Interesting perspective on how changes in anti-trust thinking since Reagan leads DOJ to value low prices for consumers over fears of monopoly in suing $AAPL rather than $AMZN. http://bit.ly/ynDpXC
73 plus ones
Shared publicly•View activity
View 66 previous comments
- I'm still on my phone. I see no way to edit posts. Long hold seems to do nothing special because touch is for +1 (which I can't do to my own comments sadly, but the interface still tries).
As for the rest, I paraphrased my definition from Adam Smith (the father of modern capitalist thought) himself. He said clearly in his work that if an entity gets too large it can operate outside the normal workings of the market (aka "market efficiency").
Your definitions and the way you use the various terms don't sound like anything from legit economic scientists but rather US news media. It's sound like the way Rush Limbaugh would try to define these terms.Mar 19, 2012
- When I long press on any post I get the option to +1 (even my own.) And of course, I already mentioned that I can edit, or delete mine.
Also, Adam Smith preached total business non regulation, because businesses will automatically, always do the right thing because that will help their profits. Not sure if you are familiar with Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, but it showed that this was very specifically not the case. This price fixing is another example of business regulation that flies in the face of Adam Smith's, philosophy. According to him, no companies would want to prove-fix because consumers would simply go elsewhere, and the price fixers would lose profits.
Things have changed since the 1770's. Significantly. Big businesses (retailers specifically) are clearly able to operate at a lower cost/sale, and therefore provide their products at a cheaper rate to defeat competition. I also find it ironic that you appeal to the works of Adam Smith when you yourself oppose his ideas as strongly as you do. You call Loss-leading predatory, if it was a bad thing, then according to Smith's teachings, no company would be able to sustain it because they would lose sales.
Long story short, Adam Smith's teachings are out of date, and don't apply to the capitalism that we use today, however much he influenced it in it's early years.Mar 19, 2012
- Let's remember that The Jungle is a work of fiction. It would be just as reasonable to quote Atlas Shrugged in economic arguments.Mar 20, 2012
- you are right, it is fiction. It is still valuable in denouncing laissez-faire economics.Mar 20, 2012
- Did you READ the article? Prices may be lower, but that's simply not always the best answer.Mar 20, 2012
- In what way is it useful? In fiction you can tailor make the facts to fit your story. As it happens, "Atlas Shrugged" paints a different picture than "The Jungle." Neither are real life.Mar 20, 2012
Add a comment...