Monopsony bump
Isnt there supposed to be a barf alert on this or something?
False.
Economics presumes free and economically maximizing people to cause generally optimal economic and social outcomes WITHOUT rules designed to achieve that.
It is particularly the lack of rules that allows the outcomes.
Any rule-making by the author's socialist compatriots will ONLY INHIBIT OPTIMAL OUTCOMES.
Eric A. Benhamou Chairman, 3Com Corporation & Palm Inc.; Chairman and CEO, Benhamou Global Ventures, LLC
James Fallows Board Chairman, New America Foundation; National Correspondent, The Atlantic Monthly
Francis Fukuyama Professor of International Political Economy, Johns Hopkins University
Ted Halstead President & CEO, New America Foundation
Noosheen Hashemi President, HAND Foundation
Laurene Powell Jobs President of the Board, College Track
Kati Marton Author & Journalist
Walter Russell Mead Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow for U.S. Foreign Policy, Council on Foreign Relations
Lenny Mendonca Chairmain, McKinsey Global Institute
Steven Rattner Managing Principal, Quadrangle Group, LLC
Eric Schmidt Chairman & CEO, Google, Inc.
Bernard L. Schwartz Retired Chairman & CEO, Loral Space & Communications Ltd.
Anne-Marie Slaughter Dean, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University
Laura D'Andrea Tyson Dean, London Business School
Christine Todd Whitman President, Whitman Strategy Group
Daniel Yergin Chairman, Cambridge Energy Research Associates
Fareed Zakaria Editor, Newsweek International
Like IBM?
Like GM?
Like ENRON?
Crock of SH*T alert!
Let's not. Raw materials are virtually irrelevant in a knowledge based economy.
This sounds like politicians, not the free market.
Yeah sure, entrepreneurship has died because no one can compete with these behemoths of efficiency. I suppose that's why 80% of all millionaires in this country are first generation rich.
Kraft has found itself with no other choice than to swallow the costs, and hence to tear itself to pieces
Is that why Altria's stock is performing so poorly? LOL!
Even in sneakers; Nike and Adidas split a 60-percent share of the global market
This can't be because they just happen to make better shoes than their competitors, could it? No. It's only because the Reagan administration and those evil conservatives who followed eviscerated the anti-trust laws that made our economy work so well during the Carter years. Never mind that I can find shoes from a half dozen other manufacturers in my local Sports Authority.
Most reports blame soaring prices of energy and raw materials, but in a truly free market Kraft could have pushed at least some of these higher costs on to the consumer.
Yeah, in a truly free market companies work to increase costs to consumers rather than reduce them by becoming more efficient.
The problem is that Wal-Mart, like other monopsonists, does not participate in the market so much as use its power to micromanage the market, carefully coordinating the actions of thousands of firms from a position above the market
Wal-Mart's logistics systems revolutionized the industry and forced suppliers to become more efficient. That's one reason consumers have more money in their pockets today and can afford to buy even more goods and services, thereby increasing their standard of living, and to invest in the markets and earn a piece of the pie. Since 1980, the number of working Americans invested in the markets has increased from 25% to almost 60%.
Like this article, I could go on and on and on....
Mr. Lynn ought to read a couple of Nobel Prize Winning Economists before spouting further:
Free to Choose - Milton Friedman
The Road to Serfdom - Friederich Hayek
If this revenue is unprofitable, they should surrender it. Unless they're as dumb as Willie Green. LOL!
So WalMart is evil for making the poor suppliers give them a lower price and the supplier is evil for not giving the same low price to the smaller retailers. Wow, whole lot of evil going on.
"There is an undeniable beauty to laissez-faire theory, with its promise that by struggling against one another, by grasping and elbowing and shouting and shoving, we create efficiency and satisfaction and progress for all. "
The very first sentence of this article is hookum. Laissez faire never "promised" anything, much less efficiency, satisfaction and/or progress.
It is simply the least INefficient, the MOST satisfactory, and the economic model most LIKELY to lead to "progress". Although I daresay the author(s) of this piece might define "progress" far differently than any poster on this site.
The whole thing is based on the first sentence being a strawman. The article is worthless as an analytical exercise.
NB: Kraft, which the author mentions as a corporate predator, is not an independent force in the food business. Although it is technically an independent company (the second-largest food and beverage company in the world, in fact), Kraft Foods is actually owned and controlled (88.1% ) by the Altria Group — the conglomerate formerly Kknown as Phillip Morris.
Still, great post. Too bad no one here wants to hear the message behind it.
***
NATIONALIST ECONOMICS: WHY "EVERYDAY LOW PRICES" ARE BAD FOR AMERICA
Q. Why pay more for goods made domestically?
A. National security.
1. History demonstrates that any nation with a weak manufacturing base is at the mercy of those with stronger manufacturing bases should war come.
2. War always comes.
3. Therefore, in order to avoid being at the mercy of other nations, the United States should maintain a strong manufacturing base, by whatever means are necessary.
QED
Yes, much like in the movie, "Demolition Man," where all restaurants were Taco Bell, it's really a terrible thing that the only store in the country where products are sold is Walmart! When I need to buy clothes, the only place I can buy them is at Walmart. Same with oil and tires for my car. And the food that I eat. And the office supplies I use. And... Wait! What's that I see off in the distance? Is that a different store? Hey, that's not a Walmart! It's a Target! Actually, it's a "Super Target!" And look! There's a Payless Shoe Source next to it! Does that mean I don't have to buy my shoes at Walmart?
More Walmart bashing. If manufacturers want to sell their product at the world's largest retailer, then they're going to have to bend to the will of the 800 pound gorilla. But nobody's forcing any manufacturer to sell to Walmart. There are other stores they can sell to. They'll just have to realize that if they want the visibility and and distribution that Walmart has, they'll have to play by their rules. But nobody's forcing them to do so.
Mark
The role of governmend should be analogous to that of a referee in a sporting event. The problem with our society today is that we're letting the referee pick sides and play in the game.
Fix that problem and you've fixed A LOT.