Comments on: Cheap Furniture Good, Cheap…Furniture Evil

By: Megan

Megan — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 21:44:07 +0000

Fjord. I just wanted to use that word too. Not an opportunity I get too often!

By: RonTopofIt

RonTopofIt — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 19:49:01 +0000

Couldn’t have said it any better myself, Wally.

You know, not since the “accident” that is.

By: wally

wally — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 19:43:31 +0000

Places like West Sac were meant for Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart does not make since in Downtown Plaza. West Sac is a gross industrial area, and a place like Wal-mart is not going to make it any worse.

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 19:04:04 +0000

http://www.jibjab.com/Movies/MoviePlayer.aspx?contentid=122&adp=1

By: maya

maya — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 18:25:30 +0000

Ed is a friend of mine. He’s a well-educated dude. If his choice of words seems leading, perhaps it’s because he’s trying to reflect the sentiment of W. Sac residents, not insert his own opinion into the piece?

By: sac-eats

sac-eats — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 17:50:23 +0000

The biggest issue in my mind is that Ikea outsources it’s customer service jobs to India, thereby robbing able-bodied Swedes of their right to work at a job in sub-zero temperatures in some crappy suburb outside of Stockholm. This global economy is really being felt at home…as long as your home is floating on an ice floe in the middle of a fjord.

By: Plumwin

Plumwin — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 17:49:21 +0000

Ah, I LOVE my shitty falling apart furniture. It brings back good memories and has good vibes.

By: RonTopofIt

RonTopofIt — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 17:42:50 +0000

Hey everyone, CoolDMZ says it is ok to be funny now…

By: CoolDMZ

CoolDMZ — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 17:35:10 +0000

aren’t we all being a little too serious for our own good here? after all, clearly the most pressing issue is that IKEA does not offer a vegan alternative to their famed Swedish-themed meatballs. this is an outrage.

also they don’t offer a well built alternative to their shitty fall apart furniture. Oooh!! burn!!

By: RonTopofIt

RonTopofIt — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 16:38:03 +0000

It is next to impossible not to fill in your own blanks about what is being said in Ed’s article and what CoolDMZ is trying to get at. That is, the brand name Wal-Mart is a hot topic of political debate in recent years due to allegations of (linked below) “…unfair labor practices around the world…”

So, yes, Mr. Fletcher does seem intent on including his personal views on the matter in his article which has become all too popular with today’s news reporting. Much the same way he managed to include the quote from Villegas which also supported his opinions about Wal-Mart.

Bottom line is that this article wasn’t about the business practices of retail giants, but rather about West Sacramento getting closer to reaching their retail goals.

Basically, let the Sac Rag tell you what is really being said out there and what opinions you should have, not your local newspaper.

Quote obtained from: http://www.1worldcommunication.org/Walmart.htm

By: HeyMeg

HeyMeg — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 15:31:34 +0000

Right. So if the purpose in re-zoning is to increase sales tax revenue, I don’t think there’s any substantive distinction between Ikea and Wal-Mart. Which makes the distinction in Ed Fletcher’s tone toward Ikea vs. Wal-Mart questionable. Is he concerned that Wal-Mart will simply draw a different shopping crowd? Or is he on the “it’s politically progressive to hate Wal-Mart but okay to shop at Target” bandwagon? Or am I just so bored during the working day that I’m conjecturing his motives when in fact he has simply given it no thought at all? I am open to the possibility that that last one is true, but I have to go with DMZ on leaning toward the bias theory. p.s. I speak for the entire website and all its contributors.

By: John (Uneasy Rhetoric)

John (Uneasy Rhetoric) — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 15:00:09 +0000

Wow. You managed to take my name in vain on a topic I haven’t weighed in on.

I think Ed’s choice of words was a little poor, but on the whole, I thought his piece was more or less fair. I actually thought it was sympathetic toward the city officials.

It *is* the goal of the city to increase sales tax revenue, after all. I don’t think there’s much argument there.