A comment about 'improving capitalism'

[ataraxia]

So it's super chair Mart buys Craftsman chairs for me what stops me from taking their money reinvesting it and starting another company making higher quality chairs?

Once they are in the picture, You won’t have enough to re-enter the market- even with their initial buyout of you.

 

[CLAX1911]

Once they are in the picture, You won’t have enough to re-enter the market- even with their initial buyout of you.

I won't have enough what to re-enter the market? All I need to build chairs are a few tools and access to lumber.

So when they buy me out they buy every tool in existence and I can never own them again and they own all the trees in the world?

 

[Michael Cole]

Ime, when people learn the hideous REALITY of how 'their' money is created and issued, the nature of money, etc., they don't blather about subjective economic THEORIES. ugh...

On the other hand, people know and don't care. Ime a goin' with that.

 

[Michael Cole]

I won't have enough what to re-enter the market? All I need to build chairs are a few tools and access to lumber.

Without anti-trust laws, and without public property, your access to lumber can be limited to the land you own. It's all about access.

Start with they buy me out they buy every tool in existence and I can never own them again and they own all the trees in the world?

This is exactly what happens, though not as hyperbolic.

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, etc... got started and became huge without any government help.

That isn’t true. Those companies all started in a country with a government.

If you want to talk about a successful company that didn’t need any help from the government, you need to pick one of the companies that got started in an environment of anarchy for your example.

 

[KevinKohler]

So it's super chair Mart buys Craftsman chairs for me what stops me from taking their money reinvesting it and starting another company making higher quality chairs?

Nothing, but that's not what historically happens.

 

[CLAX1911]

Without anti-trust laws, and without public property, your access to lumber can be limited to the land you own. It's all about access.

What if I build chairs I probably could purchase milled lumber. So unless this Monopoly who magically has all the money in the world without government stopping their competition and somehow buys up all the lumber producers in existence then yet but that's extraordinarily farfetched.

Capitalism or no if there's an entity that can buy everything everywhere then there's no economy at all.

So short of comic book villains how can there be a monopoly if I can purchase lumber from anywhere and compete with super chair Mart?

This is exactly what happens, though not as hyperbolic.

So what happens in a free market is some comic book villain buys the entire world?

Please list the number of people who owned the entire world.

 

[Questerr]

Unbelievable. Will you ever learn.

The Fixed Pie Fallacy

Quote of the day, from economist Milton Friedman: “Most economic fallacies derive from the tendency to assume that there is a fixed pie, that one party can gain only at the expense of another.” In terms of globalization and international trade, we see the “economic fallacy of the fixed pie” in...

www.aei.org

The pie grows, but it doesn’t grow at a very big rate, only a few percent a year.

Meanwhile, the portion of the pie controlled by the wealthy continues to grow far faster than the pie itself does.

 

[CLAX1911]

Nothing, but that's not what historically happens.

I stand by my position that the only way you can have a monopoly is with help from the government because if I sell my business to super chair Mart I can just start a new business making chairs.

 

[Michael Cole]

So it's super chair Mart buys Craftsman chairs for me what stops me from taking their money reinvesting it and starting another company making higher quality chairs?

Nothing would stop this, but companies don't sell with a plan to start over. A company would expand its capital investment to include high quality product if that's the plan.

We've already seen the demise of many small businesses because of big corporate stores. There's nothing wrong with this economically, as it leverages the cost savings associated with scale.

Businesses are monopolistic by design. This is the paradox with capitalism. Only law prevents monopolization.

 

[ataraxia]

I won't have enough what to re-enter the market? All I need to build chairs are a few tools and access to lumber.

So when they buy me out they buy every tool in existence and I can never own them again and they own all the trees in the world?

Not a long read:

Barriers to Entry: Understanding What Limits Competition

Barriers to entry are the costs or other obstacles that prevent new competitors from easily entering an industry or area of business.

www.investopedia.com

 

[ataraxia]

I stand by my position that the only way you can have a monopoly is with help from the government because if I sell my business to super chair Mart I can just start a new business making chairs.

