This BusinessWeek story examines an action by Wal-Mart that is pro-consumer, pro-efficiency, pro-productivity, and pro-progress and somehow manages to present it as rapacious and damaging to everyone. How so? Well, you see, Wal-Mart cut the price of its 42 inch, flat panel television to less than $1,000. This might sound great. But, the story points out, it hurt the competition, hurt the bottom line of marginal stores, and infuriated the producers of the television.
It's hard to understand the mentality of people who would oppose this. Is it better to have high priced televisions that only the rich can afford so that marginal stores can charge inflated prices and producers can have subsidized profits? Is that really the only just way to price televisions?
