User Tag List

First 6141516171826 Last

Results 151 to 160 of 303

  1. #151
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    This is the basic disagreement here.
    Indeed it is.

    You're stating that people pay what something is worth and receive likewise. This is untrue. You sell at what you can get and you buy at what you can get. That is never the actual value.
    Remember the Matrix? "There is no spoon."

    There is no "actual value". As I pointed out in my prior post, believing in an "actual value" is one of the most pernicious of economic fallacies.

    What is the "actual value" of my hypothetical "Uumlau action figure"? It's f-cking worthless to everyone, even me, yet money and resources were (in my example) spent making them. Their actual value is not "how much it cost to make them" nor is it "my expenses plus a small-but-fair profit". There is no actual value. Or perhaps Uumlau becomes a world famous soccer star, at which point the worthless figurines become vintage collectibles worth $10,000 a pop.

    The other point of my action figure example is that it isn't about selling for "what you can get" so much as finding something to sell that other people value. My example is purposefully ridiculous because there isn't even a "what I can get": I need a completely different business model that involves making/doing something that people actually want.

    Value is always personal and circumstantial. A bottle of water is of little value if there's a water fountain down the hall, of moderate value if there's a fountain but you hate the taste of the fountain water, and of great value if you are hiking through a desert.

    So I'm not saying that people pay "people pay what something is worth and receive likewise". I'm saying that people pay what they're willing to pay for something they want - something they want MORE than they want to keep their money in their pocket. The person selling that something is in the business of selling it because they've figured out that people want it more (in terms of resource expenditures) than it takes the business to supply it. That's why it is win-win. No one has lost in the exchange. In fact, barring coercion or fraud, the trade can only proceed if and only if both parties believe that they gain from the trade.

    Take cars for example. I buy a new car and drive it off the forecourt down the road and sell it. Some cars will have dropped 40 percent in value in ten miles. That's now based on value but the perception of value. Add to that mix marketing and strategy and you have the market, basically. Now who has the most influence on perception? The big boys,the ones with the cash. Ergo they can set the market in their favour.
    Perception of value IS the value. Some people value a new car more and will pay for it. Some people find that extra 40% ridiculous and will gladly buy 2 yr old used models for much less.

    I'm not saying, however, that car dealers don't often use shady tactics to eek out every last penny, e.g., the "extended warranty" that HAS to cost more, on average, than paying for repairs as you go, otherwise they wouldn't sell it. I'm just pointing out that value is necessarily based on perception and some people are willing to pay for that perceived value, even if they're entirely aware of how much the car's value drops upon driving off the lot. I'm aware of it myself, and I prefer to pay for a new car than risk buying a "refurbished" one for much less, because I prefer to have an extra couple of years of not needing repairs or maintenance, and I'm fully aware of all that the vehicle has been through.

    Btw, when did the government getting money become separate from the people? Do we Brits need to let you guys back in so you can see how it's done right?
    Well, Britain was wise enough to stay out of the Euro, I'll give you that!
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.
    Likes SD45T-2 liked this post

  2. #152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    Police lock up elderly in care crisis: Watchdog report reveals OAP's ordeal

    This is what Obamacare looks like in the near future as heathcare costs skyrocket and bureaucrats scramble to save money on the backs of our elderly.
    Terrible! I told y'all so. I didn't vote for Obama.
    Likes Tellenbach liked this post

  3. #153
    deplorable basketcase Tellenbach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,953

    Default

    Why Social Security is a bad idea:

    "I remember during the 1980s, several young men suffering from AIDS tried to get out of paying Social Security taxes on the grounds that they would not live long enough to receive the benefits. Instead, they wanted to use the money for medicine that might extend their lives. For their own good, their requests were denied." Peter Schiff, "The Great Crash"

    "Black men have a life expectancy 6 years shorter than white men. As of 2006, the average white man lives 75.7 years; average black man lives to 69.7 years. Full Social Security retirement age is 67 years. A black man takes in 2.7 years of benefits while the white man gets 8.7 years." Peter Schiff

    The Social Security program is regressive and redistributes wealth from people who live shorter lives (the poor) to people who live longer (generally the rich).

