Skip to main content

View Diary: No one wants to drive out to Walmart stores anymore (325 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  What specific "tax breaks and incentives"... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    msdrown, La Gitane, Sparhawk, Gary Owen

    ...does Walmart get from the Federal government that are not available to other corporations?

    As far as having to tear down their stores rather than try to sell them, that's a local issue -- and should be applied equally to all businesses and residences.

    Perhaps cities and counties should require payment of a "demolition and replanting" fee sufficient for demolition and land restoration before issuing a building permit. If the building is vacant or not being used for its original purpose for more than nine months, the city/county would tear the structure down and restore the land using the funds accumulated through the fees. If demolition and restoration costs go up, for example due to inflation or due to new environmental laws, beyond the return on the US Treasuries the fund is invested in, each business/residence would be taxed annually to top "their" portion of the fund up.

    If an owner demolishes a building (and possibly restores the land if not rebuilding) they get a refund from the fund for demolition costs (and, if done, restoration costs).

    Detroit could have used this.

    Check with your city council.

    •  I have been shouting this same thing for YEARS (5+ / 0-)
      Perhaps cities and counties should require payment of a "demolition and replanting" fee sufficient for demolition and land restoration before issuing a building permit. If the building is vacant or not being used for its original purpose for more than nine months, the city/county would tear the structure down and restore the land using the funds accumulated through the fees. If demolition and restoration costs go up, for example due to inflation or due to new environmental laws, beyond the return on the US Treasuries the fund is invested in, each business/residence would be taxed annually to top "their" portion of the fund up.
      Of course, I'm not in charge.
    •  I just discovered this: (3+ / 0-)

      I'm living in America, and in America you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business.

      by CFAmick on Mon Feb 24, 2014 at 12:43:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Reply to WillR (0+ / 0-)

      Unless you count federal medicaid and food assistance (Which are of course subsidize all low wage corporations) most Wal-Mart subsidies are from local governments.

      Wal-Mart is notorious for building just outside the corporate limits when they can't bully the city council into giving them what they want.
      This draws the customer base from the municipality while conveniently being outside its tax jurisdiction, leaving the council to make a Faustian bargain.

      Your Demolition fees make a lot of sense, as do making tax breaks the subject of stringent requirements. In return for getting a tax break, a corporation should have to commit to bringing living wage jobs into the community.

       

      For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

      by Grey Fedora on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 06:04:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site