$640.00 to fill the tanks...

I wouldn't be too concerned about that. So the store could be able to
know when you purchased the underware you have on.

That I don't care about. What I care about is that that same underwear
could be traced everywhere it goes, and the other items it cavorts with
could be correleated to it.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

How is this =really= different from WalMart jumping in and crushing all
the local stores? Think for a moment.

Because the City built the hotel complex only after shopping the idea
around to all the big-box hotel chains -- and failing. Without
exception, the big chains rejected the notion of building a giant
luxury hotel and conference center in little Coralville, Iowa, because
they knew there was no way to net a return on their investment within
their lifetimes.

So, the Mayor of Coralville and his cronies -- flush with tax money
from the huge mall that was built there (after the anti-business lobby
drove them out of Iowa City, BTW) -- simply decided to build it
themselves, and lease it back to Marriott Corporation.

I'm sure Marriott is still pinching themselves, trying to figure out if
they're dreaming. They got a brand, new $60 million hotel for ZERO
investment, and don't have to worry about paying ANYTHING but a monthly
lease. It's a hotelier's dream -- and a taxpayer's nightmare.

Some citizens of Coralville tried to stop this madness -- they knew
that they would end up holding the bag, down the road -- but to no
avail. There simply is no law prohibiting a city from building a
hotel, and calling it "urban development", in Iowa.

WalMart only builds where they think they can make a profit.
Governments don't CARE about profit -- after all, it's not *their*
money. THAT is the difference, and that is why a government-owned
hotel is "unfair"...and Walmart isn't.

(Incidentally, the same anti-business lobby in Iowa City recently
succeeded in disallowing WalMart from building a Super Walmart just
down the road from our hotel on airport-owned land. They sued, and
delayed, and delayed, and eventually made it impossible for Walmart to
obtain a zoning variance to allow them to build a gas station on the
site. Walmart had agreed to pay our airport $3.2 million for that
land -- which would have made our airport debt-free, and would have
opened the area up to all the development that follows a new Walmart.


The anti-Walmart crowd is successfully using the courts to stifle free
enterprise -- ANY free enterprise -- that they think is "unsuitable".
Somehow these self-annointed saviors believe that the unwashed masses
who flock to Walmart every day aren't capable of making these decisions
for themselves, and must be led toward the light. It's sickening.)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 13:40:05 GMT, Jose wrote:

That I don't care about. What I care about is that that same underwear
could be traced everywhere it goes, and the other items it cavorts with
could be correleated to it.

and for some it also might be embarassing when everybody with a reader
knows that you are wearing your wife's panties :-))))

Jose

#m
--
Did you ever realize how much text fits in eighty columns? If you now consider
that a signature usually consists of up to four lines, this gives you enough
space to spread a tremendous amount of information with your messages. So seize
this opportunity and don't waste your signature with bull**** nobody will read.

How is this =really= different from WalMart jumping in and crushing all
the local stores? Think for a moment.


Because the City built the hotel complex only after shopping the idea
around to all the big-box hotel chains -- and failing. [...]
...they knew there was no way to net a return on their investment
within their lifetimes.

That makes it a bad business decision on the city's part.

So, the Mayor of Coralville and his cronies [...] simply decided to
build it themselves, and lease it back to Marriott Corporation.

[Marriott] got a brand, new $60 million hotel for ZERO
investment, and don't have to worry about paying ANYTHING but a monthly
lease.

I think Marriott typically leases space and runs hotels that way. At
least that's the way it is here.

It's a hotelier's dream -- and a taxpayer's nightmare.

The taxpayer gets a lease payment out of the deal, and doesn't have to
worry whether or not the hotel makes money.

There simply is no law prohibiting a city from building a
hotel, and calling it "urban development", in Iowa.

This is similar (from my POV) to a city building a sports complex, for
the Olympics.

WalMart only builds where they think they can make a profit.
Governments don't CARE about profit -- after all, it's not *their*
money. THAT is the difference, and that is why a government-owned
hotel is "unfair"...and Walmart isn't.

Governments don't care about profit - true. But that's not why it's
"unfair". In my eyes, what makes government-run businesses unfair is
that there is no separation of powers between those who make the laws
and the government business that has to follow them.

However, other big businesses get cozy with government too, winning tax
concessions which are just as good as free investment money. Government
lures business promising homeowners that it expands the tax base (and
keeps the mill rate down), but then it gives tax abatements and zoning
conessions and special considerations which nullify these putative
benefits to the homeowners. These concessions would be very difficult,
or even impossible, for a small business to get.

