[PLUG] Re: OT, capitalism debate

[Jon Galt <jongalt@pinn.net>]

I'll combine our two threads, since we seem to be online at the same time,
having two conversations with each other on the same subject. :-)  I'll
also delay sending this for a while, to smooth out the flow back and
forth.

On Thu, 25 Apr 2002, Fred K Ollinger wrote:

> I'll make another proof by assuming the opposite of what I think is true.
> 
> I'm a capitalist and I can make a lot of money off something that costs me
> little. I don't like that.
> 
> Hmm. I can't think of anyone who thinks that this is a bad idea save for a
> socialist who would give it all away. Or someone we think as a fanatic who
> could make a lot of money on something that cost him little, but won't
> sell b/c it will benefit the wrong types of people.
> 
> ***wipes chalk off his hands and dons asbestos suit.*** :)

LOL.  And I forgot my flamethrower!  Damn... :-)

More successful capitalists realize that their long term interests are
served better by providing something of value, rather than something with
no value.

Regarding your previous argument, I wrote:
> What it proves is that if you can obtain *something*
> (let's say Linux) at a zero "price(buy)" and sell it for a nonzero
> "price(sell)" (a la Red Hat, for example), then in your simplistic
> analysis, this is optimal.

You wrote:
>Then you are saying you'd rather pay more for something and sell it for
>less?

How in the world do you get that out of what I wrote?

I wrote:
> This is not the same as making lots of money off of selling you nothing.
>
> Suppose I can obtain X at zero cost and sell it for 1 penny per unit, or 
I
> can obtain Y at a nickel per unit and sell it for a dollar per unit.
All
> else being equal, I would be better off dealing in Y instead of X.  So
it
> seems to me that your so-called "optimal" solution is not so optimal
after
> all.

You wrote:
>I don't disagree at all. But what if you could push the price you pay for
>Y down? How far would you be willing to push this price down? I say 0.
>Nobody would disagree. How far would you be willing to push the price of
>X up? I say infinity.

No, a selling price of infinity will not optimize your net income.  There
is an optimal selling price for any product in any market, and that
optimum is never infinity.  Ever.

Regarding "pushing" prices up and down, how far would I go?  It depends on
the means used.

>Next step is to lock the consumer in so that you have to buy it: car
>insurance (make it illegal not to buy the product) or exclusive contracts
>with buyers (call them oems in our example). :)

Nooooooooooooooooooooo, not again!  I refuse to bite. :-) (On the 
"exclusive contracts" thing.)

The passage of statutes is not the bailiwick of capitalism, but is an 
example of coercion by government.  (Although many profit motivated
businesses indulge in lobbying for coercive statutes, unfortunately.)

Wayne
_________________________________________

Need an experienced programmer who knows
both the Unix and Microsoft worlds?

Then you need to hire Wayne:
http://hirewayne.com

wayne@hirewayne.com
_________________________________________



______________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group       -      http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  -  http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug