In what can only be a hilarious rebuke to the city of Chicago, Wal Mart is opening a store one block outside of the city limits after being denied the right to open one in the city.  Now all of us have been regaled with stories of how horrid and horrible Wal-Mart is, and how oppressive to their employees they are.  So in a city (just outside) with a reputation of Unionization like Chicago, one would think they would be stupid to build and operate a store.  The Pickets alone would be bad publicity.

But something strange happened on the way to the picket line.  25,000 (yes, 3 zeros) applied for the 325 jobs!  This far surpasses their old record when they built in Oakland of 11,000, or what a Wal-Mart spokesman called a successful opening of 3,000 applicants.  25,000!  And all but 500 listed Chicago as their home!

The Alderman (why does Chicago call their Council members aldermen?) that tried to get Wal-Mart in Chicago itself laments the fact that most of the shoppers are going to be coming from Chicago, but Chicago is not going to get any of the benefits.  Indeed, the little township that won the prize is expected to reap a bonus of $1 million in sales taxes a year from the store alone.  And they currently only get $3 million a year from all other sources!  A very hefty winfall!

Why Chicago rejected Wal Mart was not made clear in the article, but in reading some of the comments, it appears to be political infighting among the aldermen.  Only a couple are actually quoted.  But it does seem to be penny wise and pound foolish for all the alderman to have just chucked that much additional revenue out the door due to some petty internal squabbling.

And the 25,000 people eagerly looking for jobs?  I doubt they care what side of the street the store is located on.  They voted for Wal-Mart with their actions, and seem to be saying "Pays good, Benefits better".  And not "Bad Big Wally World".

So who gets hurt when you deny the market place?  The lesson here, is your Constituents.