Err, I have many books and they all define a monopoly as "the possession or control of a trade or service." Does that make W-M a monopoly. If they aren't one now, they will be soon as they continue to build super stores everywhere. They are now the largest corporation in the world and the largest by far in the US. Their intent is to put all competitors out of business however they can. They have been very successful using this strategy in many cities in the US. As they eventually eliminate all major competitors, are they then a monopoly in your books? What, pray tell, is your definition of a monopoly and how is W-M not one or soon to become one?
By the way, your childish insults are contrary to FR policy, or do you know the policy re personal attacks?
Firstly, please accept my apology if the sarcasm of my previous past went too far; it was not my intent, but apparently a result, to insult you.
"The possession of control of a trade or service" is too loose of a definition. What is control? The government regulating trade has control but is clearly not a monopolist. Moreoever, the term "monopoly" is typically appied to a single SELLER of a good or service. The corresponding terms for a single BUYER (which is where Wal-Mart's strength partly lies) is monopsony.
I may have stated my thought too directly in the previous post, but the thought is valid: (i) you are reading wrong books, and (ii) the streangth of your opinions is (way) out of proportion with factual knowledge. Suspend jdgement until you study more economics -- that is what the scientific method dictates.