Siri think you know more than all the economists?

 

[Michael Cole]

What if I build chairs I probably could purchase milled lumber. So unless this Monopoly who magically has all the money in the world without government stopping their competition and somehow buys up all the lumber producers in existence then yet but that's extraordinarily farfetched.

It's not farfetched. We've already experienced the effects of monopolies, which brought about anti-trust legislation. The point is access. Without anti-trust law, competition disappears. It's the government that guarantees and enforces competition.

Capitalism or no if there's an entity that can buy everything everywhere then there's no economy at all.

So short of comic book villains how can there be a monopoly if I can purchase lumber from anywhere and compete with super chair Mart?

So what happens in a free market is some comic book villain buys the entire world?

Please list the number of people who owned the entire world.

Did I mention hyperbole? I did. You may want to rethink and rewrite this.

 

[CLAX1911]

The pie grows, but it doesn’t grow at a very big rate, only a few percent a year.

Yeah it's based on the number of people who entered the job field.

Meanwhile, the portion of the pie controlled by the wealthy continues to grow far faster than the pie itself does.

Income disparity is kind of a red herring. If you went through and increased everyone's pay by five times meaning if you make $20,000 a year you suddenly make $100,000 a year the income disparity would be the same but it wouldn't be a problem because you're making $100,000 a year unless you're problem is with not having more.

 

[aociswundumho]

The pie grows, but it doesn’t grow at a very big rate, only a few percent a year.

Yes, and can we all agree that the faster the pie grows, the better off the world is?

Meanwhile, the portion of the pie controlled by the wealthy continues to grow far faster than the pie itself does.

Aww, shit. Saying the rich gain faster doesn’t invalidate the fact that everyone can gain at the same time. You are focusing on relative gains rather than recognizing that everyone’s absolute standard of living can increase in a growing economy.

 

[CLAX1911]

It's not farfetched.

So please a list of individuals that owned the entire planet.

We've already experienced the effects of monopolies, which brought about anti-trust legislation.

Again the only way you can have monopolies is through the government.

The point is access.

No Monopoly without government assistance can take away all access.

Without anti-trust law, competition disappears.

Without government support you can't have monopolies

It's the government that guarantees and enforces competition.

It's the government that creates monopolies

Did I mention hyperbole? I did. You may want to rethink and rewrite this.

No I don't you're not understanding you can't create a Monopoly without the government. I'm pointing out why it's ridiculous for you to think that you can.

 

[CLAX1911]

Yes, and can we all agree that the faster the pie grows, the better off the world is?



Aww, shit. Saying the rich gain faster doesn’t invalidate the fact that everyone can gain at the same time. You are focusing on relative gains rather than recognizing that everyone’s absolute standard of living can increase in a growing economy.

Standard of living is often overlooked in this.

 

[CLAX1911]

Siri think you know more than all the economists?

It's simple how do you have a monopoly without government interference.

If you need to appeal to the o it's so complicated and you need to read books and go to college for 9 million years it's because you know the answer to the question and you don't want to admit it.

 

[CLAX1911]

Not a long read:

Barriers to Entry: Understanding What Limits Competition

Barriers to entry are the costs or other obstacles that prevent new competitors from easily entering an industry or area of business.

www.investopedia.com

So one of the barriers to entry is regulatory costs. Regulatory costs are the government impeding competition to support.

It's incredible how your source proved me right in the first sentence.

It's almost like I know where I'm talking about.

 

[The Populist Right]

The biggest libertarian delusionan is the idea capitalism doesn't create monopolies. Even Adam Smith said they were an inevitability. In their minds if someone dominates the market it's just because they do it best and not because they crush their competition.

 

[Michael Cole]

So please a list of individuals that owned the entire planet.

Clown posting is for clowns.

For everyone else...

States have their own anti-trust laws. Walmart may not violate federal law, but it cannot merge with Target and Costco stores within the state, regardless of its investments elsewhere.

