The Wal-Mart Monopsony and Predatory Pricing

No, I didn't misspell "monopoly." A monopoly is a singular supplier of consumer goods or services. A monopsony happens when demand comes from one source. If there is only one customer for a certain good, that customer has a monopsony in the market for that good. Wal mart has a monopsony over many (most) of their suppliers.

I take three already-cheap meds, as a result of having no Hyaline Cartilage left in either knee and having undergone knee surgery nine times: an anti-inflamatory, a pain medication and a sleep aid. So anything the helps consumers obtain their medications for the lowest possible price, I'm usually all for as a general rule.

So why did I feel trepidation at the news that Wal-Mart would reduce the price on some generic drugs to $4.00 per prescription? (Maybe because I have a little bit of understanding about the impact Wal-Mart has on rural communities, having roots in one that Wal-Mart commenced raping about 20 years ago?)

Maybe because I have come to the realization that Wal-Mart does nothing without an agenda. They are all about squeezing out competition and holding their suppliers hostage. Not content to be a monopoly in rural areas, they play both sides of the fence by squeezing suppliers and labor. Thus they drive down the overall standard of living for the non-agricultural workers in rural areas, and cement market share. Wages depress and the populace can't afford to shop anywhere else.

So I do not believe that the intentions that precipitated this move are purely benevolent. I think it's a ploy to drive the last remaining mom-and-pop pharmacies off of town squares in rural areas. I hope I'm wrong, but I fear I'm not.

One thing is for certain - this issue will bear watching in the long run, not just while it is a hot topic.