US Truckers plan to start strike today over high gas prices.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by snoopy369
People do organize. The problem is it's not easy - it requires willingness to agree to do what other people want to do, which is not a common trait, particularly in truckers. Prisoner's dilemma and all that. I am suggesting that there is a method, inside the current system, whereby they could accomplish change; they must actually DO this, of course, and it is not 'simple' to do, because it requires work, and giving up your personal preferences for the group's good; but it is quite POSSIBLE to do, and likely the best option if they can actually do it.

You're right. And I'm saying that it is not in the corporations interest for them to organize. That's the main reason why it's so hard. Corporations do everything they can to prevent people from organizing and when they do organize they try to do everything they can to prevent their power. It's your attitude that corporations exist to make profit that helps them in their efforts.

I am looking at it from the corporation's point of view. That is exactly correct. I am saying that the corporation exists, itself, for the purpose of making profits. You can say that 'society should limit these profits etc.', which is perfectly fine and reasonable for you to argue. It is not, however, reasonable to suggest that the corporation exists for the purpose of making society happy; it does not. It exists to make profits. Saying "something SHOULD do something" or "something SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO do something" is one thing; saying "something EXISTS TO do something" is different, and in this case quite fallacious.

Man, have you even studied economics? Have you seen a circular flow diagram?

[snoopy369]

Yes, circular flow. A diagram for modelling ... gasp ... profits Also not relevant to single companies, but only to 'companies' as a whole.

I have a BA in economics from the University of Chicago, so yes, I have studied economics.

Corporations exist, themselves, to make profits. You can disagree with what they SHOULD do, but they definitely exist for the purpose of making profits. Some companies may choose to give back to the community etc., because they are run by humans who have feelings and such, but they in general do not exist for the purpose of 'making the city a better place'. They exist to 'make money'. That's why they lay people off when times are tough, pay people as little as they can and still keep the people there, etc., etc. It's what they do. Again - feel free to argue that they shouldn't do these things, but, anthropomorphised, it's what they exist for.

[Arrian]

Kid,

Snoopy isn't saying anything that is even slightly nutty. What are you talking about?

Anyway, ultimately the trucking industry taking a hit (presumably in favor of rail) is quite possibly a good thing overall for society.

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Yes, circular flow. A diagram for modelling ... gasp ... profits

I have a BA in economics from the University of Chicago, so yes, I have studied economics.

OMFG! You think everything is about profits don't you?!

Here is the Wiki definition of economics.

"the social science that studies the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services. "

What teh hell are they teaching you at UoC?!

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Kidicious
What teh hell are they teaching you at UoC?!

Not to use wiki?

[snoopy369]

Congrats, Kid. You know the definition of economics.

I don't think everything is about profits. Never claimed that. I think that a corporation's primary goal is to make profits. I really don't know what you are thinking... I'd think a communist would be on board with that idea.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Corporations exist, themselves, to make profits. You can disagree with what they SHOULD do, but they definitely exist for the purpose of making profits. Some companies may choose to give back to the community etc., because they are run by humans who have feelings and such, but they in general do not exist for the purpose of 'making the city a better place'. They exist to 'make money'. That's why they lay people off when times are tough, pay people as little as they can and still keep the people there, etc., etc. It's what they do. Again - feel free to argue that they shouldn't do these things, but, anthropomorphised, it's what they exist for.

You are arguing that they SHOULD make profit, as if that is an issue with society. You made that clear. Don't point this at me. The problem here is that gas prices are too high, and the fact is that corporations are making more profit than they were when prices were lower.

[Arrian]

Since communism has come up...

Explain the difference between the following scenarios:

1) Truckers, squeezed by rising gas prices, are unable to compete and are forced to find new jobs. Rail & very large trucking companies pick up the slack.

2) The Kommissar of Interstate Kommerce decides that rail > trucking, and orders that X% of goods must henceforth be moved by rail. Truckers must find (or be given?) new jobs, workin' on the railroad.

-Arrian

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by Kidicious


You are arguing that they SHOULD make profit, as if that is an issue with society. You made that clear. Don't point this at me. The problem here is that gas prices are too high, and the fact is that corporations are making more profit than they were when prices were lower.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?postid=5253512#post5253512

[q="Kidicious"]
They do not exist to make a profit. They exist to provide a service, and to create jobs and other things that society needs. We just put up with them making a profit.
[/q]

I have, from the start, argued that companies exist to make a profit. They, anthropomorphized into entities, exist because they desire more money. This is not rocket science. I have repeatedly said that you can certainly argue they SHOULD not make a profit, or as much of one, but never that they should make profits (though I certainly think they should make profits, but that's not relevant here, nor do I think they should only make profits or should make any given profit amount).

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Congrats, Kid. You know the definition of economics.

I don't think everything is about profits. Never claimed that.

It certainly seems so. You even think the purpose of the circular flow diagram is to explain something about corporations making profit. Also, you seem to think that profits can't be to high. Did you get that from your training. I'm serious. What did you learn and where do those ideas come from?

I think that a corporation's primary goal is to make profits. I really don't know what you are thinking... I'd think a communist would be on board with that idea.

Well of course it's goal is that. We are talking about corporations here. We are talking about economics (definition already agreed on). We are talking about a problem in our society. I don't know why you bring up a problem that a corporation has. ?????

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by snoopy369

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?postid=5253512#post5253512

[q="Kidicious"]
They do not exist to make a profit. They exist to provide a service, and to create jobs and other things that society needs. We just put up with them making a profit.
[/q]

I have, from the start, argued that companies exist to make a profit. They, anthropomorphized into entities, exist because they desire more money. This is not rocket science. I have repeatedly said that you can certainly argue they SHOULD not make a profit, or as much of one, but never that they should make profits (though I certainly think they should make profits, but that's not relevant here, nor do I think they should only make profits or should make any given profit amount).

Let's just cut to the chase and you can go ahead and make a point. Or was that just a trivial remark?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian
Since communism has come up...

Explain the difference between the following scenarios:

1) Truckers, squeezed by rising gas prices, are unable to compete and are forced to find new jobs. Rail & very large trucking companies pick up the slack.

I don't if it will go down like that. More than likely you will just see lower real compensation for truckers. They'll just take it.

[Arrian]

Ok, but at some point, they won't be able to just take it. They will be losing money, and will be staring down bankruptcy.

Maybe $4.00 diesel isn't enough to reach that breaking point. Perhaps it's $5.00. I don't know. But at some point, the breaking point exists.

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian
Ok, but at some point, they won't be able to just take it. They will be losing money, and will be staring down bankruptcy.

Maybe $4.00 diesel isn't enough to reach that breaking point. Perhaps it's $5.00. I don't know. But at some point, the breaking point exists.

-Arrian

Then that's really the difference between that two. Because in the capitalist system people aren't really sure what to do. They don't know if gas prices will be higher or lower. So they might stay at the same job too long or them might start another career when this is just a temporary condition.

[Kidlicious]

The other difference of course is that someone in the capitalist system has a **** load of money and a whole bunch of other people have less.