| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Comments:
<0> farhan: shutting down for a month or two is rather costly. you still have to pay for lot, rehiring/training employees, paying for living necessities while you're out of business, etc
<1> farhan: economics cl*** teaches you to argue against people who are pro-regulation? Sounds like your professor has an agenda
<2> i think what everyone fails to understand is that when you sell below your costs, you are LOSING money. It doesn't matter if you have a billion dollars in cash reserves, EVENTUALLY you will loose that money
<3> A free market economy gave the united states fast food, and other harmful products to the whole society. There's a bit of regulation though, so the damage is limited. Imagine what companies would do without any kind of control?
<4> niv_: it is readily apparent that whatever economics cl***es farhan has taken did not teach him very much, is it not?
<1> are you just starting out in ecn111/ecn112?
<3> You don't even need a good product or a product that people need when you got marketing
<1> evilgeek: yup
<4> farhan: what you fail to understand is that, in the stochastic process you've defined, the big company never actually sells below cost.
<2> evilgeek : why not?
<3> People are stupid, they'll run for anything they are told will make them happier ( not that it ever works )
<2> evilgeek : so, what's the problem then?
<4> they set their prices to below cost when the small company is in business, and they set them to above cost when the small company is out of business.
<2> evilgeek : if they don't sell below their costs....they sell at their costs? well, the small company can do that too....waht's the problem then?
<3> The sample case you are taking is completely misadapted to how it works _today_
<4> farhan: this is not, in and of itself, a contradiction. it is a stochastic process in which the big company sells at the average of its below-cost price and its above-cost price while the small company sells nothing.
<2> evilgeek : tell me what is the problem? if the big company is NOT selling below its costs, what is the problem?
<4> see above.
<2> huh? it has two different prices?
<5> Yes, a competion price and a mopoly price.
<2> evilgeek : so, if it costs $50 to make an apple, they sell at both $49 and $51 ?
<2> us that what you're saying?
<4> farhan: they sell at $49 when others are in the market, and $51 otherwise.
<2> evilgeek : yeah, can they maintain that $49 forever?
<1> depends on their capital
<1> not forever, of course
<2> exactly!
<2> not forever
<0> farhan: they don't need to maintain $49 forever. just longer than anyone else
<5> Can the other business afford to be out of business forever?
<4> fred, in my example, can maintain it long enough to drive gary bankrupt.
<1> but more than competition
<1> s/more/longer
<2> you know what's funny?
<2> Walmart
<3> farhan, do you really believe that the selling price is the main factor?
<2> has anyone seen Walmart Phase II ?
<2> where they charge HIGH prices?
<2> prime example
<5> Yes.. Walmart is living proof that you're wrong, farhan.
<2> Sartak : how?
<2> pretty low prices where im from :-)
<4> farhan: you have yet to refute my argument.
<2> sorry, let me reread it
<4> or do anything close to refuting any of my arguments.
<5> farhan: For now, perhaps. Perhaps they're driving competitors out of business?
<3> This is like discussing with a believer, trying to put some reason and common sense into a brick
<5> Alex__: Refractory period up yet? hehe
<1> yeah no ****
<2> evilgeek : lets say he has $20 trillion dollars in reserves. He can pay people to use his product, right? That's how rich he is. He cannot maintain that forever still. Two things. Fred can A) shutdown for a while and wait it out. B) fred goes out of business, but others try. EVENTUALLY, he'll be done with
<2> :-)
<1> captain america or some ****
<2> Sartak : yeah, but prices are low
<2> evilgeek : have you ever seen Walmart Phase II
<4> farhan: what are you talking about?
<2> where prices are high?
<2> just answer the question. yes or no
<4> farhan: you still havne't refuted anything.
<2> in some places, there is NOTHING left. Do they charge up the prices?
<2> evilgeek : yes i did, read above
<5> farhan: So during the times that there is no competition, the consumer is SOL.
<4> farhan: he doesn't NEED to maintain this forever.
<3> farhan, a free market economy is _not_ for the common good. It's for the good of certain individuals who want to maximize their own little profits in the vague dream that it will provide them with more happiness
<4> farhan: that's not a refutation. you have omitted several key facts.
<2> lol, thank god for walmart
<4> farhan: it is incorrect handwaving again.
<2> evilgeek : tell me then! Have you seen a walmart where prices are high? in some places, walmart is ALL they have, even for groceries yes they keep prices low. Explain to me your argument why this makes no sense (even though its occuring)
<1> maloeran: spot on
<4> farhan: no, i haven't. what's your point?
<2> evilgeek : we were originally arguing about how when no one is left, Gary will jack up the prices
<2> but, that clearly doesn't happen in the real world
<2> and walmart is the best example of that
<4> i wasn't, no.
<4> i know of no community that has a walmart but nothing else.
<4> (including roads to other communities.)
<2> are we basing all of economics over your personal aquantances?
<5> farhan: You asked if he knew of such a Walmart.
<2> lol, true :-)
<4> no.
<1> farhan: let's talk about the effects of the free-market on the average worker
<4> we are answering questions. dumb***.
