Starbucks State vs. Wal-Mart State
As Kottke aptly puts it: Forget the Red State / Blue State labels - the real question is Wal-Mart State or Starbucks State? Social scientists from Columbia University collected data to create the maps below that show the density of Starbucks and Wal-Marts per capita.
From here, you'll have to draw your own conclusions. (Via Seattle Metblogs)
From here, you'll have to draw your own conclusions. (Via Seattle Metblogs)
Comments
I would NEVER survive in Mississippi!!
Posted by: lattelover | March 7, 2008 1:59 PM
There is so much more to this graphic....it also shows where 'right to work' states land and states that feel that working is not a right, but a privledge and you should be paid accordingly. I live in one of these Wal-Mart states and the poverty level and miniumum wage level is pathetic. Economies need diversity and competition to be great and well, Wal-Mart sucks those things right out the window when they come rolling into town....not a fan, not a fan....
Posted by: AnnMarie | March 7, 2008 3:45 PM
AnnMarie, you idiot, "Right to Work" states make it nearly impossible for unions to work, most of the southern states are "Right to Work" states, such as Virginia. "right to work" means that if a union represents the workers at your company, you cannot be forced to join the union to work there, and why would anybody pay union dues if they don't have to. So nobody does, and hence, there are no unions in the South.
In Washington, if your company is UNION, you MUST join the union or you can't work for them. So, "right to work" is a very misleading title for those states.
Posted by: Rich Boswell | March 7, 2008 7:33 PM
I think you misunderstood my post - I am for unions and not for right to work states. If you notice the south (where most of the walmarts are) they are right to work states. I am pro-union - both being a teacher and growing in a fire fighter's family - unions protect the worker. Walmart employees could use someone standing up for them.
It would be nice to see someone come out with a rebutal that did not start off with 'you idiot'...I don't remember that being the way my debate competitions started off with back in high school....
Posted by: AnnMarie | March 9, 2008 4:47 PM
BTW Rich...I am from Seattle but don't live there at the moment. My husband is stationed at Ft. Bragg, NC. I know what Washington requires with unions - taught there for 10 years....but you did not read where I said "I live in one of these Wal-Mart states and the poverty level and miniumum wage level is pathetic."
I am a native from Seattle and remember the billboard "Will the last one out of Seattle please turn out the lights" when Boeing was going through hard times in the 70s...how did Seattle survive...diversity!
Posted by: AnnMarie | March 9, 2008 4:59 PM
You're still and idiot. If wal mart was unionized there would be less jobs and higher unemployment, unions only help the actual people employed by the Union, not the people they supposedly represent.
Unions probably add about 10% to the price of everything we buy in this country, and nobody should be forced to join one as a condition of employment, what a crock.
Did I mention that you are an idiot? Sorry, never took debate in high school.
Posted by: Rich Boswell | March 10, 2008 1:45 PM