>"They needed to eat so they sacrifice the long term for the short." And they would not have had to sacrifice if they went to the "mom and pop stores" instead?

>"They needed to eat so they sacrifice the long term for the short." And they would not have had to sacrifice if they went to the "mom and pop stores" instead? You're not really addressing the point of Walmart actually being cheaper than the mom and pop stores, and thus got more sales. Precisely leading to what the OP said of poor people voting "with their dollars". >*"Walmart has innovated in logistics and supply chain management[...]" Exactly how they made life easier for the poor, by transferring enough of the cost-savings from the efficiency to both undercut the wasteful mom and pop stores, and to save the poor customers money.