<2> well, now you're just insulting me
<2> after i proved you wrong with Walmart
<4> haha, what?
<4> your walmart example didn't "prove me wrong." i believe it was adequately refuted.
<2> evilgeek was saying that when the competitors are all out of the market, they will raise the prices really really high back up to their monopoly prices and walmart is a clear example of why this isn't the case
<1> farhan: do you consider a system just that extracts surplus labour-value from workers, in order to make a few rich people richer, in effect exploiting the worker?
<3> I think farhan lives in his own little bubble, where everything he thinks make absolute sense and the outside world is wrong
<2> niv_ : no, because it is their own choice
<5> So what does Walmart gain by keeping prices low? If there's no competition, they can raise the prices to increase profit margin. As soon as competition comes around (who just jumped over the barrier to entry) they can go back to their super happy kawaiilow low prices.
<4> Maloeran: but what he thinks isn't even self-consistent.
<1> farhan: No, incorrect.
<3> Of course it isn't, evilgeek, but he doesn't need to realize that
<2> Maloeran : then show me how im wrong!
<4> farhan: can you give an example of such a walmart, anyway?
<4> farhan: WE HAVE.
<2> evilgeek : which raises the prices?
<1> farhan: They live under capitalism, thus they live under wage-slavery.
<2> Walmart Phase II ?
<2> niv_ : nope, they can quit if they want
<4> farhan: a walmart in a community that has nothing else, including roads to other communities.
<3> farhan, fast food is amazingly harmful to the society, it costs a fortune in healthcare and loss productivity
<2> evilgeek : listen, you don't know what you're talking about. you know nothing about econmics, and it shows because you're resorting to insults
<2> Maloeran : consumer choice
<3> Do you expect that to go away in an unregulated free market, or gets worse?
<2> evilgeek : you don't know what you're talking about
<2> evilgeek : hush
<3> No, marketing choice
<1> farhan: And then they will starve- so they are forced to sell their surplus labour-value to a capitalist for his profit
<4> might i point out that that's an insult?
<2> Maloeran : market-choice is consumer choice :-)
<2> Maloeran : no one put a gun to your head and said eat McDonalds
<4> i called you a dumb*** because your "refutation" of my argument ignored a point that was brought up a few lines earlier.
<2> Maloeran : YOU decided to go there
<2> evilgeek : yes, and i was having a perfectly civil and interesting discussion with you before. Then you resorted to insults
<3> Consumer choices are driven by marketing and various market incentives, it's much more effective than the gun
<2> i was actually enjoyin git
<4> it wasn't interesting, actually.
<2> Maloeran : yeah, marketting tactics which appeal to the consumers. they're meeting consumer demand
<4> farhan: anyway, back to this numerical example.
<2> evilgeek : then stop arguing and go do somethin guseful
<4> farhan: i'm trying to teach the clueless something about economics, though.
<3> So farhan, people are harming themselves and the whole economy by their own choice?
<4> farhan: surely that is useful.
<2> Maloeran : yes. no one forced them
<2> Maloeran : did someone FORCE you to go to McDonalds?
<2> Maloeran : no. advertisements just got your aattention
<4> farhan: i encourage you to work out my numerical example.
<3> I'm talking about the m***es, I never ate fast food in the last 10 years
<2> attention
<2> i used to eat mcdonalds and run races the next day :-)
<4> farhan: for simplicity, ***ume further that fred and gary pay $1 per day of operation.
<3> Maximizing profits will bring companies to harm the whole society in order to benefit from it
<4> farhan: it should be clear in this case that gary will not survive.
<2> Maloeran : i see "the m***es" differently than you probably do. I see them as a bunch of individuals, not a collective group
<1> farhan: would you cl***ify america, the darling of the free-market, as an upwardly-mobile society?
<5> evilgeek: But there will be plenty more Garies in the future.. stronger, faster, more productive Garies... maybe not this year, maybe not next year, maybe not even in our life time, but some day..
<2> niv_ : when my dad came to america, he had only $200. he now earns over $100,000 a year
<4> Sartak: right, but these future garies would need to contend with an even bigger and more powerful monopolist fred.
<4> farhan: does he drive on public roads?
<2> evilgeek : no. im serious :-) he doesn't. up here, we have a road called The Dulles Toll road
<2> it goes straight to Tysons Corner
<1> farhan: because if you would, I'd like to point out that a recent study (which I can find) showed that those born into poverty have a 1% chance of making it to the top 5% in society, while those born into the richetst 5% have a 25% chance of remaining
<1> s/richetst/richest/
<3> That doesn't have to do with anything, farhan. We are talking about the common good, not the people who exploit the system for their own profits
<4> farhan: what would he do if this private road were to raise its toll considerably?
<2> evilgeek : and the times he isn't on private roads...there's CRAZY traffic. He hates it
<4> so he does use public roads.
<5> Let's get back to Fred and Gary. This road stuff is boring. >_>
Return to
#c
or
Go to some related
logs:
THxUDP
#redhat
mircstats 1.21 crack
#politics
t
#unixhelp
#politics
#beginner
motion guide carousel
pooontang
|
|