- cross-posted to:
- economics
- cross-posted to:
- economics
Key Points
Walmart is rolling out digital shelf labels and expects the technology to be in all U.S. stores by year’s end. Kroger also has begun experimenting with the technology.
The nation’s largest retailer says the digital price tags help associates do their jobs better and stresses that prices on items will be exactly the same for every consumer in every store.
Some legislators are wary of the technology’s potential to be used in dynamic pricing models that disadvantage consumers, with Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) introducing a bill to ban it.
There are far more trillions in bonds, doesn’t make them high yield investments. Its reality, their margins are less than 4%, so how much can prices fall?
Oh no, not less than 4%, that makes it all alright, because economies of scale for a trillion-dollar company definitely don’t make 4% a figure anyone could even think about protesting against.
Nooo, Walmart is practically socialist, because the profit margins are single percentages. That’s definitely how this works.
Well if you think its Walmart making people poor you’re mistaken I would say, its QE that really erodes your paycheck. The CPI then does hedonic adjustments and substitutions to mismeasure real inflation to make it seem like you’re not getting poorer.
They’re not the only one to blame, no.
The system is propped up by everyone simultaneously. Especially when there’s people like you defending giant corporations like Walmart.
Also I’m not American
If the money supply grows at 8% a year and productivity barely rises that’s just raw debasement in my view, and complaining about an unchanging <4% margin of a consumer staple mainly owner by retired boomers is silly IMO.
According to research everyone should be buying levered positions and staying 100% global equities for life, as an inflation hedge is so important in the casino we call a global economy.
Because that’s how economies of scale work; you say a bigger number happens in another process, which implies that 4% profits are actually 4% socialist.
#/S
Man, I really didn’t think you were going for the “Walmart is actually socialist” - bit, I thought it’s beyond exaggerated comedy for me to even suggest you’d be dumb enough to argue that… yet here we are. Lol.
You’re comparing two completely different things; profitability per dollar vs. absolute growth of business.
Ya you lost me on the socialist bit. I’m simply saying there’s so very little juice to squeeze, you’d be extremely luck to trim 1% off their price, banning credit cards at grocery store would probably be more effective.
Why are you genuinely disregarding everything I say about your points? Feels like you’re being disingenuous.
You showcase that profits are 4%, but growth of money supply is 8%, and then heavily imply those can be directly compared, meaning that Walmart is actually losing money with 4% profits when they “should” have that number at the 8%, even when those figures don’t correlate at all.
It’s like saying that since my shoe size is 44 that my IQ must be X or Y. Shoe size has nothing to do with IQ, even if IQ was objective and good enough to be valuable.
Well sorry no, I think the stock rises in value with inflation as well. You’re not losing money buying it as its still an inflation hedge, but it only makes a small profit given its margin. I think you need to be more aggressive to actually gain purchasing power relative to real inflation is more the point, and that is the same with wages as well.
This is also how the rich are getting so rich relative to everyone else, the profits come from corporate efficiencies, the efficiency of wages losing to inflation.