The Decaying Evolution of Education...

[Fading Fast]

NYC, too, has many independent bakeries, fish, butchers, and fruit and vegetable shops, but as Lizzie notes, these are not priced for the budget conscious. Having talked to the owners and read about the business models, the reality is these shops - at least in NYC - have to become "higher-end" shops offering, in theory, a better product than the supermarkets so that they can differentiate themselves and charge more. They absolutely can't sell the same products at the same or lower prices as the supermarkets have better buying power and better economies of scale so they will always beat the small stores on price.

So, in NYC, we have a model of supermarkets (the regular ones, not the Whole Food type of ones) that offer the most-competitive prices on food and small, independent shops offering higher-end versions of those items and some speciality items for those willing to pay more. We do all our regular shopping at a a couple of supermarkets that are very competitive (and you can see it in their specials, etc., they are competing for your dollar) and, then, buy a few things now and then at the speciality shops the offer some unique and interesting items to treat ourselves.

 

[philosophygirl78]

Not sure about the bitcher's but you can still find those types of shops, even in Miami, you've even got some Farmer's markets down there, try googling....you never know, there might be something within walking distance from work or home. Now all you need is an excuse not to use them.

I do go to Farmer's Markets, but what I was referring to is the old America small town feel prior to the infiltration of corporate giants.

 

[philosophygirl78]

My refrigerator door is dedicated to mustard. I have probably 40 different jars of it any time, though it's out of love of mustard, not out of fear of running out. Though that would unsettling. My wife thinks I have a problem.

 

[philosophygirl78]

I live in a small town, and there's a co-op selling fresh vegetables and meat about a block away from where I live. And there's a bakery next door to where I work. And there's a fish market with right-off-the-boat fish two blocks south of where I work. The only problem with these shops is that they aren't priced for working-class people -- the day will never dawn when I pay six dollars for a loaf of bread, no matter how "artisanal" it is.

Its sad... I wish small businesses could compete with giants. We are losing the country to foreign cheap labor.

 

[Bolero]

In my area, Southeast Lower Michigan near Detroit, we still have many "Mom & Pop" shops or stores, they are mostly owned & operated by Middle Eastern folks or Eastern European's, generally the whole family works ...
Occasionally an American older 60's/70's aged & retired person will work there also...
Some of the larger stores, called Deli's, have a marvelous selection of Homemade specialities including Deli sandwich's, Reubens, Kilbasa's, Schwarmas, etc......
All good here.

 

[Lean'n'mean]

but what I was referring to is the old America small town feel prior to the infiltration of corporate giants.

That's evolution, everything changes for better of for worse. That said, if you venture outside of a metropolis, I'm sure you could find one of those quaint little dusty towns where nothing seems to have changed since the 50's & where those good ol' American values such as racism, homophobia & xenophobia are prevalent .......................bread is probably cheaper too.

 

[Fading Fast]

Its sad... I wish small businesses could compete with giants. We are losing the country to foreign cheap labor.

That is definitely part of it, but domestic economies of scale is also a big part of it. Coke can sell 5000 bottle a week (making the number up) at one store of a large NYC chain. To do so, they negotiate with one company that is (usually) very professionally run (and that negotiation could cover 50 stores each selling 5000 bottles a week). The Coke truck makes one stop, unloads its goods in a well-thought-out loading area and the guy (always a delivery guy - my personal observation) can have the soda on a shelves quickly.

For a local store, Coke has to negotiate (or at least go through the process of signing them up) with each small store (some very professionally run, some, not so much) versus one corporate entity. Then the truck has to stop at a small store, most of them don't have a loading area, old stairs to go down to the cellar and they have to do this how many times to sell the same 5000 bottles a week at these small stores? Plus, the small stores have higher overhead, so regardless of foreign labor (and I agree that it is part of the story), large chains have incredible advantages over small stores in delivering the same goods at lower prices to consumers.

While many lament Walmart replacing small stores (I do), Walmart never forced anyone into their stores, people came - even many who grumbled about what Walmart was doing to their town - because the prices were so much better and most people have to do whatever they can to help their family budgets.

