- Joined
- May 2, 2014
- Messages
- 10,761
- Reaction score
- 3,409
- Location
- CONNECTICUT
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
and when you can produce a commodity cheaply, more cheaply than the competition, you can influence prices by increasing and decreasing production. If you increase production, and thus decrease prices, to the point that your competition can't make a profit, you control the market.
And, if you're willing to operate at a loss for a time, you can run your competition out of business. When the chain store comes to town, it can afford to operate at a loss for a time, as the other stores make up the difference. The local can't do that, so it goes out of business. That's how the game is played.
Do you even know what the hell you're saying?
My God... You know... When you buy a piece of ****ing bubblegum you're actively "manipulating" the market by creating demand for something.
Every thing we do economically is "manipulating" the market.
When you buy, you "manipulate" the market. When you sell, you "manipulate" the market. When you produce, you "manipulate" the market.
Anyone who makes an economical argument by saying the word "manipulate" cannot be taken seriously.
Yeah, sounds like the free market and competition doing what it does best, allowing that which is most appealing to the consumer to survive.
Yeah, sounds like the free market and competition doing what it does best, allowing that which is most appealing to the consumer to survive.
:lamo
Abusing their market share to drive out other producers is the antithesis of a competitive market.
this is the time when we should be replacing our transportation energy model. well, actually, that should have been done in the 1970s when we got our first real warning.
:lamo
Abusing their market share to drive out other producers is the antithesis of a competitive market.
Except that U.S. producers will simply start up where they left off when prices rise. It is not like that oil is going away. The Saudis are only protecting their market share.
:roll:
You destroyed yourself in your own post, I'm just waiting for you to notice it.
You don't understand what makes markets efficient, which is why you fail.
Don't change the subject here.
Taking actions to drive out one's competitors is the WHOLE IDEA OF THE COMPETITIVE MARKET.
I understand that you made a statement that punched you in the face without you even knowing it, but there's no need for you to get salty after realizing it.
Exactly, and low gas prices do appeal to the consumer even if temporary.
Nope!
There are anti-competitive actions, such as using ones market share to manipulate price, in order to remove competition. In economics, we refer to this as dumping.
I understand you lack exposure to basic economic concepts, evident in these responses. Your concession is expected.
Dumping the market :lamo
It would be a good idea to study basic economics prior to having matter of fact discussions in an economics debate forum.
Yes I was and am aware of the term, but no, I don't find "dumping" to be contrary to competition and definitely not to a free market.
Saudi Arabia is kicking our ass in the oil department, big whoop. Either we get better or they continue to do what they do.
What you find or do not find is irrelevant. Aramco is operating at a loss to gain market share, while being propped up by their government; the global oil market surely isn't free! It would be akin to the federal government subsidizing oil production so they could produce even @ $20/barrel and be profitable.
I understand economics isn't something you're comfortable with; but that's just too bad.
:roll:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?