3 ms·

Ironically, Costco treats its employees much better than most any locally owned shop.

digging 3y ago
That's probably true. The benefits of local business are 1) that dollars spent there generate more wealth for the local economy, as they're not extracted to offshore bank accounts; and 2) that there can be more accountability to and involvement with the community served. However, just because someone hasn't expanded their business to the state/national/international levels doesn't make them a good person, a good manager, a good CEO, or a good community member. The term "petty tyrant" is often used to refer to small business owners who abuse their employees and/or community.
- gruez 3y ago
  >that dollars spent there generate more wealth for the local economy, as they're not extracted to offshore bank accounts This is only one side of the equation. Globalization also means the local economy is also "extracting" wealth from other economies. >2) that there can be more accountability to and involvement with the community served. Yeah, like car dealerships using their "accountability to and involvement" to forcibly insert themselves in the value chain?
  - digging 3y ago
    > This is only one side of the equation. Globalization also means the local economy is also "extracting" wealth from other economies. ... more than large corporations do? Nonsense > Yeah, like car dealerships using their "accountability to and involvement" to forcibly insert themselves in the value chain? I would suggest you reread the sentence you quoted and then go ahead and finish reading the rest of my comment, because this sounds like an argumentative retort but I don't think you understood what you're replying to.
    - gruez 3y ago
      >... more than large corporations do? Nonsense Corporations aren't some entities from another dimension. Their earnings must ultimately go to someone. For the global economy as a whole, all the "extraction" that's happening ultimately net out to zero. >I would suggest you reread the sentence you quoted and then go ahead and finish reading the rest of my comment, because this sounds like an argumentative retort but I don't think you understood what you're replying to. I suggest you do the same. I was simply pointing out the dark side of the dynamic you described. Yes, car dealerships are pillars of many communities. They sponsor local clubs/sporting teams and local politicians. However, all that "involvement" means they wield enormous political power, to the extent that they're able to lobby state representatives to forcibly add themselves to the automotive value chain. Whether that's better for the consumer, and the local community as a whole is questionable. After all, they're getting the money from the local community, and if their services aren't needed (why do you have to go through a dealership rather than ordering through a web app?) then they're ultimately leeches and a net negative for the community.
      - digging 3y ago
        > Corporations aren't some entities from another dimension. Their earnings must ultimately go to someone. For the global economy as a whole, all the "extraction" that's happening ultimately net out to zero. I have no idea how this relates to what I was talking about. The reason I asked you that question is because the topic was "local business vs large corporations." What did you think I was talking about? > I was simply pointing out the dark side of the dynamic you described. You mean the dark side that I explicitly described in my original comment? Now it's my turn to stop reading, because this is not productive.
latentcall 3y ago
Right, also keep in mind Costco can afford to treat their employees well. A small mom and pop with the owner(s) and maybe one or two clerks may not be able to in the same way.

That's probably true. The benefits of local business are 1) that dollars spent there generate more wealth for the local economy, as they're not extracted to offshore bank accounts; and 2) that there can be more accountability to and involvement with the community served. However, just because someone hasn't expanded their business to the state/national/international levels doesn't make them a good person, a good manager, a good CEO, or a good community member. The term "petty tyrant" is often used to refer to small business owners who abuse their employees and/or community.

gruez 3y ago
>that dollars spent there generate more wealth for the local economy, as they're not extracted to offshore bank accounts This is only one side of the equation. Globalization also means the local economy is also "extracting" wealth from other economies. >2) that there can be more accountability to and involvement with the community served. Yeah, like car dealerships using their "accountability to and involvement" to forcibly insert themselves in the value chain?
- digging 3y ago
  > This is only one side of the equation. Globalization also means the local economy is also "extracting" wealth from other economies. ... more than large corporations do? Nonsense > Yeah, like car dealerships using their "accountability to and involvement" to forcibly insert themselves in the value chain? I would suggest you reread the sentence you quoted and then go ahead and finish reading the rest of my comment, because this sounds like an argumentative retort but I don't think you understood what you're replying to.
  - gruez 3y ago
    >... more than large corporations do? Nonsense Corporations aren't some entities from another dimension. Their earnings must ultimately go to someone. For the global economy as a whole, all the "extraction" that's happening ultimately net out to zero. >I would suggest you reread the sentence you quoted and then go ahead and finish reading the rest of my comment, because this sounds like an argumentative retort but I don't think you understood what you're replying to. I suggest you do the same. I was simply pointing out the dark side of the dynamic you described. Yes, car dealerships are pillars of many communities. They sponsor local clubs/sporting teams and local politicians. However, all that "involvement" means they wield enormous political power, to the extent that they're able to lobby state representatives to forcibly add themselves to the automotive value chain. Whether that's better for the consumer, and the local community as a whole is questionable. After all, they're getting the money from the local community, and if their services aren't needed (why do you have to go through a dealership rather than ordering through a web app?) then they're ultimately leeches and a net negative for the community.
    - digging 3y ago
      > Corporations aren't some entities from another dimension. Their earnings must ultimately go to someone. For the global economy as a whole, all the "extraction" that's happening ultimately net out to zero. I have no idea how this relates to what I was talking about. The reason I asked you that question is because the topic was "local business vs large corporations." What did you think I was talking about? > I was simply pointing out the dark side of the dynamic you described. You mean the dark side that I explicitly described in my original comment? Now it's my turn to stop reading, because this is not productive.

latentcall 3y ago

Right, also keep in mind Costco can afford to treat their employees well. A small mom and pop with the owner(s) and maybe one or two clerks may not be able to in the same way.