> That's not the point I'm challenging, though. It is recognized that you invented a fake point and are trying to challenge something that doesn't have any rel

> That's not the point I'm challenging, though. It is recognized that you invented a fake point and are trying to challenge something that doesn't have any relevance. My previous response was pointing out your error and attempted to salvage the train wreck that you created. Curious how that went unnoticed. > I'm saying that the causation is likely not as you describe -- any reduction in consumer prices What are you talking about? There has been no description of any reduction in consumer prices. Why would Coca-Cola charge less than the market has already shown it is willing to pay just fine? This doesn't make any sense or have any connection to the discussion taking place. > The "let's just assume I'm right and move on" approach you have is pretty annoying. I can assure you that the "I won't bother to read your comments but will reply anyway" is far more annoying. Logically, if something doesn't seem right, thus implying a misinterpretation, one would ask questions to find clarification rather than doubling down on the misinterpretation. What is to be gained from this bad faith approach we are witnessing here? > We're not in high school debate club. Clearly. High school debaters have sensibilities.