In today's "LA Times" there's an article about the continuing migration of the film industry out of La-La Land. Conservatives might say, "Well, this just proves California's not business friendly."

But what lures them away to other states, and in the case of Canada provinces, are generous tax breaks (Big-Box retailers are also beneficiaries). This is not how it's supposed to work under free market orthodoxy. If Angelenos don't want to lose the jobs, however, they are going to have to offer tax breaks, a form of subsidy, to keep the industry in town.

The review , Okea is as bad as Wal-Mart was eye opening. I bought an Ikea chair and ottoman and so far so good. Actually it is pretty damm good. When the chair that was my basic everyday chair in my apartment finally collasped after twenty years of use I was in a bind. Having little extra income what was I to do? Looking at the recliners available on the internet and the prices it seemed that they were too much money for too little quality. Ikea had a sale on the Poang chair and ottoman which fit my budget. While I am not good at assembling things I took my time and lo & behold in about an hour I had a comfortable chair. The point being is this- Ikea fills purpose for consumers such as myself who are on tight budgets, Quite frankly if they did not do what they are doing another company would. As with any store there is always a rang of quality. Lets face it the Ikea style is quirky thats for sure. I probably would not buy a sofa from them but then again since I do not abuse what I own it could last for a while. Ikea fills a need for people to have some furniture that is at least halfway ok- it may not be heirloom quality but for a few years at least you do not have to sit on the floor. Regarding Wal-Mart- I do not think that those who shop at Wal-Mart are cheap & lazy. I think that many Wal Mart shoppers are stuck between the rock and the hard place. Raising a family isn't cheap and keep up a house isn't cheap either. If the legislators were doing thier jobs they woul;d pass tax incentives and other legislation to help the mom & pop operations survive. For many people it is Wal Mart or what ? I do not shop at Wal-Mart but I can see why so many people do so. Lets face the facts if Wal-Mart wasn't around there would a similiar type of operation. That is the nature of a market economy. It should be the

responsibility of the legislators to enact laws that chanel the market economy into not only making profits but respecting the community and the worker. Unfortunately too many of our elected officlas are too damm busy taking Viagra, dropping their pants and acting like fifteen year old teens to do anything that would be of benefit to the community. They really are the prostitutes not Ikea or Wa-Mart. They put on a good show while they screw us blind.

BTW- In response to Xrandadu Hufman's letter- I agree that devices such as Kindle will drastically change the book market place. I aslo think that there will always be books. As as an artist no matter how good a Kindle device may be it can replace a good quality artbook.

In fact there is nothing like holding a book or discovering one in the book store. I would though consider buying a Kindle in the future. I have at least 15 bookcases of varying sizes and types. I can see that in my future except for artbooks, some Shambala titles I would prefer having history, fiction, poetry and philosophy books on a Kindle if for the reasons of space and storage alone.

The books that we can put in our hands will continue and so will the electronic kind. What may yet happen is that the large box store may suffer unless they can adapt and change.

It could be that in the future the book store of the mid century will be smaller and more niche oriented. Looking at B&N or Borders they offer a social experience in addition to the books for sale. it will be interesting to see where all this takes us. Does anyone remember the TOS Star Trek episode where Kirks lawyer had actually books and how unusual that was? This is yet another example of science fiction being ahead of actual events.

I agree that the Repubs spout market-fundamentalism in a strikingly amoral & cavalier fashion (the market is intrinsically moral, don'tchaknow?), but the Dems are increasingly insidious in their tactics, giving lipservice to the worker, to the middle class, to human rights, to worker's rights, to environmental protection, to consumer protection-- but delivering almost as little substance as the Repubs.

-- lee silk

I've found that at the grassroots level, most Dems are almost exclusively dedicated to the worker, to the middle class, to human rights, to worker's rights, to environmental protection, and to consumer protection. Something clearly gets lost when our politicians enter the national scene.

And don't we get tired of bitchn about Washington? We should probably all grow up a little and realize that our representatives in the congress and senate aren't always reflecting the interests of the middle class because a.)we've let special interests buy their way into running the country and b.)we don't actually hold our politicians accountable to the people they're supposed to represent.

Much as some might relish the idea of blaming the Swedes for our disposable culture, “planned obsolescence” (designing products to fail, or fall out of fashion, to encourage consumers to buy more) was, like Bruce, born in the U.S.A.

The phrase was coined in 1932 by a Manhattan real estate broker named Bernard London who dreamed up the concept as a remedy for the Depression. Enforcing a steady turnover of goods, London figured, would ensure a balance between supply and demand that would keep people employed at making things. He called for the government to “assign a lease of life to shoes and homes and machines, to all products of manufacture … when they are first created,” after which time “these things would be legally ‘dead’ and would be controlled by the duly appointed governmental agency and destroyed if there is widespread unemployment.”

But the notion of disposable goods had been invented long before, by at least the nineteenth century, along the Hudson River, where manufacturers eager to encourage consumers to keep buying designed the first throwaway products. Among the earliest examples were detachable paper cuffs and collars, invented in the early 1800s in Troy, New York. By 1872 America produced 150 million paper shirt pieces. And the push toward disposable products was on.

Today, drowning in the detritus of our disposable, consumerist culture, it’s no wonder we have lost touch with craftsmanship and the inherent value of things.

On this, the 400th anniversary of Henry Hudson’s historic voyage up the river that now bears his name--a birthplace of American industry, and the site of crucial advancements that shaped the development of the U.S. and, by extension, the global economy--it’s the perfect time to ask questions about who we are as a nation, as a culture. To take stock of where we’ve come from and where we’re going.