NRS: CHAPTER 598A - UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES

NRS 598A.060 Prohibited acts.

(14)(e) Monopolization of trade or commerce in this State, including, without limitation, attempting to monopolize or otherwise combining or conspiring to monopolize trade or commerce in this State.

(f) Except as otherwise provided in subsection 2, consolidation, conversion, merger, acquisition of shares of stock or other equity interest, directly or indirectly, of another person engaged in commerce in this State or the acquisition of any assets of another person engaged in commerce in this State that may:

(1) Result in the monopolization of trade or commerce in this State or would further any attempt to monopolize trade or commerce in this State; or

(2) Substantially lessen competition or be in restraint of trade.

Competition is guaranteed by the government.

The question you should be asking yourself is not clownish. The question is what would happen if one developer owned all the apartments in your city? Or a small town. That's a serious question.

Again the only way you can have monopolies is through the government.

No Monopoly without government assistance can take away all access.

Without government support you can't have monopolies

It's the government that creates monopolies

No I don't you're not understanding you can't create a Monopoly without the government. I'm pointing out why it's ridiculous for you to think that you can.

 

[CLAX1911]

Nothing would stop this,

So there's no possible way to have a monopoly without government interference

but companies don't sell with a plan to start over.

A company would expand its capital investment to include high quality product if that's the plan.

Mass production will either cause a quality drop or a price increase.

We've already seen the demise of many small businesses because of big corporate stores..

It's not because of big corporate stores it's because of government regulation. The government favors big corporations because everyone in every party gets donations mostly from operators of big corporations. So it's in government's interest to restrict small business.

There's nothing wrong with this economically, as it leverages the cost savings associated with scale.

It doesn't though monopolies and government regulation create monopolies.

Businesses are monopolistic by design.

Without government impeding small businesses they can't possibly be

This is the paradox with capitalism.

It's the paradox of corporatism.

Only law prevents monopolization.

Only law creates monopolization.

 

[Questerr]

Yeah it's based on the number of people who entered the job field.

Income disparity is kind of a red herring. If you went through and increased everyone's pay by five times meaning if you make $20,000 a year you suddenly make $100,000 a year the income disparity would be the same but it wouldn't be a problem because you're making $100,000 a year unless you're problem is with not having more.

You think economic growth is based solely on people entering jobs?

Your second argument has no basis in economics or even logic.

 

[Questerr]

Yes, and can we all agree that the faster the pie grows, the better off the world is?



Aww, shit. Saying the rich gain faster doesn’t invalidate the fact that everyone can gain at the same time. You are focusing on relative gains rather than recognizing that everyone’s absolute standard of living can increase in a growing economy.

Except the meager, almost non-existent, gains by the poor are wiped out by inflation. They aren’t gaining.

 

[Michael Cole]

So there's no possible way to have a monopoly without government interference

This makes no sense. It's government that prevents monopoly. I just showed you statute that outlaws it.

Mass production will either cause a quality drop or a price increase.

Cool.

It's not because of big corporate stores it's because of government regulation. The government favors big corporations because everyone in every party gets donations mostly from operators of big corporations. So it's in government's interest to restrict small business.

Familiarize yourself with economies of scale.

Economies of scale - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Small business isn't restricted. It's supported. Harris proposed a $50k tax deduction for startups. She should have talked more about that.

There's a public/private organization EDAWN, which promotes entrepreneurship. If you want to start a business in the area, call EDAWN.

Startup Reno

Welcome Entrepreneurs To Reno Nevada Northern Nevada is one of the fastest growing regions in the country with a booming culture of creativity and innovation. And we’ve never lost touch with our unapologetically gritty pioneering spirit. Whether you are local or planning on relocating here...

www.edawn.org

Starting a business is well supported. You're not going to start a Walmart.

It doesn't though monopolies and government regulation create monopolies.

Without government impeding small businesses they can't possibly be

It's the paradox of corporatism.

Only law creates monopolization.

This is nonsense.