You think that what we have going on in today's world is a "free" market? It is to laugh.
i drink it up!
Yes. Steel worth what people will pay for it based on supply.
I personally would love more competition in Canada in the telecom space. Data prices up here are absurd.
Originally Posted by rezo
You think that what we have going on in today's world is a "free" market? It is to laugh.
i drink it up!
Do you have substance in your anger or is this some global conspiracy shenanigans gripping your mind?
It's not anger so much as clarity.
Backroom dealings and unfair competition didn't die with the Carnegies, Rockefellers, and Bells. The people that followed them just got smarter at doing it.
This Mishima kills fascists
Generic meds.
They should keep drug prices low. And, in a lot of cases, they do. The Kroeger-brand Ibuprofen I've been chain-eating all week is proof. But, because pharma is increasingly writing the rules of the "free" competition, we're not seeing the generic alternatives we could.
Pharmaceutical companies can outright pay and are outright paying developers of generics to delay release of their drugs to ensure their monopolies extend beyond what the law typically allows. The Federal Trade Commission found this (legal, within-the-rules) tactic costs us $3.5 billion in medical expenses a year. It's a "fair" tactic as far as it's just competitors dealing with other competitors in a 100% legal way, but is this the kind of fairness we want?
And that's just one tactic in one component of one industry.
There is no market independent of rules because rules constitute the market. A market is a rule system.
Having seen actual factory budgets, I don't completely believe this. It is probably true for tech start ups that focus on software, but probably not for anything that is made on multiple acres of land, that take raw materials and process them into usable goods. it is probably closer to 4 to 8 % depending on if the facility is union or not.
Last edited by Fe 26; 10 Mar 2018 at 04:59 PM.
Do you want to know the real reason big business is always worried about labor? Because they are stupid and/or risk adverse.
The ceos don't really know how their products are made. They don't understand the science of it. They don't understand the equipment used. And without this understanding, they are unable to make intelligent choices on what things to modernize to produce more product for less resource or on how to make different products with the same resource at a higher profit. When someone suggest this and that new thing, it all appears like a huge risk because they don't understand the present state and the suggested future state. Or they do understand and they're just cowards.
But they do understand labor. Or they think they do. Its a very visual thing. You walk into a facility, you see labor.
So if they want to increase their profitability, they decide its easier to make zero changes to their equipment and instead cut labor. So hopefully, instead of paying $100 to make widget X, they spend $99. If sales stay the same, they'll make 1% more money.
Voters believe the shit they're told about high labor costs by big business because labor is a big cost in service jobs or small firms. If you only have 10 or 20 people, labor probably does eat up a lot of your money. You probably aren't making millions of units, spreading your fixed labor cost out to almost nothing per unit.
Might not be so good for you! haha
Pontius is my Co-Pilate
Have a turmeric tea, hippie.
Boo, Hiss.
Yeah IP, labor isn't necessarily the biggest expense but it is the largest that management can easily control short term. Which is why when some companies have a bad quarter the first thing you hear is layoffs.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks