Aug. 30, 2011 at 12:31pm

Is Walmart about to grace us with its presence?

Speculation on a Walmart locating at

So I just received this email via the CNC email list and thought I'd share. Personally I find it disappointing to see a potential big box retailer go in (particularly Walmart). Especially if the original plan was for medical buildings and the higher-level higher-wage jobs they would have accommodated.

Thoughts? Reactions? Opinions? Please share...

The Central Neighborhood Council has learned of news regarding the Elks Development on S. 23rd and Union.

Background on the Issue:

For many months the CNC has been following the potential development at S. 23rd Street and Union Avenue also known as the Elks Lodge Development. Last week at a City Council Committee meeting the developers asked the city to change an ordinance to deal with potential traffic flow issues once the development is done. Council Members Fey, Mello, Boe and Campbell tried many times and many ways to ask what was being developed there. The developers refused to respond in the public. The Central Neighborhood Council submitted a request for Public Records with the city dealing with that site. Records show a site map that includes a new hospital, medical and dental space, pharmacy warehouse and a parking structure.

Why the secrecy? What is it about this that was so secretive? Well, we have learned that the plans the CNC have acquired are changing. The developers still refuse to tell the city council or staff what is going there. They have said that the site plans have changed and that it is a controversial business which we are lead to believe could be Walmart.

Action to take:

You as a resident, you as a business owner should be very worried. The city council is scheduled to hear the first reading today, August 30 at 5:00 and the final reading and vote next Tuesday, September 30, at 5:00. Both meetings will be in Council chambers at 747 Market Street. We are asking that you go to City Council today, Tuesday, August 30 at 5:00pm to testify and ask the City Council to slow down, demand that the developers divulge what is happening at the site. The city council SHOULD NOT pass any changes to ordinance, should not accommodate any request by the developers until they are transparent, open and upfront about what is happening in our neighborhood.

If you cannot attend today, Tuesday, August 30 or next Tuesday September 6, please e-mail our City Council members.

Tricia DeOme
Central Neighborhood Council


Justin D. Leighton
Central Neighborhood Council

comments [314]  |  posted under tacoma


by fredo on 8/30/2011 @ 12:57pm
Yes Tricia and Justin,

We can't maintain these high unemployment numbers here in Tacoma unless we make the development process as cumbersome as possible. I was just thinking the other day that it would be nice if all the sites for potential development could be hamstrung in some way so that we could perpetuate our employer-unfriendly climate.

Bravo public servants!

by NineInchNachos on 8/30/2011 @ 1:07pm
taking down Wal*Mart is a happy challenge!

by The Jinxmedic on 8/30/2011 @ 1:17pm
They should put it right smack downtown, on the block where the Luzon used to be, with underground parking below the store. Win-win.

by Nick on 8/30/2011 @ 1:18pm
Excellent points Fredo. I do think its a matter of perspective though. I see two issues here: employment and land-use. I also see two timeframes: long (5-10+ years) and short (6 months - under 5 years).

On some level it feels like there's some merit to the saying "beggars can't be choosers," especially given the short-term prospects for this area. But I can't help but think that rubber-stamping anything that creates jobs within city limits only focuses on the employment issue and only in the short-term (for other employment/land-use issues joined a the hip, see City of Tacoma vs. ClearChannel Outdoor).

To me, considering the (un)employment and land-use issues on the long-term scale supersedes the short-term perspective. Sure we get guaranteed minimum-wage jobs where there would otherwise be an empty parking lot. But is it worth it? We'd lock-in a big box structure likely for decades, precluding any other alternative type of development from happening during that time. Does that match up with Tacoma's goals and aspirations?

It's a risk/reward thing. Guaranteed minimal return now, or do we take a risk and hold out for something better? I'd like to think we can afford at least a little more risk than simply rubber-stamping the first proposal that presents itself. I know this specific incident isn't about approving the actual development, but I think that is really what will be driving most of the discussion.

by tacoma1 on 8/30/2011 @ 1:21pm
hmmmmmmmmmmmm, lets see here................ The original development plans called for additional hospital space, medical, and dental offices. Good paying jobs, with good benefits! If the developer puts in a Walmart, with low paying jobs, poor benefits, and the ability to crush smaller local businesses nearby...............who wins in that scenario? Keep in mind that the future Walmart employee most likely currently works in their own small business nearby.

Would the winner be:
A) Tacoma citizens
B) Future Walmart employee (aka current Tacoma small business owner)
C) Walmart shareholders
D) The developer
E) Both C & D
F) Charlie Sheen

by NineInchNachos on 8/30/2011 @ 1:22pm
why is Wal*Mart being so sneaky? So secretive?

here is audio of Ryan Mello asking over and over for information and the developer stooge not saying jack.

by L.S.Erhardt on 8/30/2011 @ 1:29pm
Methinks they're being quiet because Target, Fred Meyer, Petsmart, etc in that area would raise holy hell if they knew a Wal-Mart was trying to sneak in there.

Oh, and not to mention the thousands of people who don't want a wal-mart.

Interestingly enough, I agree with the Jinxmedic. If they want in town so badly, have them go DT with parking underground and like 2-3 floors of retail and some other stuff. It's a better option than just another box (though admittedly the box IS their M.O.)

by fredo on 8/30/2011 @ 1:34pm
Nick wrote@ "We'd lock-in a big box structure likely for decades, precluding any other alternative type of development from happening during that time. Does that match up with Tacoma's goals and aspirations?"

Yes we should certainly have goals and aspirations, I mean, we should have REALISTIC goals and aspirations. And where are Tacoma's goals and aspirations codified? I would like to review them. Nick do you have a copy you could post?

Yes it is sort of a beggars can't be choosers situation. In the 2 years we've lost Russell, Nalleys and Morpho Systems. And the major employers we've gained? I can't recall any.

Regarding the walmart jobs. I notice the people who are already employed at jobs they like are quick to criticize. I wonder if you would be so glib if you had just exhausted your 99 weeks of unemployment benefits and were about to be living in your car.

by tacoma1 on 8/30/2011 @ 1:42pm
Fredo, I would rather have someone that is currently unemployed get a higher paid job in a medical office than work for minimum wage without benefits in a Walmart.

If you listen to the audio (the pertinent part starts at 30 minutes) the traffic impacts in this neighborhood would be significant.

And NIN is correct, the douche bag developer essentially refuses to answer the councils direct questions on what type of develoment it would be?

by Erik on 8/30/2011 @ 1:48pm
A developer is entitled to develop the Elks parking lot under the building code presently in place. An intense walkable mixed use project would be ideal for this massive dead zone.

However, the council is under no obligation to vote to give the developer special consideration and modify traffic flow without knowing what is being proposed.

Perhaps a better design could even be obtained for the u turn vote.

by Erik on 8/30/2011 @ 1:49pm
RR: I think you have a Walmart Tacomic in your archives!

by NineInchNachos on 8/30/2011 @ 1:59pm
i'm going to need a better one.

by tacoma1 on 8/30/2011 @ 2:08pm
I'd be ok with Walmart taking over and redeveloping the B&I. That would be a net improvement for that area, and consistent with the current zoning and use.

I certainly think that the city council has the right to know what the use is for this developer before they agree to any traffic variances.

by fredo on 8/30/2011 @ 2:10pm
I'm not pro Wal Mart. I'm just playing the devil's advocate. In our mad pursuit of the elusive high wage developments let's not lose sight of the fact that the parcel under discussion has been on the market for years. Perhaps there really isn't a high demand for additional medical offices that some of the comments have suggested.

Is it entirely impossible that a WalMart could be designed in the proper scale and with the appropriate considerations to pedestrian demands that it could actually be part of a city worth caring about? What if the Wal Mart could be required to put 2 floors of residential on top? Would that make it acceptable?

by Nick on 8/30/2011 @ 2:11pm
"Regarding the walmart jobs. I notice the people who are already employed at jobs they like are quick to criticize. I wonder if you would be so glib if you had just exhausted your 99 weeks of unemployment benefits and were about to be living in your car."

Did you know a starving man would readily eat poisonous berries before nothing at all?

by Nick on 8/30/2011 @ 2:11pm
Ultimately it's about cost vs. benefit and risk. Nobody denies the value in creating new jobs. The question is are those additional jobs worth it when balanced against the costs. Which brings to mind another question, what are those costs?

by NineInchNachos on 8/30/2011 @ 2:25pm
Dear walmart if you're reading this, don't throw away all that awesome vintage 1960 theater equipment in the main hall. I'll give you top dollar... like 20 bucks.

by fredo on 8/30/2011 @ 2:52pm
"Did you know a starving man would readily eat poisonous berries before nothing at all?" Nick

That's funny, but of course a minimum wage job is not the equivalent of poisonous berries. If you accept a minimum wage job you can work it for a year or two until the family wage jobs come into the area. If you eat poisonous berries you would probably be dead.

by seejane on 8/30/2011 @ 3:06pm
"It cost the state an estimated $12 million in 2004 to provide government-subsidized health care to Wal-Mart employees"

by NineInchNachos on 8/30/2011 @ 3:14pm
... or start out with a small amount of poison berries and work up a resistance over a span of years. THEN challenge a rival to a game of wits.. poisoning BOTH goblets of wine. Ah, ah! you cry I win! They were both poison options!

by tacoma1 on 8/30/2011 @ 3:26pm
Good point on the Walmart's Gubermnt subsidized healthcare plan. I forgot about that. $12M is just the state's portion. And you have to double that amount to $24M in order to account for the fed's contribution.

by fredo on 8/30/2011 @ 3:32pm
"It cost the state an estimated $12 million in 2004 to provide government-subsidized health care to Wal-Mart employees"

Jane, that's a good example of a statistic which, when examined, really doesn't mean very much. The State of Washington was probably providing health benefits to all the people at WalMart even before they working at WalMart. These employees didn't leave great careers at Frank Russell, Microsoft and REI so they could work at WM.

by fredo on 8/30/2011 @ 3:44pm
I think it would be a good idea if WM had two prices on every item. You could pay the lower price or you could pay the higher price. If you paid the higher price, that extra money would be put into a pool and used to pay for health insurance for the employees. I wonder how many people would wish to pay the higher amount.

by tacoma1 on 8/30/2011 @ 4:01pm
Really? Do you really you want to advocate for a business model that relies on tax payer paid healthcare for its workers! Isn't that a little inconsistent with your tea party ideals?

Also, if digital billboards are visual blight in Tacoma................where does a Walmart fit on the blight-O-meter scale?

by fredo on 8/30/2011 @ 4:11pm
Tacoma1 wrote@

"Do you really you want to advocate for a business model that relies on tax payer paid healthcare for its workers! Isn't that a little inconsistent with your tea party ideals?"

I'm not a "member" of the tea party and have no idea what their position on health care benefits would be, so you'll have to forgive me. The no-health-insurance "business model" has been around for years. It predates the founding of the WalMart company by probably several hundred years.

A job with minimum wage and no benefits is still better than no job with no pay and no benefits. Wouldn't you agree?

by fredo on 8/30/2011 @ 4:17pm
"where does a Walmart fit on the blight-O-meter scale?"

I would like their stores to blend into the neighborhood with residential above and parking underground whenever feasible.

by tacoma1 on 8/30/2011 @ 4:33pm
It's not realistic to expect to see a Walmart build a store with your specifications. However, feel free to call 'em up and make it happen if you can.

by fredo on 8/30/2011 @ 4:43pm
I'll get on it right away.

Some of you might wish to look around Tacoma. The awful looking Wal-Mart stores you object to so mightily don't look much different on the outside than the Target, the Fred Meyer, and The Best Buy stores. Big boxes surrounded by parking lots and some beauty bark.

What is it you really object to?

by NineInchNachos on 8/30/2011 @ 5:03pm
love these debates. I see alluring points on all 4 sides

by tacoma1 on 8/30/2011 @ 5:04pm
4 sides?

Apparently you weren't paying attention, big box stores that take advantage of their employees and the tax payer, unwalkable developments, and increased traffic congestion, are what I object to.

Oh yeah, and developers that want variances from the city, but refuse to tell our city officials wtf the variances are for.

And I'm not really fond of beauty bark, or the corn dogs that these places always seem to sell.

Or the shopping carts that end up on every street corner within a mile radius of the place.

Can I also object to the website www.peopleofwalmart.com

by fredo on 8/30/2011 @ 5:20pm
"Apparently you weren't paying attention, big box stores that take advantage of their employees and the tax payer, unwalkable developments, and increased traffic congestion, are what I object to." tacoma1

In what sense wasn't I paying attention? In what important respect is WalMart different then Fred Meyer, Best Buy and Target? All these stores are big boxes that are function as unwalkable developments and increase traffic congestion. They all use low wage employees and benefit from taxpayer subsidies.

