The comment chain is too deep, so I'll reply here.
> You claim it's a personal attack, and then you do exactly what I said you would; take the evidence, and do your best to dismiss it.
I claimed your specific statements were personal attacks, because they were.
> My favorite part of your post is how you acknowledge that you knew about court cases related to predatory pricing (Arkansas Supreme Court), while simultaneously pretending you didn't know about Wal-Mart being accused of it, and demanding evidence to prove it anyway.
There's a big difference between an accusation and a proven fact.
> Combined with your clearly detailed knowledge of the history of Wal-Mart, you can't even properly accuse me of throwing out an ad-hominem without contradicting yourself.
My father-in-law retired from WalMart after working there for thirty years - as a sales clerk, basically. My knowledge of the history stems from my being close to it and having been interested in the topic for a long time. In fact, my interest in the topic is why I asked if you had evidence of their driving competitors out of business and raising prices, because that's something I'd love to have.
I also seriously considered suing WalMart a few years ago. I worked there as a freight unloader in 2002. They had a policy of not allowing employees to wear steel-toe boots and I was injured on the job as a result of it when a furniture box was dropped on my foot. The nail on my right big toe is permanently disfigured as a result. I went as far as paying an attorney for a few hours' time to prepare a case, but in the end it became clear that pursuing it would have been a bad financial decision.
> Thanks for the laughs. I had karma to burn. :)
Again, I didn't downvote you.