|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
Report Comment
"Interesting article, but this should be classified as "opinion" rather than news. The author of this bit has a bias against large chains (you can go to the website that the UTW took this article from, even down to the picture - to validate this comment) and this article fails to address one issue that most Americans understand -- the bottom-line, out-of-pocket costs to the consumers. Wal-Mart and others did not coerce their competition into shutting down. Rather, Wal-Mart out-competed them. There are winners and losers, but such is life.
Having said that, the readers of the UTW would have been better served if instead of simply “cursing the darkness” if the UTW had used this opinion piece to initiate its own digging around to see what is being done (or not done) in Tulsa. I only recently moved to Tulsa but I understand that the local Chamber has struggled with this issue for over a year and I recall seeing some buy local billboards when I first arrived in Tulsa.
Certainly this issue is complex and not easily relegated to a few columns in a paper. However, I do think that there are a few things that must be considered in trying to shed some light on this matter. First, distinguish between purchasing locally and purchasing locally-produced/grown products. Second, work with businesses (including large businesses) to help educate that they benefit if they consider the end-to-end process and that it is in their “enlightened self-interest” to participate because the total rewards of doing so outweigh the perceived cost savings otherwise obtained. Third, recognition for participating must be present – instead of knocking big businesses, a successful program must work with big business (everyone likes to see their name up in lights, receive an award or the like and that includes business leaders). Fourth, the benefits must be tangible – but do not necessarily have to be in terms of dollars (think carbon footprint reduction, increased business that results from keeping the expenditures in the local economy, quality of life that these other businesses support, reduced crime by keeping local people gainfully employed).
Finally and somewhat tongue-in-cheek: all products are “locally-produced” someplace. In heading down this road where do we decide local is local enough (Bixby watermelons versus Rush Springs watermelons for example) and are we heading back towards isolationism?"
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