If they were required to offer lavish benefit programs, WM probably wouldn't exist. And all their employees would still be unemployed causing an even bigger strain on the entitlement system then they are now. How would that be a good thing?

by tacoma1 on 8/30/2011 @ 5:38pm
Your point that fred meyer, or best buy, etc are all unwalkable simply reinforces the fact that we have enough car dependant unwalkable strip malls and big box stores in Tacoma. We don't need any more. Without Walmart there, my life will be no worse off. If Walmart can't exist without the taxpayer healthcare subsidy, I'm completely OK with that. Your assumption that without Walmart, nothing will go in there, and no one will get hired is unproven, and most likely false.

btw, if Target is so bad, why isn't there a website called peopleof target? or peopleofhomedepot? why just peopleofwallmart?

by CassieInUP on 8/30/2011 @ 5:46pm
So I'll leave the state supported health-care, low vs high wage earnings, poison berries and just plain sneakiness of the purported WalMart scheme here for you guys to bat back and forth.

One thing that I haven't noticed being talked about here is possible traffic impact to the surrounding areas. It's already a crap-tas-tic intersection. The pavement is sorely in need of repair (OK, where in Tacoma does it NOT need repair), and the signals there already have a hard time managing the traffic impact given the detours due to the Sprague St/Hwy 16 revamp during high volume commuting hours.

So, assuming it IS a WalMart going in, and assuming that it gets heavy patronage, where in the heck are all the cars going to go?? You can't argue and say that people could bike, or take public transportation in a situation like this. Who can take a 64-pack of Coke and Doritos on a bike? Or a huge flatscreen TV made by 4-year-olds on a bus? People will be in their cars/SUVs/whatevers. I would think that the impact from that single point should be enough to dissuade the council. But then again... their history maybe contradicts that. Ahem, ahem.. Clear Channel.

by fredo on 8/30/2011 @ 5:59pm
Walmart doesn't require it's employees to apply for any government assistance. If they do, it's on their own. Most of them probably had subsidized health care when they started working for WM, so how is that an increase in public assistance?

I never stated any assumption that without WM nothing will go in there. I simply stated that the property has been available for development for years and there have been no takers. I suppose we could make the development requirements so stringent that only a utopian business of the type you seem to favor would be allowed in there. It would have to be a high wage, high benefit business, with no corn dogs, no beauty bark, no shopping carts, be a wonderful pedestrian experience, not in a big building, with no parking lot, and not attractive to any sort of congestion. Why don't you name this utopian business or does it only exist in your mind?

tacoma1, your attitude toward the unemployed is really quite regrettable. Just because you have a great job it's OK for you to dump on the limited employment opportunities that might come along once in awhile for the less fortunate. I doubt if someone living in their car would be so cavalier about Tacoma's attractiveness to potential employers.

by tacoma1 on 8/30/2011 @ 6:03pm
I did mention that the traffic impacts would be significant.

Once this goes in, where all the traffic ends up is the city's problem, ie the taxpayers problem. We get to pay for more road infrastructure to handle the increased car volume.

by fredo on 8/30/2011 @ 6:11pm
WM would pay huge amounts of real property tax, personal property tax, City and State B&O tax, sales taxes, FICA and FUTA taxes, L&I taxes, unemployment taxes and probably dozens more. Don't know why there would be any new roads. All the roads are in already.

I do think the traffic problems would be horrible and that would be my major objection.

by Erik on 8/30/2011 @ 9:10pm
Here is some info on other cities who have passed big box bans:

On Monday, February 12, the city counted voted 4 - 2 to ban big box retail stores and "created strict design standards for retail establishments with more than 60,000 square feet of floor space," reported the Bellingham Herald. "The [90,000-square-feet] size limit brings it below what most chain stores want in terms of size," Robinson said. "A lot of communities choose 90,000 for that reason."

Robinson noted that there were a number of factors behind the city council's decision to restrict store size. Among the key reasons for the ban, he surmised, is larger retail outlets don't fit in with the city's comprehensive plan, which calls for small urban villages scattered around the community. "The plan supports those kinds of places so you have neighborhoods ... that are pedestrian friendly," he said. "Allowing big box stores is in conflict with the current comprehensive plan." Also, big box store development brings with it environmental concerns, Robinson said, such as water run off from parking lots into the many streams and creeks in the area.


by NineInchNachos on 8/30/2011 @ 9:20pm
BREAKING: 6 month emergency moratorium on Elks Lodge / Walmart sneaky development!

by NineInchNachos on 8/30/2011 @ 9:20pm
Nice work city council.

"Debate on the proposed moratorium. Moratorium supporters Lauren Walker, Ryan Mello, David Boe, Jake Fey, Marty Campbell, Victoria Woodards and Mayor Marilyn Strickland speak in favor. Spiro Manthou understands what the council is trying to do but will abstain. Longergan was absent. Motion passes 7-0-1-1.

Woodards gets kudos points in her debate for talking about how this is pro business because we want to insure we protect those business we already have in our community!"

by NineInchNachos on 8/30/2011 @ 9:27pm
Top foods, Fred Meyer those are pacific northwest local companies

by cisserosmiley on 8/30/2011 @ 9:29pm
walmart keeps prices down because they contract chinese manufacturers into rock bottom production prices, the manufacturers make it up through bulk production for a rock solid business partner...but the port of tacoma, and all of tacoma really, runs on the revenue of our great port
tons of walmart imports every year move through our port from china...how do WE collect revenue from importing walmart stuff, but not allow walmart stores??? it seems a little hypocritical???

by Erik on 8/30/2011 @ 9:49pm
Congrats on the council for taking on the Big Box Ban/Moratorium. I have always thought of this issue, watched many others take it on, but never thought the City of Tacoma had the stomach to take it on.

There are dozens of cities working on the issue. Here is a Google search on it:


by jenyum on 8/30/2011 @ 9:56pm
Walmart engages in lots of nasty anti-competitive behavior. It's not pro-business to let them open up and work their juju on central Tacoma. We've already got Winco luring us down to South Tacoma for some of that delicious non-union 1.89 a jar crack... I mean, Prego.

This is not a neighborhood that lacks for stores. Let's keep the ones we have healthy.

by fredo on 8/30/2011 @ 11:43pm
Good thing we have the stomach for driving the evil non NW big box store out of our city. Who cares if it hurts the unemployed, hurts the consumers, hurts the Elks Lodge, hurts the local construction companies, hurts the local taxpayers, hurts the longshoremen in the POT. As long as it breathes life into the leftist Utopian vision its a good thing.

This is the new Tacoma Method.

Who knows, in another 130 years maybe the people of Tacoma will ask WalMart Corp for forgiveness, even start a little Reconciliation Park to say we're sorry.

by Justin on 8/30/2011 @ 11:44pm
@fredo - I have zero regrets doing what I did or my neighborhood council did on this issue.

Why the secrecy? why the lack of transparency? Clearly this development knows it wont be beloved by the community!

This is about protecting the jobs we already have. 6th Ave Business district should be livid about the possibility of a Walmart. We don't know it is but it sure seems like it.

Yes development is key and I want nothing more to see that site developed but insuring there is not market overload, protecting our key niche community businesses are of high importance to me!

We have six months to figure out what is happening there and determining action forward!

by cisserosmiley on 8/30/2011 @ 11:50pm
6th ave has little to lose because it is mostly niche artsy and specialty shops, but target might go out of business...then what will we do with that empty building and parking lot?

by L.S.Erhardt on 8/30/2011 @ 11:52pm
I do think it's 100% not acceptable for this kind of secrecy, especially to the city government.
I also think the city does need to have some sort of code/whatever to make sure big box stores fit into the specific needs of the city.

I see nothing unreasonable about the moratorium. Should the city create some sort of code and Wal-Mart abides by it and drops this sneaky-sneaky sh*t, I see nothing wrong with them building a store.

by KevinFreitas on 8/31/2011 @ 12:09am
"Some of you might wish to look around Tacoma. The awful looking Wal-Mart
stores you object to so mightily don't look much different on the
outside than the Target, the Fred Meyer, and The Best Buy stores. Big
boxes surrounded by parking lots and some beauty bark." @Fredo

The difference being that there's lots of new blood in and paying attention in Tacoma. We weren't around to help usher in mix-used and more dense urban development but we're here now. There's no reason we can't start to get things right now and demand our City not just take any old development that comes our way. If nothing else let's require Wal-Mart put their store in but with 2 stories of residential on top as you mention. Make them invest in the community the stand to gain (and take) so much from. I see zero wrong with moving forward like that.

And bravo to our City Council for their moratorium! It's great to have civic leaders who are willing to help get things right.

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 8:07am
look corporations are artificial people they don't have feelings like you or me. Think of them more like terminator robots or batman villain. WalMart will try again again again and again to get a foot hold in here. Don't feel bad for them. They'll be back.

by Jake on 8/31/2011 @ 8:18am
Here are some of the issues TPD is reporting because of WinCo:

Traffic Congestion: On weekends traffic in all directions seems to become an issue at the intersection of S 72nd and S Hosmer. This is due to the increase in traffic flow because of WINCO. Traffic backs up in all directions and on the off ramp of NB I-5.

by tacoma1 on 8/31/2011 @ 8:19am
God created cities like Federal Way, Lakewood, and Renton, specifically so Walmart would have places to go.

by fredo on 8/31/2011 @ 8:20am
Not feeling sorry for the corporation.

Feeling sorry for the hundreds of people who could have found jobs there. You know, not everyone looking for work has a PhD. in chemical engineering and is prepared to work in the Tacoma Clean Water Technology Enterprise Zone. Lots of people are just regular schmoes who would love a job that pays $20K per year.

There's a clear disconnect in this thread among people who have good jobs and who are completely oblivious to the problem of unemployment in Tacoma. I guess en route to our Utopian future we have to expect to step over some of the hungry underclass which serves a useful purpose as collateral damage.

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 8:47am
does this help? www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oMGC80_x-U

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 8:52am
also link to TNT story... thanks Lewis! www.thenewstribune.com/2011/08/31/180277...

I am intrigued by the secrecy of the developer..

by tacoma1 on 8/31/2011 @ 8:53am
Keep in mind that we don't know if the developer wants to build a Walmart, or something else? We don't know how many jobs that will be created or lost for Tacoma. It's entirely possible that whatever goes in doesn't net us any jobs at all. All we know is that the developer says that traffic will increase substantially, and that he can't tell us wtf he wants to build.

If my city council didn't have questions about the secrecy, I'd definitely have questions about them. Kudos to Ryan Mello for his relentless questioning, and to Justin and the CNC for alerting everyone about this.

by Nick on 8/31/2011 @ 8:54am
"In what important respect is WalMart different then Fred Meyer, Best Buy and Target?"

For one thing, WalMart doesn't already have a building constructed, it isn't already adding to the excessive congestion of Union Ave., and it isn't already occupying land that could find a much better more density-oriented use. Target, PetSmart, and Office Max are already three too many.

Word on the street is the Elks don't really care what goes in there, as long as they can sell the property and get something built. That tells me that they'll follow the path of least resistance. Provide resistance for big box suburban stores, and they'll just move on and find something that won't be difficult to get placed there. In other words, I think in this case we can afford to be choosers.

by fredo on 8/31/2011 @ 8:59am
let's listen in on the meeting of the Google Board of Directors:

"Gentlemen, I'm sorry to inform you that our secret plan to open a high technology campus right in the middle of Tacoma Washington has been thwarted by the Tacoma City Council. They've placed a moritorium on the variances required to bring our 20,000 highly paid job complex to reality. So are we all agreed that the technology campus will go to a different city? Thankyou for your unanimous show of hands. That concludes our meeting. Have a good day."

by captiveyak on 8/31/2011 @ 9:05am
Oh God. There would be no reason for the deliberate secrecy and obstructive attitude toward city gov't if a marketable employer was moving into that space. If Google or Yahoo was planning something there, they'd engage in community outreach (as they did in Quincy, WA over the past couple years) and marketing, trumpeting the benefits to the local economy. Besides, the JLO Enterprises is a shopping-center developer specifically.

by captiveyak on 8/31/2011 @ 9:11am
i assume the developer is engaging in "due diligence" and has drawn up a list of constraints and limitations. A feasibility study, actually. There are probably traffic conditions and site restraints that require significant alteration before a Wal-Mart would even be feasible. They don't want to show their hand because they haven't committed to a design. Putting a six-month moratorium on box stores is not going to stop them from continuing to evaluate feasibility. At this point, the site plan is all conceptual and can turn on a dime. They probably have a passel of design firms who would scramble at their request to come up with whatever the next concept is.

by fredo on 8/31/2011 @ 9:11am
It's OK for people to jump to the conclusion that the developer is representing WalMart even though no such announcement has been made, but not OK to conclude that the development might be a wonderful new business which merely wants to keep it's plans confidential.

It's not obvious to me that a developer who doesn't want to share the identity of his client is therefore trying to foist some malignancy on our town. That would be described as paranoia.

by jenyum on 8/31/2011 @ 9:14am
That's really amusing, Fredo, but hardly realistic. If Google were so much as considering a campus in Tacoma, our city council would be planning them a ticker tape parade.

by captiveyak on 8/31/2011 @ 9:20am
I've done design and survey work for 2 Wal-Mart developments in the past 6 years. I know precisely how they work and how their developers and lawyers navigate the planning process. I've also worked at Wal-Mart on the night shift ten years ago. So i'm not anti-Wal-Mart or pro-paranoia. I have just worked with enough developers to know what's probably going on here.

