Why has Capitalism failed to produce optimal value everywhere?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Last Conformist
I'm not familiar with that idiom, but assuming it means buying it far below the price it might normally be expected to fetch, sure. I'm better off, they're better off, both parties volunteered to the deal.

So you would say that anything that makes you better off is fair?

Edit: The scenario is rather odd, tho; why couldn't they fetch the market price for it?

Assume the rent is due before they can find a buyer at market price.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Agathon
Of course it does. But many economically inclined people tend to dismiss such obvious features of reality out of hand.

Every human being pursues some conception of the good, but people tend to have a very vague and often contradictory idea of what that is. Even if the good is relative to different persons, that does not entail that what any person pursues at any given time is identical with the good.

People can be wrong about what is in fact good for them. In many cases other people are better at determining what is good for you than you are. People don't like this, but that doesn't stop it being true.

But who knows what is a better value to an person than himself? I'll grant you that people make poor decisions for themselves sometimes, but I still prefer to assume that individuals are most capable of making decisions for themselves. There are obvious exceptions though.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Last Conformist
I'm not familiar with that idiom, but assuming it means buying it far below the price it might normally be expected to fetch, sure. I'm better off, they're better off, both parties volunteered to the deal.

This is something you would actually do? Sure there are plenty of people who would do something like that, but there are also plenty of people who would pay a 'fair' price for the car. Such an act is only fair according to you, and only in the sense that it may be in line with your own morality. However, it is not fair in the sense that it is equitable, which is a more objective way to describe fairness. Just because someone benefits from a deal doesn't mean that the deal is equitable-fair, both parties should benefit according to their costs.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Kidicious


But who knows what is a better value to an person than himself? I'll grant you that people make poor decisions for themselves sometimes, but I still prefer to assume that individuals are most capable of making decisions for themselves. There are obvious exceptions though.

I'ld take issue with this as most buying decisions by most people are driven from the emotional not the rational being. That being said the ability to understand from a rational POV the value of a product or service is understandably suspect.

Its the first thing taught in sales 101.

[Kidlicious]

Sure you can fool people, but otherwise they are pretty capable. You aren't saying that salesmen should decide what is valuable to us are you?

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

No sales people are charged with making an emotional bond with people and influencing their emotions to the point where they buy.

A buy decision has been shown time and again to move from a rational weighing of benefits and features to a time when emotion rules the decision making process. At this critical juncture rationality goes out the window and emotion rules. A good salesmen knows this and has set his ground work accordingly so that he can manipulate (if you choose to use that word) the emotions accordingly so that the buy decision is the preferable one amongst the alternatives. (non-buy, buy competitive products/services etc.)

Even in impersonal modes of selling such as internet etc. emotions are tapped into in order to influence the buy. It is the essence of advertising.

In short, to assign value at the point of time of purchase is the least accurate as that is the time when emotions rule.

[Kidlicious]

I disagree with you Og. I don't find emotions significant. They may play some part.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Kidicious
I disagree with you Og. I don't find emotions significant. They may play some part.

I suggest then that you re-evaluate your buying habits and buying motives.

I consider myself a normally rationale person (an engineer for crying out loud) , yet when I really do an in depth look at buying decisions I made, I deluded myself for years thinking I used almost exclusively my rational self to make the decisions. Upon re-evaluation I came to understand ( I would say) approximately 90% of all my buying decisions ultimately came down to an emotional decision to do the buy (in the finality of the deal) or otherwise fulfill an emotional need. Realize that is not to say that a person doesn't do their homework or has not considered thoughtfully the decision to buy or not buy, it merely is that at the time of purchase most people have to have emotional buy in to get over the angst of doing the deal.

[Kidlicious]

My own buying decision have nothing to do with my emotions. I can honestly say that. My wife seems to be more spend thrift though, but I think that's because she doesn't really have to worry about making ends meet.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Kidicious

So you would say that anything that makes you better off is fair?

No. I would, for instance, not consider it fair if I killed random people in the streets and stole their valuables, despite the fact it would leave me better off.

Assume the rent is due before they can find a buyer at market price.

That suggests some majorly poor planning on their part. Ah well, it doesn't really matter.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Last Conformist
That suggests some majorly poor planning on their part. Ah well, it doesn't really matter.

No it doesn't. That's just another bad assumption on your part.

Anyway, I wouldn't really call your belief morality. It's really just self-interest. Such a belief is dependent on your ability to be the exploiter as opposed to the exploited.

It might interest you to know that most polytubbies are opposed to price gouging, which of coures involves free decisions. LoA of all people, started a thread on it, and immediately many people of like mind to your own spoke out against it.

[Kidlicious]

Some of you might find it interesting to know that price gouging is a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice in the US. I know this from first hand experience.

I was assigned temporary duty to the supply department on one of my cruises. So I had knowledge of the cigarette supply. I knew that the ship would run out before we pulled into port so I stocked up. I was selling packs for $20 and single cigarettes for $5 a piece. People were getting pissed, but they were still paying. My superior officer told me to stop it if I didn't want to get wrote up.

btw, I wasn't a communist, and I still can't say for sure if what I was doing was immoral, since people shouldn't smoke anyway, but I certainly don't believe that any deal that people make freely is fair.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Kidicious
My own buying decision have nothing to do with my emotions. I can honestly say that. My wife seems to be more spend thrift though, but I think that's because she doesn't really have to worry about making ends meet.

I would submit that the tighter you are with your money they more likely you need to feel a compelling reason (read emotional need) to do a buy. Your angst level of actually purchasing is actually higher because of the constraints of your budget. When you do buy, you need to feel emotionally it was worth it.

Realize I am not talking about impulse buys (although that is also a component), I am talking about the decision making rationalization process people go through at the point of purchase. Even for the many routine purchases this rationalization has been made years ago and the continued ongoing buy decision is now a routine one with little emotional component but was once upon a time emotionally rationalized.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
I would submit that the tighter you are with your money they more likely you need to feel a compelling reason (read emotional need) to do a buy. Your angst level of actually purchasing is actually higher because of the constraints of your budget. When you do buy, you need to feel emotionally it was worth it.

I don't think that being conservative is necessarily being rational. Some people are too conservative, and they could actually be happier maybe if they let loose a little. That's not me however. I put a lot of rational thought into my purchases unless they are immaterial.

Realize I am not talking about impulse buys (although that is also a component), I am talking about the decision making rationalization process people go through at the point of purchase. Even for the many routine purchases this rationalization has been made years ago and the continued ongoing buy decision is now a routine one with little emotional component but was once upon a time emotionally rationalized.

Emotions definitely play a part, but that doesn't mean that decisions are irrational. Emotion does not make something irrational.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Kidicious
No it doesn't. That's just another bad assumption on your part.

The car market is liquid enough that finding a buyer willing to pay the market price does not normally take alot of time. To have to sell the car to me for a much lower price the seller would have to be in major hurry. Being in a major hurry to get money to a predictible cost like rent certainly implies bad planning.

Anyway, I wouldn't really call your belief morality. It's really just self-interest. Such a belief is dependent on your ability to be the exploiter as opposed to the exploited.

If it were just self-interest, why should I care if the other party consents to the deal?

It might interest you to know that most polytubbies are opposed to price gouging, which of coures involves free decisions. LoA of all people, started a thread on it, and immediately many people of like mind to your own spoke out against it.

People of like mind to mine? Who'd that be?

Let's say you're right about the majority of polytubbies. If so, so what? If said majority thought that boiling bearded people alive should be legalized, would that therefore be right?