 

[Lean'n'mean]

Its sad... I wish small businesses could compete with giants. .

They could compete in terms of quality but the problem is, the richest people want the cheapest goods.

 

[philosophygirl78]

That's evolution, everything changes for better of for worse. That said, if you venture outside of a metropolis, I'm sure you could find one of those quaint little dusty towns where nothing seems to have changed since the 50's & where those good ol' American values such as racism, homophobia & xenophobia are prevalent .......................bread is probably cheaper too.

 

[philosophygirl78]

They could compete in terms of quality but the problem is, the richest people want the cheapest goods.

I would say the richest people want the best quality goods and the biggest profit margins so they sell the cheapest goods to up their IRR's.

 

[Lean'n'mean]

By richest people I was refering to the average middle class American earning 40 grand + a year & whom are reluctant to spend their money on good quality essentials because they prefer to spend it on more rewarding things.

 

[LizzieMaine]

That's evolution, everything changes for better of for worse. That said, if you venture outside of a metropolis, I'm sure you could find one of those quaint little dusty towns where nothing seems to have changed since the 50's & where those good ol' American values such as racism, homophobia & xenophobia are prevalent .......................bread is probably cheaper too.

You don't have to go to a small town to find those things. Racism, homophobia, and xenophobia are still very much rampant anywhere you go in modern America. People are still assaulted in the streets -- or shot in the back -- for their race, their gender preference, or their nationality, and the more subtle expressions of such attitudes are even more common. The internet, cable news, and talk radio are filled with proof of that.

As for chain stores, you'd have to go back a very long time to escape them. The A&P was the largest grocery retailer in the country a century ago, Woolworth had destroyed the independent small-town variety store by 1915, and franchised restaurants like Thompson's Dairy Lunch, Waldorf Lunch, and Baltimore Lunch were spreading out fast by the time of the First World War.

What killed Main Street USA was less the rise of chain stores than it was the rise of the postwar car culture centered around suburbia. Dynamite the malls, shopping plazas, the freeways ,and the suburbs and you'll get a proper Main Street back again. Or just get in your time machine and go back and kill William Levitt and Robert Moses.

 

[Bolero]

Lean and Mean.....Family of 4 Poverty level is between 25 and 35 K a year...$40K a year is not even close to Middle Class of the 1940's, 50's 60's...
Walmarts, KMarts, etc are a necessity to feed a family these days...


[Bartender Edit: Please remember to observe the rule barring contemporary politics.]

 

[HudsonHawk]

What killed Main Street USA was less the rise of chain stores than it was the rise of the postwar car culture centered around suburbia. Dynamite the malls, shopping plazas, the freeways ,and the suburbs and you'll get a proper Main Street back again. Or just get in your time machine and go back and kill William Levitt and Robert Moses.

You'll also get people living in Jacob Riis-ian tenement squalor. You'll have 11 people living in a 1,100 sf apartment, but they won't have to walk very far to buy bread.

 

[sheeplady]

I think it is convenience as much as "cheap" goods. It is convenient to park your car, go into a single store, and get anything you need from groceries to bandaids to a new pair of pants. And a few things you don't really need as well.

From my perspective, which has always been that one has to drive quite a distance to get to civilization, I need to park my car someplace to begin with. With the kids by myself I can mentally handle 3 errands at a go, I imagine other parents are similar. If I had to drive and then stop at the butcher, baker, grocer, pharmacy, etc. I would go nuts unloading and reloading the kids in and out of their car seats.

Now, it would be totally different if these stores were near each other on a mainstreet- I could park once and then unload the kids and do my shopping in one fell swoop. But if they are spread out all over town, heaven help us, we'd likely starve.

 

[philosophygirl78]

I think it is convenience as much as "cheap" goods. It is convenient to park your car, go into a single store, and get anything you need from groceries to bandaids to a new pair of pants. And a few things you don't really need as well.