This is equally cozy in my view. But it is not labeled "communism",
wheras the former is.

I'm not fighting here, I'm just trying to see whether you have a zebra,
or just a horse in stripes.

Walmart had agreed to pay our airport $3.2 million for that
land -- which would have made our airport debt-free...

.... which sounds good until the first plane crashes on the roof killing
seventy five people, and then there is a call to close the airport.
There's a reason airports (should) have buffer zones. You should know
it better than most.

The anti-Walmart crowd is successfully using the courts to stifle free
enterprise -- ANY free enterprise -- that they think is "unsuitable".
Somehow these self-annointed saviors believe that the unwashed masses
who flock to Walmart every day aren't capable of making these decisions
for themselves, and must be led toward the light. It's sickening.)

That's mighty theatrical talk. What exactly did they sue to prevent?

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On Sat, 19 Aug 2006 12:33:59 -0600, Newps wrote:



Jay Beckman wrote:

A Lowes and a Home Depot
built brand new right across the street from each other


You see that everywhere you go. These two are attracted to each other
like nothing I've ever seen.

The best looking and largest lumber and hardware store I've ever seen
anywhere was built recently by Kenyon Noble in Bozeman, MT. This
company has been here since 1889. Motto - "We're not the best because
we're the oldest but we are the oldest because we're the best."

It is just a couple of blocks away from a fairly new Home Depot and a
couple of blocks in the other direction from a Wal-Mart that was built
first.

Wal-Mart? Bring 'em on!

Klein
Bozeman, MT

On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 15:58:58 -0600, Klein wrote:

On Sat, 19 Aug 2006 12:33:59 -0600, Newps wrote:



Jay Beckman wrote:

A Lowes and a Home Depot
built brand new right across the street from each other


You see that everywhere you go. These two are attracted to each other
like nothing I've ever seen.

The best looking and largest lumber and hardware store I've ever seen
anywhere was built recently by Kenyon Noble in Bozeman, MT. This
company has been here since 1889. Motto - "We're not the best because
we're the oldest but we are the oldest because we're the best."

It is just a couple of blocks away from a fairly new Home Depot and a
couple of blocks in the other direction from a Wal-Mart that was built
first.

Wal-Mart? Bring 'em on!

Home Depot can be a pain in the ass. But they're displacing the
neighborhood hardware stores that are moribund anyway. Went into HD
the other day looking for a 2 x 4 cutoff for a minor project. Found
one in the bin, along with some other fine woods cutoffs, but it
hadn't been marked with a SKU, so the two clerks at the contractors
cash register insisted I'd have to pay the 8-foot price. Fasteners not
so good either. Need a couple of 10-32 Tee-Nuts for the same project.
No joy. Went to the local HW store (They're an ACE affiliate, but
they stock like a real HW store) and found 'em in the bins. In favor
of the local HD, they hired this 70-year old woman who works in
plumbing, and she is a virtual encyclopedia of practical plumbing
knowledge. Probably used to own a hardware store.

Don

The anti-Walmart crowd is successfully using the courts to stifle free
enterprise -- ANY free enterprise -- that they think is "unsuitable".
Somehow these self-annointed saviors believe that the unwashed masses
who flock to Walmart every day aren't capable of making these decisions
for themselves, and must be led toward the light. It's sickening.)

That's mighty theatrical talk. What exactly did they sue to prevent?

A local group called "Stop Walmart" constituted itself back in the late
1970s, in an attempt to stop the construction of the original Walmart
store here in Iowa City.

They apparently made life miserable for Walmart (it's before my time),
but, eventually, the store was built. It's been successfully providing
low priced, high quality goods and excellent customer service ever
since. (And shafting their vendors, of which I was one, BTW.)

In 2005, Walmart announced plans to build a new Super Walmart on a site
just to the East of their store, on airport land that was carved out by
the Airport Commission in an attempt to free the airport from the
slavery of begging the city council for money each year.

(Flash back a few years: The infrastructure of the airport was
crumbling, and the city simply wouldn't pay to repave taxiways, etc. --
so the airport commission decided to take matters into their own hands,
and devised a way of making the airport self-sufficient. They carved
out 15 acres on the north side of the airport and designated it a
commercial park, with the idea of selling or leasing the land to
business interests. Walmart was to be the first, anchor tenant.)

