There was this article in one of my local papers (Laconia Citizen) from a local shopkeeper imploring the local residents to buy from local businesses:
If Lakes Region residents devoted only 10 percent of their shopping to local businesses, it would benefit not only the region, but themselves in the long run, an noted author and expert on local economies told an audience Wednesday….
Hamel explained that a big problem in the economy is people not spending locally, but rather at "big box chain stores," and buying on the Internet…
Hammel said that with large corporations building chain businesses, they are essentially "stealing from local economy" by making consumers think that their money is being spent locally when it isn’t. He said if people shopped just a little more at the local level, it can make a big difference…
…Local business owners Randy and Sue Bullerwell, who also started BIBA, own All My Life Jewelers and they said they were forced to close their second shop, String ‘Em Up Bead Shop, because they were losing business to the Internet and larger chain jewelry stores.
"We got sick and tired of people saying what they bought online," said Randy. "It wasn’t helping our businesses and it wasn’t helping the area."
"We had two businesses downtown and because people don’t shop locally, we have one now," said Sue.
The phrase "stealing from the local economy" really struck me – do local businesses have a right to claim a profit first from the local population before the "big box stores"? If I spend at a Lowe’s or a Shaws, am I now participating in a "capitalist crime"?
Last time I looked, commerce in our capitalistic society is a voluntary decision – a price determines whether or not I shall buy an item or service and a vendor will sell. It shows…
Democrats continue to insist that they created jobs. To do this they extracted trillions from our economic future in an effort to create jobs that did not yet exist–that perhaps were not needed yet. Looking at similar exercises, cash for clunkers–which moved car sales forward a few months but has since resulted in a collapse in the market; the home mortgage bail outs, supports, credits, and the "home affordable" programs which improved home sales briefly but which have since collapsed (also to historic lows); and then there’s the stimulus, several public sector employee bailouts, bank lending infusions, small business bills, and everything in between including health care reform–many trillions spent, all made with claims that they would create, save, or incentivize job creation.
The economic relationship between government, the private sector, and the people, has been the object of much debate as democrats try to convince people that spending trillions we don’t have has some kind of payoff at the other end. The fact that we can’t see that "end" and none of their predictions have come true fuels the fires of the opposition while encouraging proponents to claim we just need to wait a bit longer–or spend a few trillion more.
Ann McLane Kuster, aside from having another one of those pretentious feminist names like Carol Seiu-Porter, has demonstrated to us that she is just another shill for the left wing narrative.