That being said, I'm not significantly worried about the possibility of a Wal-Mart realistically being placed on that site. I think it is one possibility amongst many that the developer/managers are considering. It is probably the most profitable possibility, but also probably the most fraught with difficulty and risk.

They're just feeling their way around.

by fredo on 8/31/2011 @ 9:22am
"If Google were so much as considering a campus in Tacoma, our city council would be planning them a ticker tape parade." jenyum

I indicated in my posting that it was a secret plan. That's why I used the code term "secret plan." How could the City Council plan a ticker tape parade for something which was known only to the Google Board of Directors? That doesn't make sense to me.

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 9:29am
good point. we don't know jack squat. fascinating input from CaptiveYak.. thanks. Don't want to get carried away, but imagine how awesome it would be to take down Clear Channel Outdoor and a Walmart in the same year? Evil doers beware!

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 9:34am
the Elks have mentally checked out long time ago...

"Reality is we (Tacoma Elks) dont care what eventually occupies this property and we have no prejudices as to what business or businesses are the tenants.. Our concern and focus has to be getting the sale closed and the new facility going. - SOME ELKS LEADER"

by fredo on 8/31/2011 @ 9:38am
How about the city buy the parcel and turn it into a homeless encampment like they have in Seattle? We know that the Winthrop has problems and all those people may need a place to stay. The Elks site is centrally located. Most of the homeless people don't have cars so there wouldn't be any extra traffic impacts. Close to hospitals so that when residents get drunk or stabbed they can get immediate attention. It would be a good staging area for illegal immigrants who are coming here because we have a illegal friendly city council. It's a win-win.


by fredo on 8/31/2011 @ 9:42am
Nachos wrote@

"Reality is we (Tacoma Elks) dont care what eventually occupies this property and we have no prejudices as to what business or businesses are the tenants.. Our concern and focus has to be getting the sale closed and the new facility going. - SOME ELKS LEADER"

You used quotation marks but didn't attribute the statement to a specific person. Who said that?

by captiveyak on 8/31/2011 @ 9:45am
i'm going to have to stop commenting for a bit. i need to go out and find another business to destroy. Or maybe some jobs i can prevent from happening. I try to do something like that every day before lunch.

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 9:47am
illegal immigrants... here we go. Thorax I demand a kangaroo nazi tea-farty penalty flag image !

by fredo on 8/31/2011 @ 9:48am
"Unemployment rates were lower in July than a year earlier in 257 of the nation's 372 metropolitan areas, but higher in 94 areas, including Olympia and Tacoma, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The jobless rate rose in Olympia from 7.9 percent to 8.1 percent. Tacoma's rate ticked up from 9.5 percent to 9.6 percent." bureau of labor statistics

Maybe it's time for the City Council to declare a six month moritorium on job killing six month moritoriums.

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 9:53am
@fredo Elks Steering Committee member, Ron Forest
though I don't see him listed here...


might be an anarchist infiltrator !

by captiveyak on 8/31/2011 @ 9:55am
Long-term, being the kind of city that prefers to avoid Wal-Marts makes Tacoma a more attractive place to certain kinds of businesses. We're moving in the direction of becoming a more professional, metropolitan-style city. slowly, but that's what we're becoming.

by fredo on 8/31/2011 @ 10:03am
"We're moving in the direction of becoming a more professional, metropolitan-style city." captiveyak

What role do you see for unemployed people in Tacoma who don't have professional level abilities? Should they just sit on the sidelines and wait for the slowly incoming tide of professional businesses to cause prosperity to trickle down to them?

by thriceallamerican on 8/31/2011 @ 10:05am
The Google/Yahoo/etc. scenario is disingenuous at best, the moratorium specifically applies to retail uses.

(But if I could walk to a Google campus that would be a sweet gig...)

by The Jinxmedic on 8/31/2011 @ 10:24am
Tacoma1: "God created cities like Federal Way, Lakewood, and Renton, specifically so Walmart would have places to go."

No matter what my views may be on this particular issue, that's just extremely well said. Good job, Tacoma1.

by fredo on 8/31/2011 @ 10:27am
That was a good saying.

I might alter it a bit: God created cities like Federal Way, Lakewood, and Renton specifically so unemployed people in Tacoma would have places to go to seek work.

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 11:11am
federal way is a nightmare. We should steal their sandcastle contest.

by SerenityGirl on 8/31/2011 @ 11:18am
Walmart in Lakewood is hiring. Lots of positions. So is the Target right next to the potential Tacoma site!

We do need to create more jobs here in Tacoma, but they should be jobs people actually want.

by The Jinxmedic on 8/31/2011 @ 11:28am
The sand castle contest would be a good fit for the convention center...

by Non Sequitur on 8/31/2011 @ 11:47am
Choose one, and I'll tell you what kind of an economy you want.

1) Low unemployment but nearly all of the jobs are minimum wage with little or no benefits.


2) Higher unemployment but the majority of jobs are middle-class level pay.

If you chose #2, then you want an economy like Seattle's.
If you chose #1, then you want an economy like Aberdeen's.

by tacoma1 on 8/31/2011 @ 11:58am
If a business (like Walmart or Target) has low enough standards to want to hire me in this economy....................I don't want to have anything to do with them.

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 12:08pm
what is that thing Obama is always talking about... False choices ?

by tacoma1 on 8/31/2011 @ 12:15pm
I couldn't agree more.

This property is 18 acres if I remember right. Has easy access to the freeway. Near a major bus trunk line. Next door to a hospital. Half mile from Cheney Stadium. 3 miles from DT T-Town. 2 miles from the mall.

It has to have a higher purpose than a friggin Walmart.

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 12:35pm
UPDATE: blog.thenewstribune.com/business/2011/08...

by troysworktable on 8/31/2011 @ 1:31pm
*Nachos wrote@

"Reality is we (Tacoma Elks) dont care what eventually occupies this property and we have no prejudices as to what business or businesses are the tenants.. Our concern and focus has to be getting the sale closed and the new facility going. - SOME ELKS LEADER"

You used quotation marks but didn't attribute the statement to a specific person. Who said that?*

@Fredo: Which is also what you did with your hypothetical Google board of directors.

by captiveyak on 8/31/2011 @ 2:13pm
i've been sitting here thinking about it more, and I misspoke when i said i am not anti-Wal-Mart. I'm pretty anti-Wal-Mart. It's had a net effect of destroying American small businesses and making entrepreneurial pursuits too expensive or risky for most would-be-small-businessmen and kept them working for corporations. Corporations do not take human considerations into productivity the way small businessmen must, so not only has it limited small business opportunity, but Wal-Mart has also lowered the quality of living standards people expect to settle for. Welcoming Wal-Mart as a job creator is like a 50-year-old version of Stockholm Syndrome.

by tacoma1 on 8/31/2011 @ 2:35pm
Well said captiveyak!

by fredo on 8/31/2011 @ 2:53pm
"Fredo: Which is also what you did with your hypothetical Google board of directors." troyworkstable

Ha, you're right!

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 2:55pm

UPDATE, 2:35 p.m.: Wal-Mart spokesman Steven Restivo just told me that the company plans to build a 150,000-square-foot store on the Central Tacoma Elks site.

The company submitted a land-use application for the store today, he said. "With the moratorium being the elephant in the room, I don't know what that does to the (construction) time frame," he said.

Read more: blog.thenewstribune.com/business/2011/08...

by fredo on 8/31/2011 @ 2:56pm
"Wal-Mart has also lowered the quality of living standards people expect to settle for." captiveyak

You mean people who have been out of work for years who finally get a job at WalMart are now going to be lowering their living standards? Quite frankly, that doesn't make any sense.

by Jesse on 8/31/2011 @ 2:59pm
Best comment of the month by non-sequiter at 11:47.

However, do you also realize that walmart, economically, has the same philosophy as supply side economists? That being, give a few people lots of money and they'll create jobs. I think walmart proves that supply side economics is short term gain and long term travesty.

by fredo on 8/31/2011 @ 3:01pm
Serenity girl wrote@ "We do need to create more jobs here in Tacoma, but they should be jobs people actually want".

Well serenity girl, could you give us some examples of the type of jobs people actually want, and then tell us what you have done to "create more" of them?

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 3:03pm

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 3:04pm

by Jesse on 8/31/2011 @ 3:24pm
Let walmart build downtown... one of those smaller ones. Dt needs shopping and it may actually cause spin off businesses.

by The Jinxmedic on 8/31/2011 @ 3:24pm
Jesse- I believe that is the stance I took on this, as well.

by captiveyak on 8/31/2011 @ 3:25pm
Fredo -
not everything that creates jobs is healthy for the long-term economy nor for the long-term well-being of those currently unemployed. Your assumption would lead people to assume that exploitation should be encouraged as long as a few jobs can be squeezed out of it.

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 3:31pm
downtown walmart on the other side of the 11th street bridge would be cool.

by The Jinxmedic on 8/31/2011 @ 3:35pm
Naw, build it on the block where the Luzon used to be, put a parking garage in on the lower levels, and make sure it has a pseudo late-19th century facade facing Pacific avenue. It's a no-brainer, and would actually make downtown living more tenable- and provide walking distance PT jobs for UWT students.

But because it makes so much sense, it will never be done.

by The Jinxmedic on 8/31/2011 @ 3:36pm
(Or dig out the $700,000 parking lot and put it there.)

by Jesse on 8/31/2011 @ 3:41pm
How about in the old Peoples department store building? Id actually be excited about that.

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 3:42pm
somehow combine the NWDC with WalMart so the imprisoned immigrant laborers are the employees...

by fredo on 8/31/2011 @ 3:43pm
captiveyak wrote@

"not everything that creates jobs is healthy for the long-term economy nor for the long-term well-being of those currently unemployed."

Well in the long-term all the unemployed people are going to be dead. It sounds like you would prefer that people wait their whole lives for a dream job rather than accept anything less.

My first job was a minimum wage job and I wasn't in a union. I worked my ass off but it didn't hurt me one bit. I had an actual paycheck to spend and I was proud of the work I did. I wasn't "exploited" in any way. My boss worked harder than I did.

The people who work at WM aren't exploited in any way. It's just an entry level type job. Work your way up or get some experience and move to a different job. The people who are really exploited are the people living their lives on long term entitlements who never once get the feeling that they have any value in this world except when it comes to voting for more politicians who encourage the entitlement lifestyle.

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 4:08pm
now is not the time for rational argument. We're talking WalMart here. Now is the time to get naked, paint your face blue and pick up the (double-sided) broad sword of social justice.


by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 4:08pm
let's get crazy!

by L.S.Erhardt on 8/31/2011 @ 4:09pm
Wal-Mart causes the biggest problems in small communities. When they roll into smaller city, they easily out-compete the mom and pop stores. As a result, Wal-Mart becomes a major employer and that is the most danger from them. Larger cities (such as one with 200,000 people) with more robust economies aren't as affected by this problem. A Wal-Mart in Bremerton or Aberdeen will have more negative effects than one in Tacoma or Seattle would.
Notice my use of "more negative". To be sure, the current big box model is not good for any community.

While I think that a lot of their labor practices are poor, are they much worse than Dayton Hudson (the parent company of Target)? I strongly feel that Tacoma needs to get a lot more middle-class job action going on, but does that mean that Wal-Mart has no place in town?

The 150,000 sf building they want would be a LOT more beneficial to the city if it was in downtown and spread out over five floors. Hell, even a 5+ story building in the development on the Elks site would be better than a HUGE box.

If the City Council would offer Wal-Mart a sweet deal in exchange for going downtown and going up, perhaps that would be the best possible option?

by KevinFreitas on 8/31/2011 @ 4:41pm
Loving this downtown sentiment. Let's cut 'em a deal to make it cost effective for them to go in downtown (with parking below street level, thank you very much) and get some office or apartment space up above. Pretty sure if the Walmart folks would be up for showing how they can bring positive growth to a community/downtown it would be a win-win for most.

by The Jinxmedic on 8/31/2011 @ 4:47pm
Put it downtown, yes. This would be a VERY GOOD THING for downtown. Such a creature downtown would provide convenient shopping for condo dwellers (along with the new Pacific Avenue grocery), would increase bLINK useage, and provide those entry-level jobs for Winthrop residents and UWT students. It would also be convenient for overnight boaters along Foss waterway. This is exactly the type of thing that City Council should be promoting, attracting, and facillitating for downtown. Is it ideal? No- but it sure beats the heck out of abandonned surface level parking blight.

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 4:52pm
keep it away from the people. put it downtown!

by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 4:53pm
find the 'others' www.facebook.com/groups/143674189056782/...

by tacoma1 on 8/31/2011 @ 4:59pm
Is it just me, or do others envision hell to be alot like, if not exactly like, or perhaps it actually is - the Renton Wal-Mart?

Yikes! It's true, it is gonna be a friggin Wa-mart!


by thriceallamerican on 8/31/2011 @ 5:14pm
I'm pretty sure the Walmart folks aren't at all "up for showing they can bring positive growth to a community/downtown." They have no interest in building a store that's not a sprawling box with surface parking.