From my perspective, which has always been that one has to drive quite a distance to get to civilization, I need to park my car someplace to begin with. With the kids by myself I can mentally handle 3 errands at a go, I imagine other parents are similar. If I had to drive and then stop at the butcher, baker, grocer, pharmacy, etc. I would go nuts unloading and reloading the kids in and out of their car seats.

Now, it would be totally different if these stores were near each other on a mainstreet- I could park once and then unload the kids and do my shopping in one fell swoop. But if they are spread out all over town, heaven help us, we'd likely starve.

It is only convenient so the worker can afford more time in slave labor. Whereas before, families had the luxury in this country for only one parent to work, nowadays both must to sustain any normal type of lifestyle. And it is getting worse by the year. Convenience in this regard is learned behavior, not natural.

 

[LizzieMaine]

That is definitely part of it, but domestic economies of scale is also a big part of it. Coke can sell 5000 bottle a week (making the number up) at one store of a large NYC chain. To do so, they negotiate with one company that is (usually) very professionally run (and that negotiation could cover 50 stores each selling 5000 bottles a week). The Coke truck makes one stop, unloads its goods in a well-thought-out loading area and the guy (always a delivery guy - my personal observation) can have the soda on a shelves quickly.

For a local store, Coke has to negotiate (or at least go through the process of signing them up) with each small store (some very professionally run, some, not so much) versus one corporate entity. Then the truck has to stop at a small store, most of them don't have a loading area, old stairs to go down to the cellar and they have to do this how many times to sell the same 5000 bottles a week at these small stores? Plus, the small stores have higher overhead, so regardless of foreign labor (and I agree that it is part of the story), large chains have incredible advantages over small stores in delivering the same goods at lower prices to consumers.

The Coke example is interesting. During the Era, bottling rights for Coke in the United States were controlled by two separate companies that had negotiated the rights in the early years of the 20th Century. These "Parent Bottlers" divided the country between themselves, and then franchised local bottlers all over their territories. Basically, any town with a population over about 8,000 had its own individual local Coca-Cola bottler, who serviced the individual retail outlets in his market. Some of these operations were quite large -- Coca-Cola Bottling of New York had a huge fleet of trucks serving the city, with depots in each borough. A small town bottler might be a mom-and-pop operation where the kids all worked in the plant and Pop himself drove the truck and serviced the retail accounts. But the one thing the bottlers had in common was that they all made a great deal of money under this system -- "Coca-Cola millionaires" were quite common in the Era, and to be a Coca-Cola Bottler meant you held an important place in your community. The individual accounts also liked this system -- they got fast, personalized service from the route drivers, and the product was always fresh.

But from the point of view of the Coca-Cola Company itself, this system was very very unpopular. Asa Candler, the president of the company at the turn of the century, hadn't ever thought bottling would amount to anything -- he believed the fountain business was the real driver for the company -- and he basically gave away the bottling rights. The only money Coke made from bottled Coke was what the bottlers paid for concentrate -- and the parent bottlers took a rake-off from that. Coke decided in the 1960s to get rid of this system once and for all, and eventually bought out both the parent bottlers -- and when they did this their next move was to eliminate as many of the local bottlers as they could, consolidating operations into huge centers that were designed to deal with big retail accounts like supermarkets. This put an end to the bottom-up system of operation, where local bottlers drove the company -- and put the Company itself firmly in control. For the first time all that bottling money was flowing to Atlanta, and not to Joe and Sally Localbottler in Podunk USA. And the guy with the filling station, who orders five cases a week, is no longer getting either personalized service or fresh product.

 

[sheeplady]

It is only convenient so the worker can afford more time in slave labor. Whereas before, families had the luxury in this country for only one parent to work, nowadays both must to sustain any normal type of lifestyle. And it is getting worse by the year. Convenience in this regard is learned behavior, not natural.

So I'd disagree with you in the sense that:
A) the preferred option is to have one full time worker and one parent who stays at home. That's certainly not my ideal.
B) I don't think any person wants to spend 4 hours driving from store to store no matter their work status. Or child status. Even when I stayed at home with my daughter my rule was 3 errands/ places a day.
C) the idea that one partner stayed at home in the past was largely the presumption of white middle and upper class people. Most working class individuals had both parents working, and some middle class individuals did too.

