Posted on 11/02/2005 10:09:04 AM PST by Eaglewatcher
Variations in quality, consumer preference, myriad reasons.So you aren't selling the same product. The question then becomes whether the consumer is willing to pay the premium you are requesting for the variation in quality and their preference. The amount of income taxes you pay doesn't sway them in the least. The price is still driven by the market.
Why do you think all prices of a good are not the same? Milk can go for $3.25 or $3.89 or $2.99.You usually won't find milk at this wide a price range at the same store or even the same general market. Some similar products will be sold for higher prices because the business has investing in marketing campaigns to differentiate their product from others (that's why people buy name brands over generics). The consumer perceives a premium and is willing to pay extra for it. But still - THIS IS A MARKET DRIVEN PRICE. If the business tries to sell the differentiated product for more than the market it will bear - they won't sell and they will be forced to reduce their price. The income taxes the business is paying doesn't mean squat to the consumer.
No. That's stupid. Stupid, stupid, stupid. That's not what was said now, was it?Yeah, I think it was.
When costs are greater than available funds.But if you can just raise your price, why wouldn't you be able to make sure revenues were greater than costs? How could any business go bankrupt in your world? If they aren't making a profit they just raise their price.
You can if you like, but you cannot price to the extent of eliminating sales - because sales revenue is the only indefinite stream of cash flow with which costs may be paid.But if you could raise your price without eliminating sales, wouldn't you do that even if you weren't paying taxes? Don't you like as much profit as you can get or are you a communist?
It's good to know that you are really so foolish as to think everyone sells the same product at the same price (or even needs to). That helps us peg you for what you really are.
At the store where we buy milk there are different suppliers of the same milk and each charges a different price from the other. No, I'll take that back since two of the five suppliers happen to charge the same price for one of the three or more types they supply. Probably they all got together and dis this to confuse us, don't you think? Check with your wife if all milk prices are the same since you obviously don't do the shopping. Maybe she'll send you out on a "honey do" errand to research it (and buy some).
Actually Nightie I don't assume you've made four errors, I know you've made many more than that. Guess you don't remember the eleven you had on one thread. I guess the memory does dull with overuse and old age so you probably HAVE forgotten those nasty old "errors". I don't recall you admitting any of them - ever - no matter how egregious.
Certainly I will not admit to being in error for interpreting Jorgenson's work since I have not done so. That's what you SQLers have been doing - except that you've been misinterpreting it. I've merely been trying to set your malpresentations straight. You are the folks putting out repeated interpretations of his work and then claiming that your interpretation is what the FairTax supporters are claiming - while all along it's merely your misinterpretations that are in play.
Do you think I'm that smart? Wow!
Thanks, lewislynn!
Back to changing quotes to alter meaning eh? So predictable.
Fool.
I could be - consumer perception alone can allow differing prices. So the question remains, why a variation in price for the same product?
You usually won't find milk at this wide a price range at the same store or even the same general market.
You're wrong. I see it every time I go to Kroger.
If the business tries to sell the differentiated product for more than the market it will bear - they won't sell and they will be forced to reduce their price.
Right. Until they can't reduce it anymore - at what point will that be?????? When their revenues do not exceed their COSTS!
HELLO!!!?????
Same as in your world - when expenses exceed sales revenues. Because, as you know, sales revenue is the only indefinite cash flow source from which expenses can be paid.
Since sales revenues are the sole indefinite source of funds, sales revenues must be sufficient to pay expenses - ALL of them. Even tax costs.
But if you could raise your price without eliminating sales,...
This is not what I've said. It's what you want to argue.
Right. Until they can't reduce it anymore - at what point will that be?????? When their revenues do not exceed their COSTS!Don't you mean "costs plus income taxes"? Oh, right. There wouldn't be any taxes if they weren't making a profit. Does the price of this product the business is selling at cost have embedded corporate income taxes in it? (Your own logic is failing you.)
No, I mean costs - all costs, including tax costs... costs like payroll taxes, compliance costs, and any income taxes they're planning on paying.
It's good to know that you are really so foolish as to think everyone sells the same product at the same price (or even needs to). That helps us peg you for what you really are.I didn't say I thought "everyone sells the same product at the same price." I said my theory is know as "microeconomics."
This is not what I've said. It's what you want to argue.Wasn't it you who said "You simply increase the price, if possible, to cover anticipated expenses."
They go out of business. Like the many US manufacturers that have left the US because of the high embedded tax costs - they go to a country that has less tax costs in prices - because they can't compete against business that has such a lower tax cost component in prices. HELLO?!
They go out of business. Like the many US manufacturers that have left the US because of the high embedded tax costs - they go to a country that has less tax costs in prices - because they can't compete against business that has such a lower tax cost component in prices. HELLO?!So can a business determine what price they get for a product or not? One minute you're saying "You simply increase the price, if possible, to cover anticipated expenses". The next you are saying that expenses could exceed sales revenue as if the business can't "simply increase the price." Make up your mind. How is the price set?
Business can certainly affect the price fetched by their product. I have not expressed any position about whether "a business can determine what price they get".
One minute you're saying "You simply increase the price, if possible, to cover anticipated expenses".
If a business needs more revenue, ONE of the things they may do is increase their price, if possible, to cover anticipated expenses.
The next you are saying that expenses could exceed sales revenue as if the business can't "simply increase the price."
Business may inrease their price anytime they want. But that isn't to say that the price will earn greater revenue. Maximum price does not bring maximum profit.
There are many factors affecting price. Market is only one of the factors. Another factor in pricing is generating sufficient revenue to pay expenses- all of them.... utilities, payroll taxes, copier leases, tax compliance costs, salaries, and anticipated income tax costs.
Yes and some just want to hurt those in the U.S. by any means they can, like those in the leftist press does.
Arguing with them is pointless. You can't convince someone the sky is really blue if they deny reality.
But can we use this as evidense to have them committed to an insane asylum. ;)
"1+1=2. Agree?"
"Noooo!!! You just want to bankrupt the housing market!!!"
"Fit him for a straigh jacket! NEXT!!!"
But the current IRS tax system is unfair because it allows to those who are already rich, like limo-socialists, to live off interest from tax free foundations and pay only 13% a year (from Mrs. Kerry's tax return two years ago). While the rest of us pay around 20% to 30% in income taxes, not including the amount and time it costs to file the paperwork.
Fairtax would force the rich socialists to pay the same percentage of taxes at the retail level, as we do.
Which housing market are we talking about. The over inflated urban housing market? Or the rural reasonably priced housing market?
My family is in the housing construction business and if you knew how may times over the price for a house in a major city is, it would make your blood boil.
By the way, the tax panel who recommended those cuts to hurt everyone but themselves were socialist college professors who bitter that they lack the ablity to work in the world where marxism does not work.
"I didn't say I thought "everyone sells the same product at the same price." "
???Really??? Then perhaps you could tell us what this (from your post #693) means ...
"And why, exactly, would someone buy from you if your price was higher than the market price? Answer: they wouldn't. So you would lower your price until it matched the market price. "
We'll ALL enjoy watching you do your normal tippi-toe tap dancing around THAT gem.
A truly lovely - and apropos - word picture.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.