    I'm not sure how true that assessment is; I'd be shocked if S.S. benefits weren't already means tested. Of course, if they raise the retirement age any more (and they will very likely do so), black men won't live long enough to collect any benefits.
    Senator Rand Paul is alive because of modern medicine and because his attacker punches like a girl.
    Likes LonestarCowgirl liked this post

  4. #154
    Senior Member riva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    2,083

    Default

    Dude would you like to live in a free market as an employee who is not in a niche market?

    All the businesses have come to an agreement to reduce reduce and reduce the wages, there is no where to turn and no where to run cus you can't even afford gas.

    Wake up man.
    .

  5. #155
    Senior Member Adam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    MBTI
    DEUS
    Posts
    162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    "Black men have a life expectancy 6 years shorter than white men. As of 2006, the average white man lives 75.7 years; average black man lives to 69.7 years. Full Social Security retirement age is 67 years. A black man takes in 2.7 years of benefits while the white man gets 8.7 years." Peter Schiff
    Wonderful how Peter Schiff sets it up to be about race rather than class. What about homosexuals compared to heterosexuals? Vegetarians compared to meat-eaters? Cat-owners compared to dog-owners?
    This is not a unique case, though. The ham-fisted attempts at packaging statistics, the use of shock value to persuade readers, and the lack of any adequate evidence to support his overstatements; in the end, these things only serve to expose Peter Schiff as a dangerous ideologue who engages in economic quackery. Economic Enlightenment and the cure-all known as Free Market, in 352 Pages. That you aren't distressed by this is a surprise which I can only ascribe to you drinking from the same bowl as him. You seem to have a relatively keen sense of source criticism when the source in question is in opposition to your stance, yet you don't point this inwards when you gather support for your beliefs.
    ‘Many novelties have come from America. The most startling of these, a thing without precedent, is a mass of undignified poor. They do not love one another because they do not love themselves.’

    ‘And we will have made great strides in equality,
    when few have too much and fewer too little.’.

  6. #156
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    The problem with the free market starts and ends with control and power.

    There is no free market that cannot be manipulated by those that constitute it the same as any other group or organisation. The larger the power base of the manipulator, the larger the effect of their movements. Can we at least agree that in any complex organism that the thing with the most power has the most power to affect change?

    Does it not follow that once this is in place that those with the most power will look after their own interests first?

    Without wishing to be confrontational I would also point out that all of the data gathered is circumstantial to the outcome. I have the same argument with politicians who claim that by sending out leaflets every week that they increased voter turnout. They fail to take into account the vast amount of information they are not looking at which, in this case, is that the person in question has a whole lot more effecting their lives than the delivery of a political leaflet. No data is gathered to directly support whether any voter decided to make their change due to the leaflet, the association is assumed.

    Some information to consider

    Wikipedia Article Link

    Also something to consider that whilst a free market may seem to free business to pursue it's course as required by the market it will still be hampered by the people who constitute the organisations. There is rampant reliance on interviews (shown repeatedly to be unreliable), nepotism and reliance on academic qualifications as indicators of professional performance. You see currently the incompetence encountered commonly covered by something referred to as the "Peter Principle" is mitigated by the regulations and laws put in place to protect the wider community from some asshat with a business and money.

    To return to a previous example
    Intel required to pay $1.4 billion fine over anticompetitive tactics against AMD | The Verge
    BBC NEWS | Business | EU slaps a record fine on Intel

    With such practices the big boy in the market (Intel) managed to harm it's only real competitor in the x86 chip market (the mainstream PC CPU) and secure it's position. Remove the protections and AMD could have gone to the wall meaning that for any home PC running Windows you would HAVE to buy an Intel chip. This is a company who (like other chip manufacturers) sells those chips which happen to turn out better for much higher prices and even sells those which to other industries would be considered faulty products (such as quad core chips where only half the cores work as designed so they just disable those cores and sell it as a dual core). They can make plenty of money and then use it to ensure that no one threatens their profit line. Where's the free market protection on that kind of practice?

