![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
It's not a problem either. Oh noes, lower costs of production! More efficient business practices! [/ QUOTE ] If by lower costs of production you mean firing a ton of people and lowering salaries so that real wages end up going down even though prices drop then yeah. And it's a problem. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] It's not a problem either. Oh noes, lower costs of production! More efficient business practices! [/ QUOTE ] If by lower costs of production you mean firing a ton of people and lowering salaries so that real wages end up going down even though prices drop then yeah. And it's a problem. [/ QUOTE ] A problem for who? Not me! A lot more people *shop* at wal-mart than work there (or for their suppliers). |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] It's not a problem either. Oh noes, lower costs of production! More efficient business practices! [/ QUOTE ] If by lower costs of production you mean firing a ton of people and lowering salaries so that real wages end up going down even though prices drop then yeah. And it's a problem. [/ QUOTE ] A problem for who? Not me! A lot more people *shop* at wal-mart than work there (or for their suppliers). [/ QUOTE ] When in doubt, change the argument! The "problem" is not the low prices. It is that the prices get jacked up to higher levels once the competing firm exits the market. For example, take a look at the cost of flying in and out of certain airports that the airline has a near monopoly on (Cincinnati for example). Competitors come in, Delta drops the price to next to nothing, competitors leave, Delta jacks price right back up. Someone wanted an example- here is one. Of course, this, like everything, will be blamed on government interference by you. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] It's not a problem either. Oh noes, lower costs of production! More efficient business practices! [/ QUOTE ] If by lower costs of production you mean firing a ton of people and lowering salaries so that real wages end up going down even though prices drop then yeah. And it's a problem. [/ QUOTE ] A problem for who? Not me! A lot more people *shop* at wal-mart than work there (or for their suppliers). [/ QUOTE ] When in doubt, change the argument! [/ QUOTE ] What am I changing? I'm merely asking who this is a problem for. [ QUOTE ] The "problem" is not the low prices. It is that the prices get jacked up to higher levels once the competing firm exits the market. [/ QUOTE ] I don't see *that* as a problem either. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] It's not a problem either. Oh noes, lower costs of production! More efficient business practices! [/ QUOTE ] If by lower costs of production you mean firing a ton of people and lowering salaries so that real wages end up going down even though prices drop then yeah. And it's a problem. [/ QUOTE ] A problem for who? Not me! A lot more people *shop* at wal-mart than work there (or for their suppliers). [/ QUOTE ] When in doubt, change the argument! [/ QUOTE ] What am I changing? I'm merely asking who this is a problem for. [ QUOTE ] The "problem" is not the low prices. It is that the prices get jacked up to higher levels once the competing firm exits the market. [/ QUOTE ] I don't see *that* as a problem either. [/ QUOTE ] Then say high prices for consumers is not a problem rather than taking the easy route and saying that the only problem is "low prices". |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] It's not a problem either. Oh noes, lower costs of production! More efficient business practices! [/ QUOTE ] If by lower costs of production you mean firing a ton of people and lowering salaries so that real wages end up going down even though prices drop then yeah. And it's a problem. [/ QUOTE ] A problem for who? Not me! A lot more people *shop* at wal-mart than work there (or for their suppliers). [/ QUOTE ] When in doubt, change the argument! [/ QUOTE ] What am I changing? I'm merely asking who this is a problem for. [ QUOTE ] The "problem" is not the low prices. It is that the prices get jacked up to higher levels once the competing firm exits the market. [/ QUOTE ] I don't see *that* as a problem either. [/ QUOTE ] Then say high prices for consumers is not a problem rather than taking the easy route and saying that the only problem is "low prices". [/ QUOTE ] Huh? Are you talking to me? |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
If by lower costs of production you mean firing a ton of people and lowering salaries so that real wages end up going down even though prices drop then yeah. And it's a problem. [/ QUOTE ] And the money that gets saved by consumers gets spent in other areas, creating different jobs. Jobs that are more productive towards meeting consumer demands. |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] If by lower costs of production you mean firing a ton of people and lowering salaries so that real wages end up going down even though prices drop then yeah. And it's a problem. [/ QUOTE ] And the money that gets saved by consumers gets spent in other areas, creating different jobs. Jobs that are more productive towards meeting consumer demands. [/ QUOTE ] Specious argument. Not all money trickles down. The entire problem is that you guys don't seem to realize that multiple equilibria are all possible, and in some there are a lot of of people who have a lot of money and many people who have almost none. It is these I'd like to avoid, and the fact that people "voluntarily" kick things in this direction is no argument that it ought not be avoided. |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] It's not a problem either. Oh noes, lower costs of production! More efficient business practices! [/ QUOTE ] If by lower costs of production you mean firing a ton of people and lowering salaries so that real wages end up going down even though prices drop then yeah. And it's a problem. [/ QUOTE ] A problem for who? Not me! A lot more people *shop* at wal-mart than work there (or for their suppliers). [/ QUOTE ] This just in: not everything in world about you. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Tom - you're right. People are moral agents. Why is it the only morality you're willing to recognize is the rights of the rich to exploit the poor?
And how is it you can't recognize that society is created by people? |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|