 

[Fading Fast]

The Coke example is interesting. During the Era, bottling rights for Coke in the United States were controlled by two separate companies that had negotiated the rights in the early years of the 20th Century. These "Parent Bottlers" divided the country between themselves, and then franchised local bottlers all over their territories. Basically, any town with a population over about 8,000 had its own individual local Coca-Cola bottler, who serviced the individual retail outlets in his market. Some of these operations were quite large -- Coca-Cola Bottling of New York had a huge fleet of trucks serving the city, with depots in each borough. A small town bottler might be a mom-and-pop operation where the kids all worked in the plant and Pop himself drove the truck and serviced the retail accounts. But the one thing the bottlers had in common was that they all made a great deal of money under this system -- "Coca-Cola millionaires" were quite common in the Era, and to be a Coca-Cola Bottler meant you held an important place in your community. The individual accounts also liked this system -- they got fast, personalized service from the route drivers, and the product was always fresh.

But from the point of view of the Coca-Cola Company itself, this system was very very unpopular. Asa Candler, the president of the company at the turn of the century, hadn't ever thought bottling would amount to anything -- he believed the fountain business was the real driver for the company -- and he basically gave away the bottling rights. The only money Coke made from bottled Coke was what the bottlers paid for concentrate -- and the parent bottlers took a rake-off from that. Coke decided in the 1960s to get rid of this system once and for all, and eventually bought out both the parent bottlers -- and when they did this their next move was to eliminate as many of the local bottlers as they could, consolidating operations into huge centers that were designed to deal with big retail accounts like supermarkets. This put an end to the bottom-up system of operation, where local bottlers drove the company -- and put the Company itself firmly in control. For the first time all that bottling money was flowing to Atlanta, and not to Joe and Sally Localbottler in Podunk USA. And the guy with the filling station, who orders five cases a week, is no longer getting either personalized service or fresh product.

While I've read about the history of Coke, as always, you bring pertinent details that I either forgot or never knew as well as you do. All that is consistent with what I've read and consistent with economies of scale. As long as Coke legally bought out the parent bottlers, then what they did, basically, brought more economies of scale to the bottling process. The end result wasn't great for the small distributor, but we are familiar with that story - i.e., it's another version of the big chain replacing the local merchant. And before anyone misinterprets my comments, I lament the loss of these small stores, but I realize why it happened and that, I, and everyone else who frequents them because their prices are good, are part of the story.

In NYC, I can buy the 2 liter Coke bottles for +/- $2.50 a bottle in the small grocery stores or pay (on the every other week sale) between $1-$1.5 in the large supermarket or drug store chains. Using an average of the sale price, it literally costs half to buy it in the chain store. If your family drinks 5 bottles a week, then you can save $325 a year buying your soda in a chain store.

 

[LizzieMaine]

C) the idea that one partner stayed at home in the past was largely the presumption of white middle and upper class people. Most working class individuals had both parents working, and some middle class individuals did too.

Precisely so, and this is well-documented by Stephanie Coontz, in her book "The Way We Never Were: American Families And The Nostalgia Trap." She makes the solid point, backed up with statistics, that the "1950s nuclear family" was a historic anomaly, and not a dominant tradition thruout American history.

The number of married women working outside the home in the United States increased steadily, across all social classes, thruout the 20th Century. And that *didn't* include married women working in some capacity as part of a "mom and pop" business -- if it did, the increase would have been even more dramatic.

Interestingly, when activist Elizabeth Hawes was working as an education director for the UAW during the war, one of her assignments was to poll as many of the women in the union as possible (there were over 100,000 at the time) on their feelings about their work and whether they wanted to continue it after the war. The response was, overwhelmingly, yes -- and the explanations given had as much to do with emotional fulfillment as they did with economic necessity. The image of the "contented housewife" who was perfectly happy to put down her wrenches and go back to the kitchen after the war was very much a myth. Many did go back to the ktichens -- but a great many did not do so willingly.