Target at least has shown they can build multi-story downtown stores.

by Chris.Tacoma on 8/31/2011 @ 5:18pm
I'm skeptical of attempting any deal with Wal Mart, downtown or no downtown.

by tacoma1 on 8/31/2011 @ 5:23pm
Hit the link below folks. Walmart confirmed that they want to build 150,000 sq ft store.


by NineInchNachos on 8/31/2011 @ 5:45pm
yeah and don't they hate women or something too?

by glynnjamin on 8/31/2011 @ 5:53pm
Those of you extoling the benefits of the 300 jobs seem to forget that those are 300 under-employed part time jobs. They aren't real jobs. Making $7 an hour is okay if you are working 40 hours a week but not if you are working 10-15. WalMart might as well be paying them $70 a week. The other downside of that low of wages is that they are tax exempt. That means the Federal government doesn't begin to recoup the cost of their half of the insurance/assistance they are providing. If WalMart hired 75 full time employees then I might be able to accept the argument that these jobs are beneficial but they really provide no assistance to anyone. Hell, you make more on unemployment!

It's not worth it folks!

by Erik on 8/31/2011 @ 7:02pm
Two Tacoma centric Walmart Facebook pages have started for those with concerns:



Looks like a lot of early interest.

This is going to get interesting fast.

by fredo on 8/31/2011 @ 10:45pm
"They aren't real jobs. Making $7 an hour is okay if you are working 40 hours a week but not if you are working 10-15. WalMart might as well be paying them $70 a week." glynnjamin

The people working at the proposed WalMart aren't going to be working for $7.00 per hour. Where did you get that figure?

A married couple I know both work at WalMart. They've been working there for 6 years. They don't especially like their jobs but it keeps their rent paid and food on the table. They aren't working for $70 per week.

by tacoma1 on 9/1/2011 @ 7:40am
You seem to know alot of strawmen.

by cisserosmiley on 9/1/2011 @ 8:15am
$7 an hour is illegal in our state...are out of state anti-walmart types commenting on the feed?

by tacoma1 on 9/1/2011 @ 9:09am
Maybe a little actual real research might help the discussion.

Advocating for Wal-Mart is the same as advocating for higher unemployment and lower wages within Tacoma.


"1. Wal-Mart�s Economic Impacts: Net Loss of Jobs, Fewer Small Businesses
Wal-Mart store openings kill three local jobs for every two they create by reducing retail employment by an average of 2.7 percent in every county they enter.6
Wal-Mart�s entry into a new market does not increase overall retail activity or employment opportunities.7 Research from Chicago shows retail employment did not increase in Wal-Mart�s zip code, and fell significantly in those adjacent.
Wal-Mart�s entry into a new market has a strongly negative effect on existing retailers.8 Supermarkets and discount variety stores are the most adversely affected sectors, suffering sales declines of 10 to 40% after Wal-Mart moves in.9

2. Wal-Mart�s Costs to Taxpayers
Wal-Mart has thousands of associates who qualify for Medicaid and other publicly subsidized care, leaving taxpayers to foot the bill.13 For instance in Ohio Wal-Mart has more associates and associate dependents on Medicaid than any other employer, costing taxpayers $44.8 million in 2009.14
According to estimates, Wal-Mart likely avoided paying $245 million in taxes 2008 by paying rent to itself and then deducting that rent from its taxable income.15

3. Wal-Mart�s low paying jobs contribute to the decline of the middle class
Median household income declined by 1.8% nationally and 4.1% in New York City in 2009.17 This decline will be exacerbated by low paying Wal-Mart jobs.
Wal-Mart�s average annual pay of $20,774 is below the Federal Poverty Level for a family of four.18"

by jenyum on 9/1/2011 @ 9:32am
Just testing if I can comment today.


by cisserosmiley on 9/1/2011 @ 10:00am
advocating for walmart in Tacoma is not a great thing, let us be honest at least...for every liberal low income social justice argument against there is an equal conservative argument for touting jobs free enterprise and 'merica. It is fine to just say culturally walmart does not fit within central Tacoma, but the overblown walmart is the fourth in the axis of evil is childish.

by tacoma1 on 9/1/2011 @ 10:17am
The research shows that Wal-mart does not create net jobs. Wal-Mart actually kills 3 jobs for every 2 jobs that they create. To argue that Wal-Mart creates jobs is to ignore the facts. It has nothing to do with liberal vs conservative politics. And those 2 jobs pay less than the 3 they killed. That would be plain bad economics for liberals, conservatives, teabaggers, socialists, marxists, etc.

Since Wal-Mart's business model depends in part on the taxpayer (that would be me and you) picking up the tab for it's employees healthcare, their brand of "free enterprise" isn't free at all.

by cisserosmiley on 9/1/2011 @ 10:22am
...and central tacoma is not culturally accomodating to the walmart corp.
all of us are bonusing from port of tacoma revenues which come from massive walmart importing from china...if you think it is anything more than culturally not wanting walmart, you are hypocritical-or-move out of pierce county because it is a fact that WE make our living importing chinese wares here.

by L.S.Erhardt on 9/1/2011 @ 10:29am
**I'm not advocating a position here, but do want to bring something up**

Food for thought: 7-11

I'm sure people have noticed that they are opening a lot of those lately. My source @ the city tells me it's 15 total the the Tacoma/Lakewood/UP area. 15 new stores, all paying minimum wage.
Granted, I'm pleased that many of them are going into empty, existing buildings.

I mention this simply because if each one makes 10 jobs, then we're talking about 150 minimum wage jobs. Are they any different than Wal-Mart?

by tacoma1 on 9/1/2011 @ 10:35am
7-11's aren't 150,000 sq ft. They don't create their own traffic congestion. They don't cost 3 jobs for every 2 that they create.

The hotdogs they serve are probably the same though.

by cisserosmiley on 9/1/2011 @ 10:51am
...yes 7-11 is the same as walmart, just as tons of other employers in tacoma are like walmart (low pay, traffic, etc) the real argument is if you already have a job, especially a low paying one, then why wouldn't you want a lower priced shopping outlet? especially when everyones uncle makes bookoo bucks at the port unloading walmart stuff for puyallup shoppers?

by babayaga on 9/1/2011 @ 11:03am
Not everyone can afford to shop at Metropolitan Market. Target is PACKED most of the time. Winco has a lot of customers since it opened. There is a demand for what Walmart offers (products for cheap) even if you can't see it from way up on your high horse.
Walmart may not fit in with the ideal landscape of Tacoma, with it's abundance of cupcake shops and other hobby businesses, but until Tacoma's small businesses can crank out products people actually NEED at a price most can afford, there is a place for Walmart here.

Or we could just keep building empty convention centers and impractical hobby businesses. That seems to be working so well for Tacoma.

by tacoma1 on 9/1/2011 @ 11:08am
Since the crux of your pro Wal-Mart argument seems to center around the business at the Port of Tacoma. Maybe you could provide proof that Wal-Mart even uses the Port of Tacoma, and that Port of Tacoma's business will go up if this Wal-Mart goes in. For all I know, Wal-Mart uses the Port of Seattle.

btw, babyaga........ since you signed up for feedtacoma today for the very first time, me thinks you work for Wal-Mart, or the super secret developer guy.

by babayaga on 9/1/2011 @ 11:26am
I don't work for Walmart or the super secret developer guy. I'm a mom in the North End who is just a little irked by all the soap-boxy preachiness of everyone around me who all have jobs and buy gluten-free, soy, vegan, super-omega enriched, taste-free, 50% marked up, expensive groceries. All you have to do is step outside the North End and realize people don't necessarily care about making a statement with their money, they just want groceries and toiletries within an actual budget.

by Rick Jones on 9/1/2011 @ 11:34am
I have no problem with Wal-Mart up on Union. I question the sources of the net reduction in jobs that WM creates (tacoma1). Mini-wage jobs are not ideal, but they are jobs. Anything better than zero is simply better. Will a WM at that location drive Target out of business? I think it'll just make Target more competitive, price-wise. WM downtown? There is not enough population downtown to support, I guarantee they have checked it out. And most of us would rather drive around a parking lot for 10 minutes searching for a space closer to the door than walk the extra 100 feet). Can we require they do one floor WM and a second/third/etc residential/office? Sure we can but as far as I know WM has a successful business equation that would never include a configuration like this (including sub-street parking).

At the current location what small businesses would they put out of business? None I can think of.There are none there.

I say let them come. Apparently the medical complex originally planned didn't pencil out. Why turn away another revenue generator? And fregardless of what stats you provide, it is a revenue producer. There's a significant population within three miles of the proposed site that would welcome a WM. But there appears to be a vocal minority that would make this opportunity unavailable to this population.

by L.S.Erhardt on 9/1/2011 @ 11:48am
Wal-Mart does not use a specific port.
I work in the Port, and let me pass on a bit of info you might find cool:

The companies that supply any company here use the cheapest carrier they can find and often contract with one for long periods.
That being said, the TV you bought may have came on a Maersk ship in Tacoma, the shoes on a Yang Ming in Seattle, the hat on Evergreen in San Diego.

Sellers with a large variety of wares typically can't be pegged down to a single port. Individual products can, however.
For example: drive a Kia? Nearly a 95% chance it came in via Tacoma. Drive a Hyundai? 80% chance it came in by Tacoma.

It's actually pretty fascinating. If you ever have some gas and time to kill, take a drive around the port. It's remarkable to watch.

by Jesse on 9/1/2011 @ 11:52am
@rickjones: You say wm has a market radius of three miles. There aren't mom and pop businesses for them to destroy within three miles?

by tacoma1 on 9/1/2011 @ 11:54am
I was aware of the Kia's and Hyundai's. Didn't know about the rest. So, if I understand what you are saying, since Wal-Mart doesn't sell Kia's or Hyundai's, there is no way to predict the rise or fall of the Port of Tacoma business based soley on whether this Wal-Mart goes in or not?

Sounds like Port of Seattle, Port of Portland, or even Port of Vancouver BC is as likely to get Wal-Mart's shipping business as is Port of Tacoma.

by L.S.Erhardt on 9/1/2011 @ 12:01pm
Pretty much.

Nothing is an island, and since we don't know what (if anything) WM sells comes through Tacoma, we can't really quantify how much or little of an effect it would have on the Port. We just don't have that info.

BUT, considering the size of the WM chain, one additional store would be a drop in a bucket, so to speak.
On that same note, a new WM in Spokane, Boise or Topeka would have the same net effect as one in T-Town would on the traffic through the port.

by tacoma1 on 9/1/2011 @ 12:07pm
Cool, good to know. I'm perfectly ok with Spokanistan getting anudder Wal-Mart. They deserve anudder one. For that matter, while I'm at it, Federal Way can have anudder one too.

by cisserosmiley on 9/1/2011 @ 12:37pm
nobody tried to quantify walmarts imports at our port, though the walmart impact on jobs has been endlessly "quantified" by many...i just pointed out that culturally we are importers and exporters and we should not bad mouth import retailers with "facts" when it is perfectly permissable to begin right where we have ended up - let walmart be in spokane and federal way, but walmart may not fit culturally in central tacoma even though it would be a great resource for many many lower income residents to shop at.

by The Jinxmedic on 9/1/2011 @ 1:00pm
Federal Way has two, if you can believe it...

by Rick Jones on 9/1/2011 @ 1:06pm
@Jesse - I think WM's market extends far beyond three miles. I'm not on the inside so I don't really know. My point is that I believe the are citizens who would benefit from WM's efficiencies ( and purchasing power). It may drive out the Mom 'n Pop's, but who buys their groceries from the Mom 'n Pop's? By nature they are convenience stores. You don't go there for anything other than one or two things you're missing and need. You go to WM for bulk purchases or to save a lot of money on regular household purchases. If all I want is a loaf of bread and it costs me $3:00 at a Mom 'n Pop's but $1.80 at WM and I was counting every penny, why wouldn't I go to WM? I suspect no one on this thread is really counting every penny. The $1.20 difference (in my admittedly awkward illustration above) may be something we can 'donate' to the common good (not having a WM). But there are many among us who would appreciate the ability to save that $1.20.

It may sound like I'm a WM fan, which I'm not, but I really don't see that big an issue letting them in.

by tacoma1 on 9/1/2011 @ 1:10pm
I know Fed Way has two. Apparently they seem to like 'em. That's why the can have ours, IMO. You know, three's a charm.

"nobody tried to quantify walmarts imports at our port" Really?

what about when you wrote this..."when everyones uncle makes bookoo bucks at the port unloading walmart stuff for puyallup shoppers?"

I don't work at the Port, don't know how they do business, but TO'T seems to know, and he says that ain't how it works down there.

And as far as Wal-Mart's impact on jobs, my research once again shows that for every 2 low paying jobs that they create, the kill 3 higher paying jobs. Of course, we can all save 10 cents on our toilet paper. So its not all bad.

by jenyum on 9/1/2011 @ 1:17pm
I can't see Fred Meyer or Top Food surviving long-term, if a Walmart were to go into that spot. Fred Meyer already has a tough time competing with Winco and Target, and Top Food's prices are already as high as this market will tolerate.

Target will probably survive because they have a great deal of brand loyalty, but I'm not in a hurry to see two existing stores with ties to the Northwest go away, so we can enrich a chain with a reputation like Walmart's.

by tacoma1 on 9/1/2011 @ 1:44pm
Thank you and good points Jenyum,

Grocery stores tend to run on very slim margins. What if just enough of Central Tacoma residents shift their grocery shopping from the Hilltop Safeway 2 miles away to this new Wal-Mart. Just enough to cause the Safeway to call it quits.

Once a grocery store leaves a community, history shows us that another one isn't likely to return. What kind of damage to the hilltop housing market would an empty grocery store be? Of course, they can still drive 2 miles to save 10 cents on toilet paper, so once again, its not all bad.

by babayaga on 9/1/2011 @ 2:13pm
I see so much pleading for the deplorable minimum wage pay of Walmart employees but not enough empathy for what it actually looks like for a consumer with a minimum wage paycheck.
If you're only saving 10 cents on toilet paper then you're shopping wrong. Driving the extra few miles to a big box to buy a week's worth of groceries, fill a prescription, and replace a pair of shoes saves a significant amount of money and saves time and gas over the alternative of frequenting local mom & pop grocery stores, pharmacies, shoe stores (not that those exist).

People with money: go buy local stuff. Feel like you've changed the world. You're such a hero! Let those who are less privileged pinch pennies where they can and chill out with the whole "not in my backyard" approach. It's the backyard of those with less money, too.

by fredo on 9/1/2011 @ 4:36pm
"The research shows that Wal-mart does not create net jobs. Wal-Mart actually kills 3 jobs for every 2 jobs that they create. To argue that Wal-Mart creates jobs is to ignore the facts" tacoma1

This study does not claim that Wal-Mart is the ONLY large business which seems to have this inverse relationship with job creation. It just happened to be the only company they studied. Had they studied some other big company like Target or WinCo they might have come up with the same result.

As I've said, I'm not a big defender of WM, but we need to be fair. People like to shop there and if they want to open a store there's no moral or legal reason to prevent it. There are a lot of very low income people in the central area who can't afford to shop at Metropolitan Mkt, and Nordstrom.

by fredo on 9/1/2011 @ 4:37pm
Sorry, I forgot to welcome babayaga to feedtacoma! Happy blogging!

by cisserosmiley on 9/1/2011 @ 5:32pm
@ tacoma 1 ...i dont consider "when everyones uncle makes bookoo bucks at the port unloading walmart stuff for puyallup shoppers?"
a quantitative analysis - just the opposite, it is a qualitative observation based on living here...here is a quantitative fact: walmart applies a special silicone painting to their ships hulls to reduces water resistance which saves 317,000 gallons of diesel per year...WOW!!! 317,000 gallons a year! cant tacoma give walmart a "green" award for that?

by NineInchNachos on 9/1/2011 @ 5:37pm
want to save money, provide a shit job or support the pollution spewing at the port ? Fine support walmart. That wont stop me from doing everything I can to prevent walmart from appearing down the street from my house... JUST FOR THE SPORT OF IT!

by CaptainBritton on 9/1/2011 @ 5:47pm
Wal-Mart is the new billboards? Only this time we fight for NiN's house!

by fredo on 9/1/2011 @ 5:52pm
The only thing worse than a WalMart shit job is a phantom high paying medical campus job at a phantom medical campus that never materialized. The lowest ranking person on the WM job board will make more money than the highest paid Administrator at the medical arts campus that could never get off the ground. Time to sober up.

by NineInchNachos on 9/1/2011 @ 6:31pm
we're stuck will billboards for now, but here is our chance to nip it (walmart) in the bud! We're not mayberry!

by L.S.Erhardt on 9/1/2011 @ 6:43pm
The big ships only burn diesel in port. Out in the open seas they burn bunker fuel, typically IFO 380.

But that's neither here nor there.
Due to the size of Tacoma, WM will have less of an effect on the economy than it would in a smaller city.
But that doesn't mean WM will have no negative effects on the city.

The question is, do we wish to bar the Big Box or do we wish to effectively and precisely control their effects as possible?

WM is cheap. It really is, and when you come down to it those dollars add up real fast. If you have a middle-class job, you're among the lucky few. Hell, even of you earn $50,000 one still needs to be budget smart. Why do places like WinCo, Grocery Outlet, Target, etc do so well? Because people don't have much slack.
It's important to understand why places like WM are so expensive. Extremely low wages (and often subhumane work conditions) overseas and low wages and nil benefits at home. Understand the cost. It's not a question of whether people who shop there are the proletariat, the elusive middle-class or the wealthy.

Would the savings to families offset the negative effects on sales taxes and other businesses?

I don't know.

by cisserosmiley on 9/1/2011 @ 8:13pm
For the record I do not support walmart, just discussion

by fredo on 9/2/2011 @ 7:49am
We're supposed to be concerned that WM will drive other businesses out of town.

But wait a minute. We allowed the Tacoma Mall to be built even though it threatened to close lots of businesses. We allowed Target to build Tacoma Central even though it threatened to close lots of businesses. Frank Russell gone. Morpho Systems gone. Nalley Foods gone. MLK boarded up, DT boarded up. And yet... we don't even have a WalMart to blame.

I wonder if it's possible that businesses close for reasons other than the opening of a WalMart?

by tacoma1 on 9/2/2011 @ 9:47am
The only business that is proposed to go in there is Wal-Mart. That is the
main issue of this thread. The positive effects if you can think of any, and the numerous negative effects on our community and economy.

Nalley Foods is gone becuase an out of state buyer came in, bought the place, took everything of value that they saw, didn't give a shit about the locals, and closed the place down. They are even advertising "NW style " pickles. No longer can they advertise that they are selling NW pickles.

Russell Investments, same damn thing happened. Out of state buyer, could care less about the local community, took everything of value and then left town.

Hmmmm, Wal-Mart........are they local? Do they care about our community? I think not.

by cisserosmiley on 9/2/2011 @ 10:03am
as a former employee of the mutual co. that purchased russell, i disagree with your assesment of russell moving...

by tacoma1 on 9/2/2011 @ 10:06am
The subject at hand is Wal-Mart. Specifically Wal-Mart potentially moving into the Elks property on S Union St. If someone wants to start a different topic on why russell moved they should do so.

by The Jinxmedic on 9/2/2011 @ 10:07am

by tacoma1 on 9/2/2011 @ 10:21am
They even have video's on that site now. Guess this is gonna be another day that I don't get any work done.

Heres a little music video for all of the wall-mart lovers out there.


by fredo on 9/2/2011 @ 10:25am
Tacoma1, you posted about a study regarding the possible effects of WalMarts opening in the New York City area. That's a different topic than the WalMart opening on Union Ave. In Tacoma Washington...and yet you didn't start a new discussion.

You indicated that when businesses close it's because of the proximity of a WalMart Store. I merely rebutted this conclusion by illustrating that lots of businesses close every day of the week even without a WalMart nearby. I would say the reason so many closures occur in Tacoma is because we have a poor city council which doesn't pay attention to maintaining the city but rather blows its funds on pet projects and overpayment to city employees...and yet I haven't heard any one claim that we should get rid of the city council.

by tacoma1 on 9/2/2011 @ 10:32am
I'll gladly vote to get rid of any city council member that doesn't do everything in their power to prevent Wal-Mart for f'ng up our city.

btw, My posting regarding the NY research was on the effects of Wal-Mart entering new markets. Obviously on topic, IMO. If you can cite any research on the effects of Wal-Mart setting up shop on Union St in Tacoma WA, I'm all ears. Figuratively, not literally, just to be clear, I only have 2 ears. They aren't particularly huge. They aren't really small though. Kinda average I'd say.

by NineInchNachos on 9/2/2011 @ 10:43am
Russell moved because WAMU vaporized and left a always-low-low-price-always skyscraper in Seattle.

by fredo on 9/2/2011 @ 10:44am
"I'll gladly vote to get rid of any city council member that doesn't do everything in their power to prevent Wal-Mart for f'ng up our city". tacoma1

Really? What is their power to prevent lawful businesses from opening a store? The city has long history of accepting, even inviting, large retail complexes surrounded by parking lots and miserable traffic conditions. I'll bet if REI or Neiman Marcus was planning to open a big box store on that site with a big parking lot and increased traffic then these issues would suddenly disappear.

by fredo on 9/2/2011 @ 10:49am
"My posting regarding the NY research was on the effects of Wal-Mart entering new markets" tacoma1

Careful. The study only looked at a few markets. They didn't study every new market that WalMart entered. If a researcher wants a certain outcome they can prejudice the research by carefully selecting the samples. The research was interesting. Was it conclusive? No.

by NineInchNachos on 9/2/2011 @ 10:50am
I see a bad moon rising blog.thenewstribune.com/business/2011/09...

by tacoma1 on 9/2/2011 @ 10:53am
Their power is by enforcing zoning laws.

If REI was going to open a 150,000 sq ft store in Tacoma, or anywhere, that would be something to discuss for sure.

btw,In regards to the article that NIN has a link to. I wonder what the Elks plan B is?

by fredo on 9/2/2011 @ 10:59am
I'll agree that the city should enforce it's zoning laws. Doubt if WM will build if the zoning is not made to conform to their requirements. Pretty hard for the city to claim that this parcel would not be OK for retail. It's directly facing the backdoor of Target, Payless Shoes and a State liquor store.

by Rick Jones on 9/2/2011 @ 11:24am
Fredo - best avatar yet! State liquor store? For bulk I shop at Top Foods, Target, and Fred Meyer - which, by the way, is now owned by Kroger, a Cincinnati Corp., not local) regularly and haven't noticed a liquor store (and I have a nose for that). I don't shop at WM (because I can afford not to) but I don't see how we can deny them placing a store on the Elk's parking lot. The benefits supersede the evils (see babayaga). Again, a few who can afford to oppose WM are trying to deny a population that might really benefit from it. This effort continues to increase the divide between the 'haves' and 'have-nots.' And begins to seem like the "pet projects" Fredo so often rails against. We may be able to make them change their common design (ala Safeway at Proctor) to more reasonably and aesthetically fit into the neighborhood, but I don't think we can or should prevent them from entering our community.

This isn't billboards. It's a huge employer and retaierl that would exist where RVs now park with retirees who eat at Shari's and then travel on.

by Jesse on 9/2/2011 @ 11:26am
@RR: The article you posted has a letter in it stating that the Wal-Mart has only been in the workls for a few weeks because Multicare pulled out of wanting to develop that lot. That is the biggest load of bullshit I've ever seen. You can'tget a project like a Wal-Mart put together to the point that it's going through committees in a few weeks.

Is it the Elks bane of existance to screwTacoma over about every 50 years?

by Jesse on 9/2/2011 @ 11:32am
All of the better places to live are dominated by locally owned businesses. Think about places like Portland, Port Townsend, inner neighborhoods in Seattle, Austin city center, etc.

All of the generic, boring, "anytown USA" placesare dominated by the Wal-Marts of the world. Think about places like South Hill Puyallup, any city in Utah, etc.

Where would you rather live?

by tacoma1 on 9/2/2011 @ 11:35am
Jesse, you make a great point. It seems to me like this is a classic bait and switch. The original plans were for a non controversial multi-use project with obvious benefits to the community. The actual proposed project, with initially, an undisclosed business model, is not multi-use, is controversial, and with dubious benefits to the community.

btw, if I remember right, you are from Portland. How many Wal-Marts are in Portland? How many in Seattle? Not a one. There are plenty of poor people (and cheapskates) in Seattle that would shop there. By sheer number, probably more than in Tacoma. Yes Seattle's average income is higher than Tacoma, but they have so many extremely highly paid folks that the averages gets skewed. These communities don't have Wal-Mart becuase they don't want them.

by fredo on 9/2/2011 @ 11:36am
Well Jesse, it seems you've thrown down the gauntlet!

Time for all you WalMart haters to put up or shut up. Form an LLC for the purpose of acquiring the Elks property. You can then sit on the property until conditions are right for you to spring your utopian project on the city. Wal Mart will be so surprised when you pull the rug out from under them. I wish I could see the look on their faces.

by Jesse on 9/2/2011 @ 11:40am
@Tacoma1: There is one WalMart in Portland that I can think of and it's way away from the Portland core at 82nd Avenue.

by Rick Jones on 9/2/2011 @ 11:41am

by Rick Jones on 9/2/2011 @ 11:57am
Well Jesse, I happen to know a business owner in Centralia - Dick Getty who owns the outlet mall there. He, and his partners,have not been effected by Walmart moving into Chehalis. But the current economy has done considerable damage. It's not Main Street Centralia, but then Main Street wasn't that effected by the retail mall. In fact, I think the additional traffic drawn to the mall added to their business. I'm not from Centralia, have never lived there so I could be wrong.

by Jesse on 9/2/2011 @ 12:01pm
Sorry Rick: I withdrew my catty comment.

by Rick Jones on 9/2/2011 @ 12:10pm
Jesse, thanks but it's okay. The original WalMart equation was to enter smaller, usually rural towns which did indeed drive out those who chose to continue to compete against it. The small business successes in these towns chose not to compete price-wise but to change their business model and offer other services/products WM could not or chose not to provide. WM, like the U.S., in its drive to grow, then entered into the suburbs, went international and, eventually, had to come to the cities. Again, I'm not a WM fan, but many people like it and I can't see why, in this particular case, I should act against what so many others might benefit from.

by fredo on 9/2/2011 @ 1:00pm
I wanted to point out that WalMart, and the other big box stores to a lesser extent, are not just retailers, selling to the final consumers. They also function as distributors to other retailers including lots of mom and pops. If you go to Costco you will see people buying large quantities of items which are obviously headed to a small store in your neighborhood. And the same goes for WalMart. This makes it possible for local retailers to replenish inventories quickly while purchasing items from a local business instead of going outside Tacoma.

by jenyum on 9/2/2011 @ 1:06pm
Costco is usually a better source, because you can specify that the items are for resale and avoid sales tax. We have bought BBs at Walmart, when deliveries are late and all other retailers in the area are sold out. (But my husband would usually rather drive up to Woodinville to purchase them from a mom and pop, if they have them.) You can get to something like 19 Walmarts within a 30 minute drive of Tacoma, not having one here does not represent a hardship.

by babayaga on 9/2/2011 @ 1:11pm


by fredo on 9/2/2011 @ 1:19pm
Jen, I don't know anything about BBs except that when you shoot a cat with one of them it jumps about 10 feet in the air.

However if the BBs are something that you and your husband SELL at your business as opposed to something you just use in your business you don't pay the sales tax on the item. It doesn't matter if you buy them at Costco, WalMart, or Cabellas. If they won't honor your resale certificate, then just list the amount you paid retail on the line marked "paid at source" on your monthly State Excise Tax form. Keep your receipts in case they audit you.

by cisserosmiley on 9/2/2011 @ 1:25pm
13550 Aurora Ave N
Seattle, WA 98133

by fredo on 9/2/2011 @ 1:27pm
babayaga, that's funny

"When engaging in a conversation about corporate evils it is important to NEVER, EVER mention Apple Computers, Target or Ikea in the same breath as the companies mentioned earlier. White people prefer to hate corporations that dont make stuff that they like." stuffwhitepeoplelike

by tacoma1 on 9/2/2011 @ 1:34pm
Thats a Sam's Club, not a Wal-Mart. Same ownership, I know, but not a Wal-Mart.

by fredo on 9/2/2011 @ 1:38pm
I mentioned that I rarely shop at WM.

However, when my kids were in ballet classes a few years ago I was instructed to purchase a certain type of leotard. I went everywhere and never found these leotards. On a whim I stopped at the Lakewood WM. Lo and behold they had a fantastic dancewear department that put every other place to shame. The people who run this company may be tightfisted but they aren't stupid.

by cisserosmiley on 9/2/2011 @ 1:48pm
so if a 150,000 sq ft sams club opened at the old ELKS it would be ok? I'll pass that along to steve gano the walmart lobbyist, thanks tacoma1.

by tacoma1 on 9/2/2011 @ 1:55pm
Not saying that. I just said that Seattle doesn't have a Wal-Mart. Which is true.

Never been in a Sam's Club myself. I know they are membership based like Costco. I don't know if its bulk merchandized like Costco too, or set up like a Wal-Mart.

My guess is that legally, since Seattle allows Costco, they couldn't ban Sam's Club. For that matter, that may already be plan B for the Elks and Mr Oliphant.

by jenyum on 9/2/2011 @ 2:26pm
Fredo: I suppose we could do that anywhere, but it's kind of a PITA, vs Costco where all of the checkers are accustomed to resale purchases.

by NineInchNachos on 9/2/2011 @ 2:41pm
Does this help?

by fredo on 9/2/2011 @ 2:42pm
Jen, I'm sure the state doesn't have any objection to people who want to pay taxes they don't owe.

by low bar on 9/2/2011 @ 8:17pm
So if you boycott the Walmart, then China won't make any money off of us to then fucking to lend back to us:(

by fredo on 9/2/2011 @ 8:46pm
hey that's a good point low bar!

Tacoma just dedicated a park to curry a reconciliation with the Chinese...so what does the city council turn around and do? Makes it as difficult as possible for the leading retailer of chinese manufactured goods to get a store open in Tacoma.

Good thing the expelled Chinese aren't still alive to see the new Tacoma Method.

by NineInchNachos on 9/2/2011 @ 10:12pm
news flash... the fucking Chinese reconciliation park is for Chinese Americans, not the commies over in Asia. Or something.


by L.S.Erhardt on 9/2/2011 @ 11:03pm
Due to trade imbalances, the math doesn't lie.
If a county (like the US of A, for example) runs a deficit, some other trading parter must run a surplus (like China). Since China refuses to float the Renambi, they peg it to the dollar. If they floated their currency, it would appreciate a lot. And that would kill their exports. HOWEVER, if China stopped buying treasuries (read debt), then the USD would crash. At that point, China would have to unpeg the Renambi from the dollar as the USD reserves they have would effectively render their currency valueless if they didn't. This would be great for OUR exports but devastating to China's exporting as the trade imbalance with their largest trading partner would no long be in their favor.
A similar situation exists in the Eurozone, where powerful exporter Germany depends on the weaker nations' debts to fuel it's own economy.

The US and China are in a dangerous, no-winner knife fight. They aren't in a situation of one holding a knife to the other's throat. It's more like if you add in an explosive device to the mix so that if one cuts the other, they both explode in firey demise. Financial MAD, if you will.

WM in Tacoma or not, it has basically zero net effect on China or the US's economies. WM however, does have a much more than zero effect on Tacoma's economy.

by panachronic on 9/3/2011 @ 8:01am
Fredo nails it: "The people who run this company may be tightfisted but they aren't stupid."

Walmart got big by providing what people want, and their formula works pretty much everywhere. We're fooling ourselves if we don't think there is a demand for a Walmart store in central Tacoma. Both for the store and for the jobs.

I am absolutely dumbfounded by some of the comments here. I don't get how people can realize how badly we need new jobs in this city, yet somehow have the idea we can be picky about what company provides them.

It's more than a little disgusted to see people - people who are already employed - so willing to deny jobs to others who would gladly accept them, just because of their politically-motivated animosity toward the employer. If there was any doubt in my mind about how hostile liberalism can be to job creation, it is now gone.

by NineInchNachos on 9/3/2011 @ 8:25am
Thorax O'Tool knife fight paints a grim picture. I like to think of the China relationship more like two guys fists super-glued to each other's pubic hairs

by NineInchNachos on 9/3/2011 @ 8:27am
@Panachronic the JinxMedic indicates there are two WalMarts in Federal Way, if you want a job I bet you could even car pool with Jinx.

by Altered Chords on 9/3/2011 @ 8:42am
Maybe McMenamins will buy the building. They like old Elks buildings.

If not, then the city council should find a research facility to move in there and give all the geniuses on this thread a $200,000/year job studying problems and solving them.

by fredo on 9/3/2011 @ 6:13pm
"I am absolutely dumbfounded by some of the comments here. I don't get how people can realize how badly we need new jobs in this city, yet somehow have the idea we can be picky about what company provides them. " panachronic

The same people who say they hate employers who pay minimum wage have driven by the subject property thousands of times. It never once occured to any of them that they could buy the property and place a business or office there paying high wage jobs of the type they so favor.

"Be the change you wish to see in the world" Gandhi

by Mofo from the Hood on 9/3/2011 @ 10:35pm
If Walmart builds a store on S. 23rd and Union then the retail domino theory will come into play as when the Tacoma Mall toppled downtown Tacoma retailers. I'm betting that a Super Walmart is planned and if built then a massive domino effect will shake the ground from S. 23rd and Union through the lowlands of Nalley Valley and all the way up and over the surrounding hills and across the tableland to the Tacoma Mall.

by Altered Chords on 9/4/2011 @ 10:16am
If they build a super walmart there, then I will purchase Philly Cheesteak meat there instead of the super walmart in Spanaway.

I will continue purchasing most of my groceries at Costco. I will continue to buy non-fat milk, red onions, butter and bananas at the Safeway 1 block from my house. I will continue to buy spices in bulk at Winco. I cleverly schedule the trips to Winco when I'm driving by that area because I'm a genius. (I don't lose the cost savings to gasoline expense).

In summary, I will only buy 1 item from walmart when they move in. I hope they don't read this blog and cancel their plans now that they recognize how damn clever we are in Tacoma.

In 1912 the Atlantic and Pacific Tea company opened it 1st discount grocery store. Until that time, there was a local family owned grocery store every 2 blocks. That was domino effect.

by Mofo from the Hood on 9/4/2011 @ 11:55am
AC brings up a valid consideration. We Tacoman's should not underestimate the economic power of the Spanaway Super Walmart and the role it plays in local politics.

If a Super Walmart is built at S. 23rd and Union then I see that as a gain for the faction against Pierce Transit (the outbound Tacoma #1 route turns around at the Spanaway Super Walmart), as well as a gain for the faction against narrowing key thoroughfares by painting bicycle lanes.

A Central Tacoma Super Walmart would serve to keep the vital expanding lower classes within walking distance of essentials for subsistence living.

The net benefits would reflect the core values of the current Tacoma City Council, namely 1) Diversity and Equality (everyone is equally f*cked) and 2) Reduction of Global Warming (yes, bicycling generates harmful heat).

by low bar on 9/4/2011 @ 2:47pm
Walmart just needs better stock as it is one step up from being a fucking stockless Target. I bet Target is just about out of business. Target doesn't have shit in stock. If Walmart could just get better quality and sell for less like TJ Maxx does, then we'd really have something. Who gives a fuck about China anyways. They don't have a clue how to be cool like Japan. If China were as cool as Japan, and Asia would form some kind of awesome united state or union, then the US would have real competition. The US will never truly have any competition because lets face it, we are the coolest and have the most fun out of every nation on the planet. We are the greatest high school president there ever was or will be. Case closed. Cool sells. That is all.

And we need to raise the minimum wage in this country to $16hr so Americans can go to college and find out what cool is. The only reason Britney Spears has a star on Hollywood blvd is because the minimum wage is only, what is it now? $6hr?

by Mofo from the Hood on 9/4/2011 @ 7:51pm
The Great Walls of Walmart just introduced a new product from China---Space Panties: For the girl who thinks her ass is outta this world!

by fredo on 9/4/2011 @ 8:03pm
"Space Panties-We cover ALL your heavenly delights...even Uranus!"

by L.S.Erhardt on 9/5/2011 @ 1:11pm

by KevinFreitas on 10/11/2011 @ 10:27am
The Tacoma Chamber sends a letter to the City re: big-box moratorium:


In my opinion, they're out of touch with a Tacoma that takes pride and is willing not just to say "yes" out of desperation to any development that comes our way. Here's my comment:

Couldn't disagree more. Though there are plenty of rules and regulations already on the books here the developer was operating in secret hoping to pull a fast one over on the City Council re: medical complex versus Wal-Mart. This combined with city-wide concerns of the impact of such a predatory business, the last-minute reveal of the developers plans, and our City Council only being part time makes a moratorium a wise move by our council so they can take the proper time to consider all the aforementioned rules/regulations and social impact such big-box businesses present in Tacoma.

I appreciate the Chamber pushing for more business and job creation but there's quality vs. quantity at play here. Sometimes "something" isn't better than "nothing" when it comes to businesses hoping to prey on Tacoma consumers. Though I want a prosperous local economy as much as the next person that doesn't mean we have to just say "yes" to any new business that wants to put up shop here. We can shape our city and set standards for what we want that Tacoma to be instead of the Frankenstein approach of most city's thoughtless development.

by NineInchNachos on 10/11/2011 @ 10:32am
go Kevin!

by fredo on 10/11/2011 @ 10:56am
Every new business is trying to carve out a niche for itself by appealing to some of the customers of the existing businesses.

When the Ford Company started selling the Model T it was hoping to take some of the business from Chrysler, Studebaker, and the local livery stables. Ford wasn't trying to "pull a fast one" or behave "predatorially" or "prey" on the shoppers.

Kevin, you talk about a plan to set "standards for what we want." Could you describe the standards that "we" want? I'm not sure what that means. Do you mean that any business named WalMart has to agree to pay family wage levels and provide full benefits and pensions for it's employees, while other businesses not named WalMart can do whatever they want?

by Nick on 10/11/2011 @ 1:49pm

I'm fairly certain the city-wide consensus is that what "we want" is simply the opposite of whatever Fredo wants. So consider what you, personally, want. Then imagine the opposite, and I think you will arrive at your answer.

end_friendly_heckling :-D

by fredo on 10/11/2011 @ 2:18pm
Nick, how did you determine what the "city wide consensus" was? I've been following the debate in the Tribnet blog and the majority of the postings are pro-Wal Mart. I'm not saying they are the most popular company in the land but how about a spirit of fairness? Is that too much to ask? Three hundred people are about to get jobs there, construction companies are going to get some work, and the city of Tacoma will be getting property and sales taxes galore for many years. I don't see the downside. Let's end the heckling of WalMart.

by fredo on 10/11/2011 @ 6:53pm
Nick, if you are right, that there is a city wide consensus that walmart doesn't belong, then let's go ahead and let them open and watch them fall flat on their face. Nothing would embarass WM more than to open up their doors and see nobody shopping there. Let's find out, once and for all, if you are right! I want to know!

by low bar on 10/11/2011 @ 7:30pm
Plenty of people are going to shop there. The demographics are crawling with idiots or WM wouldn't invest.

by fredo on 10/11/2011 @ 7:44pm
Nick says the consensus is that Tacoma doesn't want WM, and low bar says Tacoma is crawling with idiots anxious to shop there. How can both of you be right?

by Mofo from the Hood on 10/11/2011 @ 8:17pm
Central Tacoma also needs a 150,000 sq ft Dollar Tree store.