    Another example
    Microsoft Corp v Commission - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    If you want a desktop PC and like games, there's only one choice for the common consumer, Windows. Why? Because DirectX has dominance. The end result is a company who can do whatever they wish. There are many cases where a company has been told that they owe license fees and are offered a choice, either Microsoft sues them for a lot of money or the company signs up to buy from Microsoft for the next however long. Thus they continue to dominate the market despite Linux being hailed as a more competent system. Sure it's a product of their work so there is a case for it to be allowed to continue unabated but when that company requires payment from it's customers even when they aren't using their products, then it becomes and abusive company. The protections in place haven't allowed competition (some might say the product has beaten all rivals and their position is deserved) but it has limited a company which shows willing to use their position to ensure they are the undisputed king from engaging in any more questionable tactics such as almost ensuring that everyone uses IE.
    Free capitalism works for thieves.

  7. #157
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    In fact, barring coercion or fraud, the trade can only proceed if and only if both parties believe that they gain from the trade.


    Perception of value IS the value.
    You sum it up here perfectly. In this environment the con artist is king. You can believe you're getting value all you like, that doesn't mean you're not deluded.
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  8. #158
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    Police lock up elderly in care crisis: Watchdog report reveals OAP's ordeal





    This is what Obamacare looks like in the near future as heathcare costs skyrocket and bureaucrats scramble to save money on the backs of our elderly.
    Harold Shipman was a doctor and he killed people. He worked in the NHS...

    Paw, get the cross lit... I'm gett'n me a public service to string up...

    You know there was that banker who defrauded a load of people... I'm gett'n me a shotgun paw....

    On a more serious note, you've just shown a failure in source material. You're showing the NHS being backed up by the police and the BBC to ensure these things are sorted out. Well that's three public bodies... Not much private enterprise here...
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  9. #159
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xander View Post
    You sum it up here perfectly. In this environment the con artist is king. You can believe you're getting value all you like, that doesn't mean you're not deluded.
    Ah, so you admit that the rest of my thesis is true? That the ONLY difference between us is the belief that because value is subjective, "con artists" can fool people and make them buy worthless stuff?

    And, if so, then who is to say someone is deluded? Am I deluded if I prefer to buy my car brand new instead of 2 yrs old at half the price of new, or is that my conscious choice?

    ..........

    Value is subjective. It -must- be subjective. It isn't like you can stick a value-o-meter in a product and measure its "real value". What is the real value of the hypothetical action figures? $0? $10? $10,000? How do you make an objective judgment without subjective context getting in the way?

    It's not "this environment". It's a fact of economics since before history began (evidence of global trade exists from more than 8000 years ago).
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.

  10. #160
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Ah, so you admit that the rest of my thesis is true? That the ONLY difference between us is the belief that because value is subjective, "con artists" can fool people and make them buy worthless stuff?

    And, if so, then who is to say someone is deluded? Am I deluded if I prefer to buy my car brand new instead of 2 yrs old at half the price of new, or is that my conscious choice?

    ..........

    Value is subjective. It -must- be subjective. It isn't like you can stick a value-o-meter in a product and measure its "real value". What is the real value of the hypothetical action figures? $0? $10? $10,000? How do you make an objective judgment without subjective context getting in the way?

    It's not "this environment". It's a fact of economics since before history began (evidence of global trade exists from more than 8000 years ago).
    Excellent. So you agree then that businesses shouldn't self regulate because their success is no measure of their worth and therefore they should not be attributed with special status.

    A grand argument against the free market ideals. Thank you.
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

Similar Threads

  1. Slavery, child labor, organized religion and a free-market economy
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-22-2013, 11:21 PM
  2. Define capitalism, socialism, free market fundamentalism, communism, etc.
    By ygolo in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-14-2012, 06:34 PM
  3. Why your diet may not be working like you want...
    By sdalek in forum Health and Fitness
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-03-2007, 08:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO