The Shepherd Express, Milwaukee’s indie paper, has a good article on the importance of buying local:
A 2002 Economic Impact Analysis in Austin, Texas, was one of the first major studies to examine the impact of shopping at local businesses versus national chains. It found that for every $100 spent at a local bookstore or CD store, $45 stayed in the local economy. For every $100 spent at Borders, however, the local economic impact was only $13. A study in Maine the following year yielded similar results: Shopping local kept three times more money in the local economy than shopping at chains.
[Emphasis mine]
Something to think about the next time you’re headed toward Barnes & Noble.
(Unless, of course, you’re a libertarian, in which case, screw the local economy and buy what’s cheapest. In fact, buy from somewhere out of state so you can skate on sales taxes, too…)
November 29th, 2007
|
Economics, Culture |
11 comments
From Farhad Manjoo’s otherwise very good Kindle review:
“E-ink come at a cost, though: This display responds more slowly than a mime at a parliamentary debate.”
November 29th, 2007
|
Writing, Technology |
2 comments
Th GOP anti-gay stance? Pretty much all about the hate:
The general not only challenged the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” military policy; he did so by turning the tables. Why, he wanted to know, did the candidates not trust the professionalism of American soldiers to work with gay men and lesbians?
As it turns out, the good general was in the audience, and when Cooper gave the elderly gentleman — who served more than 40 years in the military — the microphone, Brig. Gen. Keith Kerr (ret.) was booed by an audience of Republicans.
This man served, at risk to life and limb, for forty years. And the GOP audience booed him. Why? becasue he wanted to know why the candidates did not trust US soldiers to be professional enough to work with gay men like himself. To boo such a man on such an issue displays a visceral level of hatred to gays that is almost pathological. This man served our country. He deserves praise and a respect for that, even if you disagree with him on the matter of homosexuals in the military. Indeed, the GOP makes a fetish over supporting the troops, in some cases even going so far as to say that criticizing the conduct of the war, or the President’s strategies, or the conduct of individual soldiers is tantamount to treason. But apparently that only applies to straight officers. Homosexual officers? Well, they deserve all the derision that can be heaped upon them.
If that isn’t politics based on hate and bigotry, then no such thing exists.
I now look forward to the comments being flooded with “You big meanie! You liberals hate on us for our hate! How awful!” and “The generals say serving alongside blacks, er, gays, will be bad for unit cohesion!”
November 29th, 2007
|
Politics |
22 comments