Incredibly, the SAME THREE PEOPLE from the late 1970s (a group of
former hippies -- Iowa City is chock full of 'em) reconstituted itself
to stop THIS Walmart store. The city had allowed a zoning variance on
the land, in order to facilitate Walmart's purchase, and the "Stop
Walmart" folks jumped all over this, suing to prove that the variance
was illegally processed by the city.

The suit dragged on for over a year, thanks to our wonderfully inept
judiciary system. Walmart patiently bided its time, and in July they
won the case. The court ruled that the City of Iowa City followed
procedures to the letter, and that nothing untoward had happened during
the issuing of the zoning variance.

"Stop Walmart" had 60 days to appeal the decision. On the 60th day,
they did, throwing the case to the Iowa Supreme Court. Everything was
done to take the maximum amount of time possible, and all involved knew
that any case that goes to the supreme court takes AT LEAST two years
to hear.

The coup de grace was when the city decided (under pressure from "Stop
Walmart") that *they* didn't want to wait two more years to see if this
land would sell. They then decided not to allow another variance that
Walmart was seeking to change the land from a "100 year flood plain" to
something less restrictive, saying that Walmart was being stupid and
obstructionist even ASKING for such a variance.

(Background: The reason Walmart asked for this new variance was because
of another Iowa court ruling against Walmart in -- I think --
Maquoketa, Iowa that related to the Walmart there being built on a 100
year flood plain. Somehow they ended up in dutch because of that flood
plain designation, and they wanted to prevent that from happening here
down the road. It was really a simple wording change, but...)

So, the City refused the variance. Walmart, now facing several years
more of legal costs and battles, walked away from the deal, and is now
looking to buy land *just* outside of the city limits -- exactly like
so many other businesses have done in our area. (Iowa City is famous
throughout Iowa for being completely anti-business development. I can
attest to this from personal experience -- for example, they would not
let us hang a "Grand Opening" banner at the hotel, when we opened in
2002, because of some absurd local ordinance. Funnier still, my barber
was not allowed to hang his restored antique barber pole outside,
because of a local law against "moving signs" that can be a
"distraction" to drivers. His shop is on a cul de sac...)

Bottom line: All "Stop Walmart" had to do was sue, and appeal, work
the phones, and delay, and they were able to defeat the building of a
new store that (a) would have provided jobs for hundreds, (b) would
have meant development of restaurants and retail stores on the out-lots
all around, and (c) would have made our airport financially
self-sufficient.

From a personal standpoint, our plans for developing a restaurant on
land adjacent to the hotel hinged on that Walmart sale going through.
Now, we may never do it. You simply can't imagine the impact that
store would have had on our relatively isolated part of town.

The "Stop Walmart" folks are nothing but selfish, pompous asses, who
have harmed more working Americans than they could EVER have hoped to
help -- but then, that's not what they're *really* about anyway, now is
it?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:

It's been successfully providing
low priced, high quality goods and excellent customer service ever
since. (And shafting their vendors, of which I was one, BTW.)

Excellent customer service? We must be thinking of two different
companies named Wal-Mart.

It's been successfully providing
low priced, high quality goods and excellent customer service ever
since. (And shafting their vendors, of which I was one, BTW.)

Excellent customer service? We must be thinking of two different
companies named Wal-Mart.

I'm not a fan of Walmart (they STILL owe me money, from my previous
business). They are absolute *******s to do business with, from the
vendor end -- but I can't argue the fact that their employees are
friendly, outgoing, well-trained, and helpful.

At least they are around here.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:
The anti-Walmart crowd is successfully using the courts to stifle free
enterprise -- ANY free enterprise -- that they think is "unsuitable".
Somehow these self-annointed saviors believe that the unwashed masses
who flock to Walmart every day aren't capable of making these decisions
for themselves, and must be led toward the light. It's sickening.)

That's mighty theatrical talk. What exactly did they sue to prevent?


A local group called "Stop Walmart" constituted itself back in the late
1970s, in an attempt to stop the construction of the original Walmart
store here in Iowa City.

They apparently made life miserable for Walmart (it's before my time),
but, eventually, the store was built. It's been successfully providing
low priced, high quality goods and excellent customer service ever
since. (And shafting their vendors, of which I was one, BTW.)

OK, two of our three isn't bad. I've rarely found Wal-Mart stuff to be
of high quality. The exception is stuff like brand-name oil. Their
tools are pretty pathetic and most other stuff is just cheap stuff, but
that is what their customers want. Customer service is good in the
sense that they'll take back pretty much anything with no questions
asked, but customer service in the sense of providing information on
their products (other than where to locate them) is also pathetic.

Matt