Thanks for nothing Tacoma City Council.

by CentralGirl on 10/11/2011 @ 8:29pm
I live in central tacoma and have no problem with a walmart coming in. Big box?? So, is Macy's big box, how about Home Depot, or Costco or /Fred Meyers?? If I shop at Goodwill is that big box or am I only to shop at garage sales?? ps - I'm not an idiot. . . .

by low bar on 10/11/2011 @ 11:18pm
HAHA Central Tacoma also needs a 12,000,000 sq ft Super Mega Michael's!! We shouldn't rest till every JBLM home has enough plastic plants and yarn to go around! Returning soldiers should come home to a world where no one will ever run out of enough fucking wool to knit up kleenex box cozies!!!!

by NineInchNachos on 10/12/2011 @ 8:13am
the horror... the horror..

by low bar on 10/12/2011 @ 11:37am
makes me want to stick my mouth over a port of tacoma smoke stack:)

by fredo on 10/13/2011 @ 7:40am
"We can shape our city and set standards for what we want that Tacoma to be instead of the Frankenstein approach of most city's thoughtless development." Kev

As a businessman myself who might wish to open up a business here in town I would be interested in knowing what these standards are? I would not wish to use a "frankenstein approach" or participate in "thoughtless development."

Please describe these standards Kevin.

by Nick on 10/13/2011 @ 10:58am
"Nick, how did you determine what the "city wide consensus" was?"

Sorry Fredo, my comment was not based in logic, evidence, or seriousness. I just wanted to lighten the mood a bit and acknowledge your willingness to stand by your perspective in the face of so much opposition.

While I may not always agree with you, I appreciate your challenges to my opinions and wish there were more people on here willing to do that. It makes for a much richer conversation.

by low bar on 10/13/2011 @ 11:26am
Tacoma right now is a total WTF random frankenstein town with delusions of being a city. And it's all because of the port. I bet you the location of the port to downtown is the reason seattle has taken off and Tacoma never will.

by fredo on 10/13/2011 @ 11:53am
I'm willing to bad mouth Wal Mart just like a lot of the other commenters.

Just tell me what standard they are violating.

I've heard people say that the employees are part time, the employees are low wage, the business is mostly non union, the owners make a lot of money.and that some of the employees may even qualify for some government benefits like food stamps or health care.

If this is all, why is WM different from lots of other businesses in town?

by NineInchNachos on 10/13/2011 @ 12:03pm
they systematically discriminate against female employees?
they're the favorite shopping choice of 9/11 Hijackers? hillbilly rednecks?
they're copyright trolls with the yellow smiley face?

the tacoma-pierce county chamber of commerce comes out of hibernation for Clear Channel Outdoor and Walmart and not for anyone else?

Walmart/Clear Channel Outdoor is the perfect candidate for Tacoma Method 2.0

by fredo on 10/13/2011 @ 12:18pm
"they systematicallly discriminate against female employees"

That's all you've got?

If you are saying that no other business in Tacoma has ever done this, I would suggest that you are pretty naive. Ever heard of Tacoma BOYS? How about the LongshoresMENs Union?

by NineInchNachos on 10/13/2011 @ 12:52pm
hey now, that woulda been the biggest class action lawsuit in the history of the galaxy! You're just lucky the supreme court is all right-wingy these days.

by KevinFreitas on 10/13/2011 @ 1:54pm
@Fredo: I would like to see a more dense Tacoma where every building and shop at street level has floors of condos or apartments above it. I'd like to see more people living and work in the same town so they can more easily walk, bike or bus to and fro. If Wal-Mart wants to build a multi-use center that doesn't just satisfy their needs but helps build a more livable Tacoma then I'd be all for it.

Jobs are great but I'd much rather see 100 smaller businesses pop up in town and employ those 300 people.

The "we" I speak of is the "we" who want a more livable, walkable, and sustainable Tacoma. If the citizens and City Council are willing to stand up as they have we may very well still get a Wal-Mart but, as with other developments around town (the MultiCare power facility along "I" across from Wright Park, the Proctor Safeway renovation) if our efforts make them appreciate and join this community as a partner rather than a vulture our job will be done.

I speak up because I want to participate and hold our City and business leaders accountable. We all know the kind of Tacoma unchecked power like Eric Anderson wielded could create (see: parking lots) and I, for one, am not willing to stand idly by.

by fredo on 10/13/2011 @ 4:13pm
New WalMart will:

1. Increase density-check
2. Increase people working and living in the same town-check
3. Centrally located on bus line for easy transit/bicycling-check
4. Not prevent 100 or more small businesses from opening-check
5. provide parking spaces sufficient to meet city codes-check
6. be like the Proctor Safeway which remodeled with no residential-check

It seems to me that the WalMart will suit your requirements for the most part. There won't be any residential upstairs but that wouldn't be any different than any other big box store or practically any retail business in Tacoma. There are only a few that I am aware of with residential above. Here's my list: Knapps, Teaching toys, Trolly Car Square, a few old buildings on 6th Ave. and on South Tacoma Way and DT of course. That's about it. Tacoma has never been big on these residential above retail. Let's not start a requirement that every new retail business have retail above or we're going to have development projects stalled for years or decades. That's going to be a deal breaker.

Let's make sure that reasonable design standards are enforced in a consistant manner and not twisted in some bizarre attempt to derail legitimate business proposals. I'm not a big fan of WM Kevin, but I am a big fan of fairness.

by NineInchNachos on 10/13/2011 @ 4:32pm
do not want more traffic in my neighborhood. more big 18 wheelers, and walmart 9/11 hijacker shopper hillbilly redneck jalopies will not make my neighborhood safer for bicycle transport.

Build the god damn thing downtown where it wont endanger any lives.

by fredo on 10/13/2011 @ 4:43pm
you make diversity sound like a bad thing

by NineInchNachos on 10/13/2011 @ 5:02pm
diversity is DESPERATELY needed downtown.

by tacoma1 on 10/13/2011 @ 5:05pm
A walmart does not increase density by any ones definition but fredo's. Walmarts take up acres upon acres of land and absolutely no one lives on that land unless you count the dozen delapidated motorhomes parked in the parking lot for months on end.

by fredo on 10/13/2011 @ 5:18pm
tacoma1, it's quite simple actually. people who want to live in a place that's conveniently located near a WM don't have to contribute to sprawl by building a home in Yelm or Spanaway. They can just live right here in the central area of Tacoma in one of the many foreclosed and vacant houses looking for a loving family and ride their bikes to the WM to work and shop. A smart guy like you should have realized that right away. This increases density. There isn't any residential going up on the Elks site so how would any alternative development change the density more than the proposed WM? I don't get it.

Some of you people are going to have to stop being haters.

by tacoma1 on 10/13/2011 @ 8:13pm
Thank you for the fairy tale. That's was entertaining. Can you tell us all about when unicorns roamed Tacoma next?

by fredo on 10/13/2011 @ 8:20pm
A big WM would generate millions in tax revenue which could be used for public transit projects, even streetcars. But the haters in Tacoma would rather finance those projects by....hummmm, I guess they haven't figured out a way to finance those projects. Oh I know. We're going to get the 1%of the people who are millionaires to pay for it by closing all their "loopholes." Hahahahahaha

by low bar on 10/13/2011 @ 10:56pm
There isn't a state income tax in WA so how is da Walmart worker's revenue gunna fix all deez potholio's? Unless you still think corporations somehow are the ones building the roads around here so that diabetes can operate a fucking walmart big rig on to bring garbage from china to central tacoma hahahahahahahaaha

by Mofo from the Hood on 10/14/2011 @ 12:14am
Let's get something straight right now.
The business name is Walmart, NOT White Trash Mart.

by tacoma1 on 10/14/2011 @ 5:42am
If the presence of walmart created density and rich city coffers, Federal Way would be a dense urban city that collects tax revenues semi trucks.

Federal Way in actuality, is an urban sprawl and strip mall Hell with a dwindling tax base due to the recession, abundant low paying jobs, and lack of high wages.

I don't want to live in Federal Way South.

by fredo on 10/14/2011 @ 6:24am
tacoma1 that's an ad hominem argument.

You don't like Federal Way
Federal Way has a Wal Mart
Therefore you don't like Wal Mart

You could substitute the term "Sand Castle Tournament" for the term "WalMart" and make the same argument against bringing sand castle tournaments to Tacoma.

by fredo on 10/14/2011 @ 6:51am
Three affluent Oregon cities with density higher than Tacoma (3865):

Beaverton (4664)
Gresham (4079)
Portland (3939)

You guessed it! They all have Wal Marts. Looks like Wal Marts are frequently associated with higher population density.

by fredo on 10/14/2011 @ 8:00am

Three affluent Oregon cities with high density AND LIGHT RAIL in spite of the fact that they also are home to Wal Marts:


How is this even possible?

by low bar on 10/14/2011 @ 10:48am
Yeah but oregonians make up for it by NOT having all too many white trash and Asian stripmall hell magnets. The dream of the 90's is alive in Portland

Also I don't think that was ad hominem as federal way doesn't breath and walk around, throw statue of liberty heads and secrete little bugs that when they bite you you lose all your blood through your anus.....yet

by tacoma1 on 10/14/2011 @ 11:04am
my point about Federal Way and Walmart was simply that all local evidence shows that Walnart does not in any way create density. Federal Way is devoid of density, and is not a rich city. Inspite of the two walmarts it has. If Walmart produced enough tax revenue to pay for lightrail, Fed Way would have 100 miles of light rail.

Renton also has a walmart. It has no density by it's walmart and no light rail either

by KevinFreitas on 10/14/2011 @ 11:10am
I agree with @tacoma1 and would extrapolate that Federal Way's strip mall-based layout anchored by big-box stores (like Wal-Mart) does nothing to improve density and help create a more sustainable community. Those kind of stores certainly have their place but there are other ways of laying things out to help improve density and use those spaces more wisely.

by NineInchNachos on 10/14/2011 @ 11:10am
I used to work in Federal Way for a spell. It is a silly place which should be 'wiped off the map'

by The Jinxmedic on 10/14/2011 @ 11:19am
Yes, Mr. Ahmedinajad.

by low bar on 10/14/2011 @ 11:27am
operation hammerdown is a go

by Jesse on 10/14/2011 @ 11:35am
Gresham (mid-1980's), Beaverton (late 90's), and Portland (mid 80's) are all cities that have had light rail for years. Apartments spring up around the light rail stops and if there's a plan for a new line, apartments start springing up there too. Light rail has everything to do with this density.

There is only one WalMart in Portland out on 82nd in the middle of the worst WT part of town... just FYI.

Right at the moment, Federal Way is too spread out for effective light rail IMO. But, so was Beaverton and Gresham pre-rail.

Also remember that light rail is different than streetcars. "Light Rail" is an all-encompassing term used for this type of rail transit. That is, streetcar is lighter, with shorter lines, and designed to go from one neighborhood in a city to another neighborhood in the same city. Light rail (like MAX or BART) is designed to link cities with larger cars, longer distances, and not necessarily built into a street. Just... for clarity. Continue on...

by fredo on 10/14/2011 @ 1:04pm
Sorry I didn't make my point my clearly.

I meant to show that high density, high affluence, and rail transportation were not inconsistant with the presence of a WalMart. There's plenty of evidence that WalMart is not going to create the body blow to our economy and lifestyle that all the haters are trying to suggest.

Don't like WalMart? Don't go there. But don't go around implying that the world will tilt off it's axis if WM opens an additional store.

by NineInchNachos on 10/14/2011 @ 1:26pm
it's hard to auto-complete fredo's thinking sometimes

by Mofo from the Hood on 10/14/2011 @ 1:37pm

Building department stores: Bad

City Councilmen who throw up barriers to building department stores: Good

by fredo on 10/14/2011 @ 1:55pm
Maybe the council could make a counter offer.

If Wal Mart will change the name of their store, change the marketing program, change the product mix, provide an employment policy that pays part time workers $50,000 per year with full benefits and a defined benefit pension, allows EZ promotion all the way to management for females and cross dressing males, uses a LEED certified building designed by IM Pei with 10 stories of apartments on top for the homeless and section 8 communities and provides on site kennels for their pit bulls and an on site yard for chopping automobiles, capped by a rainbow flag, a zen garden dedicated to spoken word artists, and a reconciliation park dedicated to all the mom and pop store owners who came and went along with underground parking and light rail and street car connections, then and only then:

the city will agree to let them build and we'll pay for a couple of left hand turn lanes.

by Mofo from the Hood on 10/14/2011 @ 7:47pm
The only thing more unwelcome in Tacoma than Walmart is a private entity that gives free food to the needy.
Remember McKinley Hill!

