Greentext

4464 readers

1310 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

Anon is often crazy.
Anon is often depressed.
Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Early_To_Risa@sh.itjust.works

1370

Anon likes bikes (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 10 months ago by Early_To_Risa@sh.itjust.works to c/greentext@sh.itjust.works

396 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Grabthar@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Might have a wee something to do with the cost and availability of large parcels of land in and around cities in Europe versus North America. If Walmart thought this was a cost-effective approach, they'd be doing it, else they would likely be sued by their shareholders. To be clear, I am not making a value judgement on whether this should be the case.

[–] Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Yeah, it is indeed a good approach for Walmart. They get to crush the competition due to their size and the economy of scale, be effectively a monopoly, and convince everyone that it's not only logical and inevitable, and the result of something normal, but good actually.
The question is, is it good for people who aren't Walmart shareholders?