[Porsche-O-Phile]

Yea, parts of "Ingle-hood" are definitely a s-hole, but other parts are okay - kind of like everywhere else in SoCal. I'm just glad the residents showed some sack and exerted some direction over THEIR community. Good!

Using the WalMart in my city (Long Beach) as an example: WalMart contributes little or nothing to the local community: a bunch of crappy dead-end jobs, overcrowding, traffic, etc. This is going to be politically incorrect and there's really no nice way to say it, but it also attracts some of the more unsavory characters from the "ghetto" areas of the community (being close to the bus / rail line exacerbates this). So now all these people are hanging around what otherwise might be a reasonably nice area of the city, bringing down the image / reputation and (probably) property values because of these people attracted by the low prices, "don't-have-to-work-too-hard" jobs, etc.

I don't want to sound snobbish or start a class war / flame war, but why the heck doesn't WalMart build in the lower income neighborhoods if that's the clientele they wish to market to? Why do they need to bring down a borderline-upscale area (such as is the case in Long Beach) or an area potentially renewing itself such as would have been the case with the site in Inglewood? That area has some potential to turn itself around and seems to be moving in the right direction (slowly), depending on demographics, economic factors, etc. but WalMart would have absolutely destroyed any chance that area had to be perceived as anything other than a dump because of what it would attract.

Way to go Inglewood!

Now if all the other communities will follow suit and we can keep them the hell out of California any more than they're here already, we'll be in good shape!