Part Time City Councilmen Bureaucratize Best!

by momof6 on 7/5/2012 @ 2:49pm
I am so sick of people bashing Walmart. They are no different then any other retailer in the world. All the things you hear about Walmart are untrue. I have worked for them for 7 years and never been treated badly. Get your facts straight before you bash people.

by cisserosmiley on 7/5/2012 @ 3:18pm
Agreed. We all have some work to do before we can look ourselves in the mirror tomorrow morning.

by Cheechmo on 7/5/2012 @ 3:24pm
Hi momof6,

First of all, welcome to the board! Secondly, can you tell me how to get Walmart to pay me for searching for and posting in threads about them? Thanks!

by NineInchNachos on 7/5/2012 @ 3:46pm
Lots of women love walmart

also Walmart is an awesome company.  Just ask the people in Mexico who got bribes!    What other big box retailer pays bribes?

by fredo on 7/5/2012 @ 5:25pm
  The women worked at WM, then after awhile they didn't like it so much.I know the feeling.

I've worked for employers before and after awhile I didn't like working for them so much either.   

 The best advice I can come up with is either find a place you like working at or start your own business. 

by momof6 on 7/6/2012 @ 8:23pm

Like I said get your facts straight before you open your mouth.

by low bar on 7/6/2012 @ 9:13pm

its called an observable fact ie the moon orbits the earth, one night in bangkok makes a hard man humble, and WALMART IS THE GATEWAY TO THE 9 LEVELS OF HELL

also, are you hearing voices?


yer its called affiliate markunting

by Welshman Novelty Account on 7/6/2012 @ 10:46pm
chan chwech blant? Gwisga t dybi sy iawn 'n anghyfrifol hon ddiwrnod i
mewn heneiddia ble 'n saith billion boblogi gras 'n briddo? Paham gwna
'ch breeders angen at bod fel 'n hunangar?

by fredo on 7/7/2012 @ 7:02am

the always reliable personal attack.

by momof6 on 7/7/2012 @ 9:52am
I just think you guys should actually get facts before you make comments you know nothing about. Observable fact? That is hillarious

by low bar on 7/7/2012 @ 12:59pm
whiny babies

ok so i've a highschool friend who works at WM in shelton and they will not let him train to work at the registers. no growth. all he's allowed to do is unload the trucks. FACT. but it's his dumbass fault he got laid off and had to apply there instead of finish his computer science degree. still...


by fredo on 7/7/2012 @ 3:45pm

Your highschool friend "had" to apply at WM? Is there some mysterious overlord that commands folks to apply there?  

by low bar on 7/7/2012 @ 4:04pm

you simply DONT HAVE A FUCKING CLUE goddamn i wish this were still the 1800's I'D HAVE RUN YOUR ASS OUT OF TOWN

by fredo on 7/7/2012 @ 4:34pm

low bar you forgot to capitalize all the words.

by jenyum on 7/7/2012 @ 10:32pm

by momof6 on 7/8/2012 @ 9:31am
Low Bar
There are reasons for them not allowing him to register train, but what does it matter to you. Wal-mart is a job, and I have great benefits. I support my family just fine with it. Small business are inevitably going to be gone one day. More jobs and better prices is what people prefer, not small businesses.
Get a life and quit knocking wal-mart.

by cisserosmiley on 7/8/2012 @ 10:54am
More jobs!!!

by NineInchNachos on 7/8/2012 @ 11:04am
Death to Walmart!  

by cisserosmiley on 7/8/2012 @ 11:09am
Walmart had caskets

by jenyum on 7/8/2012 @ 11:48am
People much prefer to live in neighborhoods with lots of small businesses.  A quick look at home values in neighborhoods like this vs. those served only by big box stores should make that clear.

by fredo on 7/8/2012 @ 12:10pm
  "People much prefer to live in neighborhoods with lots of small businesses. " 

And yet...they have no problem driving past those small businesses to pay a visit to WM, Costco, fred Meyers, cabellas, etc. Jen, I'll wager that if you took a survey of folks leaving these businesses with their purchases the majority would admit that they drove right past a locally owned business that might have had the same goods.

by momof6 on 7/8/2012 @ 1:09pm

JenWho says people prefer to live in neighborhoods with lots of small businesses? Where do you get that so called "fact"?Small businesses are bigger targets to robbery, I stay away from them. 

by cisserosmiley on 7/8/2012 @ 6:48pm
Walmart does real estate too.

by NineInchNachos on 7/8/2012 @ 7:26pm
you ask for people who prefer to live in neighborhoods with lots of small biz.  I'm one of em.  I freaking hate that there will be a walmart moving in down the street from my house.  the treachery of the Elks Developer will never be forgotten.  NEVER. NEVER FORGET. I will not stop my hatred of Walmart until they bribe me like a Mexican politician.  Good day. 

by Jesse on 7/8/2012 @ 7:43pm
I agree with Jenyum.  The proof that people like to live in neighborhoods with lots of (good) small businesses is in the form of property values.

by fredo on 7/8/2012 @ 7:54pm

I don't want to live by a WM that's why I bought a house where there are no development parcels for commercial zoning anywhere nearby.  I know some people don't consider that when they select a home but I did.

by NineInchNachos on 7/8/2012 @ 8:20pm
so much for trusting developers to follow through on the mixed use building codes or whatever which are obviously full of shit.

by troysworktable on 7/8/2012 @ 9:29pm
@momof6: It's interesting that whenever someone says something that you don't like or disagree with then it's not a "fact."  Yet you make quite a few claims without backing them up with evidence.  Show us the statistics that small businesses are more likely to be victims of burglary than big box retailers.  You keep speaking for an undetermined number of "people."  You are as partisan as those you disagree with, the "Walmart haters."

by troysworktable on 7/8/2012 @ 9:35pm
@momof6: Case in point: "More jobs and better prices is what people prefer, not small businesses."  I actually value what small businesses provide.  I like better prices just like the guy/gal next door, but hold quality in higher esteem.  I'm willing to pay more for a quality product.  I'm willing to pay more for a local product.  I'm willing to do with less to have those quality items rather than a bunch of outsourced, foreign-made items.  I still buy the latter, as well, because oftentimes I can't find local items.  But I strive for the former.  I also value loyalty that small businesses and independent businesses provide.  I stay with the same auto mechanic because he has proven trustworthy.  He has even told me to get rid of vehicles that would cost me more to continue to fix than the price of a newer used vehicle.  I remain loyal to him as he has to me, rather than trying to find the cheapest oil change or tire rotation.  Sometimes its about more than price.  But then I'm likely not one of your "people."

by troysworktable on 7/8/2012 @ 9:40pm
Like fredo, I also bought an older home in a neighborhood that is residentially dense; near small businesses, parks, and a downtown core; and not open to commercial development.  Like jenyum, I value living near small businesses.  That, for me, is a fact.  Just because you may not like it doesn't make it less so.  You work for Walmart; that's a fact for you.  I'm not going to argue it or take you to task for it (other than telling you a story that differs from the one you've "written" for yourself).  That's your fact.  Live your life and let others live theirs.

by NineInchNachos on 7/9/2012 @ 8:28am
walmart violates US & international law paying bribes in Mexico: FACT.

by NineInchNachos on 7/9/2012 @ 8:29am
largest attempted class action lawsuit in history: walmart fact

by cisserosmiley on 7/9/2012 @ 9:08am
Some Walmarts have McDonalds inside them. FACT

by Altered Chords on 7/9/2012 @ 3:29pm
I bought lunchmeat and pringles at the Auburn Supermall Walmart today and I like Walmart and wish there was one in Tacoma in a neighborhood that I don't live in but can drive to in about 15  minutes like where the old Elks building is: FACT.

by low bar on 7/11/2012 @ 7:03pm
"in about 15 minutes"exactly. time. walmart helps the lazy get their shit cheaper at the cost of quality and faster at the cost of small spread out local business. i mean it totally fits a culture one step away from living like foxconn rats. america? its over.

by cisserosmiley on 7/11/2012 @ 9:25pm
With our extra time WE can pursue art, culture & debate.

by low bar on 7/11/2012 @ 9:40pm
nonsense. cave paintings were created in the HARDEST of times. because shit sucks and takes time is not the only reason artists exist. anyways. i argue the more people turn into foxconn droids, the less time they are going to have to 'ponder' your art, let alone have the fucking IQ in the first place to get any of it. dangerous license to give a world without pushback.

anyways, i;m sure there is an equation for this but i'm too lazy to find it but short answer to everything is a drastic reduction of populations. truth hurts:( carrying capacity met = bye bye. or maybe by luck we've achieved equilibrium. can't be arsed to mull over data. but proof is perhaps in the pudding or we'd all be fucking dead by now surely. great pacific garbage patch. maybe the avengers really are real?

by cisserosmiley on 7/11/2012 @ 9:44pm
Time is the reason WE have the ability to explore. You go live in a cave, I will sit in my living room and sing a song because I can.

by low bar on 7/11/2012 @ 10:04pm
no. black's and native north/south americans getting the everliving shit fleeced out of them is the reason you have time and a living room and a bunch of other stuff right now in this point in time. simple freakonomics or was it Reaganomics? anyways yeah, what was that woody guthrie song? THIS WALMART IS YOUR WALMART THIS WALMART IS MY WALMART. fuck woody. 

by NineInchNachos on 7/12/2012 @ 12:05am
reconciliation or bust!

by fredo on 7/12/2012 @ 6:47am
the reason people have a living room and a bunch of stuff is because...

blacks, and native north/south americans are having "shit" fleeced out of them.

What does that mean?   

by cisserosmiley on 7/12/2012 @ 3:04pm
In 6th grade I borrowed $5 from my friend Robert, who is black. When i found out his dad is a movie star I never payed him back. FLEECED!!!

by low bar on 7/12/2012 @ 5:14pm
in 6th grade the school i went to taught history

for a citizen of a capitalist civilization fredo you sure don't know dick about capital flow

by fredo on 7/12/2012 @ 5:33pm

  I think I understand capitalism pretty well, and besides that I can post a coherent comment that doesn't sound like I suffer from Tourette's Syndrome.

by low bar on 7/12/2012 @ 5:47pm
because people with syndrome disorders are less. fredo > a person with tourettes

by fredo on 7/12/2012 @ 5:54pm

I don't think you really have tourettes, it's all an act, you just want people to feel sorry for you. Sort of like the guy in " the Ringer" who pretended to be disabled so he could compete in the Special olympics.

by Non Sequitur on 7/13/2012 @ 12:45pm
Christ in a falafel!

This has been a hell of a show to watch.
Speaking of things to watch, enjoy this:


by low bar on 7/13/2012 @ 1:05pm
@fredumbo yer its called trying to argue heavy on the pathos because i got no fucking data but at least i don;t make fun of RETARDS or do I?

I want to go to the church in the beginning of that video and dry hump a golden calf

by Non Sequitur on 7/13/2012 @ 1:19pm
UR doing it wrong.

The golden calf humps YOU, no lube provided except for your tears.

by low bar on 7/13/2012 @ 2:36pm

by NineInchNachos on 7/16/2012 @ 5:13pm
good stuff!


by low bar on 7/16/2012 @ 6:50pm

by cisserosmiley on 7/16/2012 @ 7:22pm

by Jesse on 7/16/2012 @ 8:05pm
@RR:  Frightening article.

@cisserosmiley:  Hilarious Bingo game!  Ha!

by Altered Chords on 7/16/2012 @ 10:16pm
I am considering dropping Costco, Safeway and Trader Joes and doing all of my shopping at Walmart.  With all of the families depending on the paychecks of the employees there, they need all the support they can get.  I think I'll get a part time job there too and save up to buy 100 shares of WMT.

by JesseHillFan on 7/16/2012 @ 11:34pm
@Altered Chords. Plus you can visit RR (NiN) after you get off work at Walmart.

by cisserosmiley on 7/17/2012 @ 7:39am
If the central WM does well, a Walmart executive might adopt Tacoma...

by low bar on 7/17/2012 @ 12:29pm
holy shit how could anyone consider dropping trader joes...just on munchies alone that place is worth a billion WM

by Altered Chords on 7/17/2012 @ 12:43pm
I finally got around to entering my receipts into my July budget spreadsheet and noticed the Trader Joes receipt.  Very small $$ amount for a lot of stuff.  Forget what I said about WMT. 

by low bar on 7/17/2012 @ 12:47pm
no doubt about that when you can get wasabi seaweed chips for 99 ct.

by Altered Chords on 7/17/2012 @ 1:22pm
Forget about this walmart nonsense.  This wasabi seafood chips info is more valuable to me than all prior posts combined.


I'm just a computer geek that has fallen in love with Tacoma.

So, what's almost as fun as sitting in front of a computer all day? Talking about the growth and development of a new Tacoma, duh!

Follow me on Twitter: @RogWilco

My Geek Blog: www.nickawilliams.com

Getting Married! www.ashleyplusnick.com

Recent Posts