does affect property values, and lower property values in turn mean fewer grocery stores. (In Detroit, for example, there simply are no national grocery stores at all, and of course there's little likelihood of.... change.) Whether this comment to the Toledo story is true I don't know: Kroger has lost also due to shop lifting and "Shrinkage" of inventory which happens when emp[loyees and their friends and family take merchandise out of the store without paying. This is also a large factor in other Toledo City Groceries and a big reason why there are very few large chain groceries in the Central City.You'd think something like that would be well within management's control. Employees can still be fired for stealing, can't they? Yes, and they can sue; according to an empirical study of employees who sued after being fired for theft, "the employees were victorious in 60 percent of the cases." (I don't like those odds.) So there's more to whether an area gets a grocery store than simple population demographics. I guess I should be glad I live in an area which still has stores. posted by Eric on 09.26.09 at 09:29 AM
Comments
Just think: soon our health care will look just like those shelves! TallDave · September 26, 2009 02:02 PM It is part of Obama’s plot to control food distribution. Mark my words. This is just the beginning. Bob Rowin · September 26, 2009 02:25 PM I remember pictures of stores in Moscow, and stores in stores in Vilnius, and ....... stores in Los Angeles. Larry Sheldon · September 26, 2009 03:19 PM Most managers I know won't fire for cause, just use layoffs or other terminology. I know someone who has been "laid off" that way several times after money disappeared from cash registers. My friend was finally able to fire a bad sales manager in his company, it took a whole year of documentation before he and the company lawyers were confident they could let her go. This was after many other years of her ruining everything she touched and costing them money. For some reason everyone fired for cause sues and says it's not their fault. The thing is they even believe it. plutosdad · September 26, 2009 11:56 PM It might be a bit naive to lament the closed store. What about the distributor that folds, meaning that store chains lose access to some products? What about farms and ranches, slaughter operations and grain elevators? What if the change is not the customers, but the taxes and regulations, that make the business non-profitable? What if union demands change the ability of a business to survive? Have you looked at the bill the US Senate is contemplating in the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions committee, H.R. 2749 (passed by the house August 3, 2009)? This is the Food Safety EWnhancement Act 2009, imposing federal record keeping on anyone storing, producing, or transporting food or components of food for animals or people. The intent of H.R.2749 appears to be to drive everyone but Monsanto's ten biggest customers out of business - and could well mean the end of the family farm, and the food we enjoy from small and medium farms - or backyard gardens, farmers markets, or roadside stands. These would *all* fall under the jurisdiction of the FDA under this bill. That may well be enough to drive producers and transporters to reconsider whether they care to mess with food products. Think what that would mean to your neighborhood Krogers. Or H.E.B. or Safeway, etc. What if world demand for oil returns as factories around the world begin to resume operations after the recession starts to wane. And that drives oil prices to $6/gallon for a couple of months, then settle back to $3-$4.50 for a quarter or two - then ratchets up again? What if Tax and Trade passes, and utilities pay to buy the coal and oil, then pay the government two to three times that amount in new taxes intended to punish and penalize companies that burn coal and oil? What if some small percentage of people that know how to run a successful business retire or move overseas, out of frustration with regulation changes? What if the percentage isn't so small? Brad K. · September 29, 2009 04:22 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
October 2009
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
October 2009
September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
"If you want war, prepare for peace!"
DON'T YOU HATE CAPS LOCK Tap tap tap... Will Obama Be Indicted? The Narrative is "Just Shut Up"! Sara Palin's Going Rogue #5 On Amazon What To Do Before TSHTF Discrimination against religion leads to discrimination in favor of religion? Holy assholes! If running really produced a high it would be illegal
Links
Site Credits
|
|
I think it goes like:
1. I'm entitled because the stores are ripping me off.
2. Yes you are entitled: to nothing.
====
I'm always happy to pay. It means the stores will be restocked.
The "socialist mentality" is destroying Detroit.