OT--Wal-Mart Posts $2.44B in 2Q Earnings
 

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 11:39:37 -0700, "jps" wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .

If everyone were shopping downwards, then WM's position would not change.
The
'rich' would be shopping at WM (perhaps), but the 'poor' would be shopping
at
someplace cheaper than WM (they are shopping downwards too), or perhaps
they
wouldn't be shopping at all.

The rich don't have to alter their buying habits for normal purchases.
They'll shop at Macys or Nordstroms no matter what. They may purchase fewer
items if they're feeling a pinch.

More likely, they'd curtail the discretionary purchases that'd be considered
debauchery by most Americans.



Thank you, that's the point I was making. Now you have a spectacular day.

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD