Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
OT / My pet peeve *fatties*
Ah, Dave goes for the ad-hominem again.
Dave wrote: Identifying you as the person making the argument is not the same as attacking you personally for making it. Really? Let's see... did you identify me as the person making the argument- yes, no problem there. Did you mis-state the argument that I proposed, so as to make my suggestion (and me, by inference) seem stupid? Yes... somewhat of a problem there. Was your statement intended to be vituperative rather than part of a logical sequence? Yes. QED Did I say that? The implication is clearly that there is something wrong with businesses' wanting to make a profit. Not at all. Not much of a stretch then to say the solution is to ban making a profit. Only if you intend to be insulting... especially since that was in no way even remotely suggested by my actual words. I got the idea you were in favor of free markets? Well, I do have this funny idea that raising the price of an item generally reduces the quantity demanded rather than increasing the quantity demanded. It does so, with the normal range of goods & in the absence of other market inputs. Addressing the first point, sugar is an good that creates it's own demand. The more of it people eat, the more they want, and there is a very high upper limit on that consumption... you can continue to eat sugar after all your teeth fall out, but the poor nutrition will not kill you for many decades. Addressing the second point, if sugar sellers could maximize their profit by reducing prices so as to increase consumption, why would they lobby to have a tariff barrier in the first place? Remember that funny graph with two lines making an X in the middle of it? A bit old-fashioned, no doubt. And not particularly accurate in reflecting this particular situation. DSK |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Pretty but unsailable | Boat Building |