Amazon Go

I'm saying that I asked for evidence and got opinion. Grading an assignment is not my responsibility.

> There are few things more amusing than when people ask for evidence for the sole purpose of discounting it at any cost. Thanks for being that person.

My purpose in asking for evidence was to examine it. I didn't "discredit" it, most of it wasn't relevant, while some of it made assertions that were counter to the ones you were asked to support. I read the links you posted, and even tracked down the paper that one of them referenced and verified the authenticity of the academic publisher that printed it. I quoted it in my comment, which you failed to address.

To be honest, I'm not convinced that you read the links you posted.

> Do you think Wal-Mart will pay you for your downvotes?

I didn't downvote you - I'm not sure I've ever downvoted a comment on HN.

> I know CTR paid $0.10 per comment, but that was for an election. What is the going rate for defending megacorporations on social media?

Where is my defense? You assertions struck me as improbable on their face, so I asked for evidence of them.

* Research and decide, based on evidence you find.

* Ridicule and discredit the evidence you asked for.

It seems you picked Door Number Two.

You mentioned you're from the heart of Walton-ville (You lived by Store #002? how interesting!). Have you spent any time in the midwest ghost towns surrounding their local Supercentre?

"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."

You didn't provide evidence, you linked to irrelevant popular articles and someone's homework assignment. Not only did I not ridicule your post, I was careful to follow HN's guideline of assuming good faith even though that seems to not be the case here.

> You mentioned you're from the heart of Walton-ville (You lived by Store #002? how interesting!). Have you spent any time in the midwest ghost towns surrounding their local Supercentre?

I grew up near Harrison, AR. Most of those "ghost towns" were dependent upon a single business that has either closed up or moved away, usually in the manufacturing or petroleum industries.

I've heard many people say WalMart has killed all of these towns, but I've never seen any evidence for it.

Here's the evidence, because I'm sure you'll have difficulty scrolling up:

https://ilsr.org/walmart-charged-predatory-pricing/

I look forward to the creative way you will dismiss this as well.

> I look forward to the creative way you will dismiss this as well.

Please cease the personal attacks. I've been nothing but professional in tis conversation.

> https://ilsr.org/walmart-charged-predatory-pricing/

The case in Wisconsin was settled out of court, with no admission of wrongdoing. The case in Germany was about pricing products too low to be legal, not about doing so to eliminate competition or to raise prices afterward.

The case in Oklahoma is interesting, but I never heard how it concluded and couldn't find reference to it in a brief search just now. I remember being especially interested in that when it came out because Crest Foods had alleged that David Glass, then CEO of WalMart, went to their stores with a scanner.

At any rate, none of these cases are any different from the original one in the 90s where the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled that WalMart had used "loss leaders" but that there was no evidence that they had done so for the purpose of bankrupting competitors not that they had raised prices afterward.

Your assertion was that WalMart lowers prices until competitors are bankrupted then raises prices to take advantage of its now-monopoly status. I have never seen evidence for that - and I've looked quite a bit throughout the years.