Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
dk--so a decision made by a supermarket chain to pull it's stores out of poorer areas of a city is an example of freedom, but an action on the part of a city to PARTIALLY address the consequences of that decision is oppression?
|
WHAT???? other than zoning, where would any branch of government have the authority to decide what type of restaraunts could or should be built?
If a supermarket chain closes its stores because it is unable to profit, that is freedom. If a million (insert any store chain here, i.e. white castle or starbucks) stores wish to open in a neighborhood, that is freedom. If a city government says that only whole foods markets can open in compton, well that is certainly not freedom.
-----Added 6/8/2008 at 05 : 55 : 09-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
No, we're determining what we want in our area. No one is saying that you can't eat fast foods. Anyone is totally free to eat whatever they want. It may not be quite as close as it could be, but you can still eat it. The freedom is intact.
You don't live in LA. Neither do I, for that matter.
|
ok, so we're going to keep it very local then, correct? I don't have to look forward to the entire state of california prohibiting any new taco bells from opening up in the next couple of years?