Were there a single company selling goods, this would be true. But when there are many (not a few--oligopolies have problems similar to monopolies), the effect of competition means that each
customer can find prices within the range he is willing to pay and each seller can find prices within the range he is willing to pay. No, you'll never get the minimum you wish to pay because the
minimum is $0.00! But you will prob. not have to pay the maximum either.
True. The problem only really arises when those oligopolies start to form. Unfortunately, they seem to be getting more common (Verizon, @home, etc), especially in the consumer services market.
In a traditional haggling-based market the effect is even more pronounced. Fixed prices make the market much less elastic. The magic words `I can get this for less at Joe's' can work wonders.
Again, true. It works pretty well for things like automobiles and home electronics. But try haggling over your cable bill. Or your credit card's interest rate >:)
The result: no change in consumer's flow of payment, but an increase in the consumer's reward for that payment. I come to this conclusion based on this reasoning (which could be flawed:)
[snip]
5.Consumers will be charged a personalized maximum price per good.
That would be the flaw }:). Corporations are inherently profit-motivated (as required by law...) Consumers being charged a *minimum* price per good would be more realistic. Expecting this price to be >= the present price would be even more realistic.
Think about who pays your salary. Corporation's success cause econonic prosperity for all of us through the DOW, NASDAQ, lower inflation, and a generally higher standard of living (just think, more money for research!!)
Thinking.... Done. Now read this comment. I'm also pretty sure this practice is at best quasilegal, but IANAL.
Slashdot Mirror
There's already at least one out. It's called Airplay and made by a company called Eleven Engineering. Uses RF, no less.
I read that as "thank (god Tivo)" instead of "(thank god) Tivo". Time for my 3rd bottle of Jolt...
Were there a single company selling goods, this would be true. But when there are many (not a few--oligopolies have problems similar to monopolies), the effect of competition means that each customer can find prices within the range he is willing to pay and each seller can find prices within the range he is willing to pay. No, you'll never get the minimum you wish to pay because the minimum is $0.00! But you will prob. not have to pay the maximum either.
True. The problem only really arises when those oligopolies start to form. Unfortunately, they seem to be getting more common (Verizon, @home, etc), especially in the consumer services market.
In a traditional haggling-based market the effect is even more pronounced. Fixed prices make the market much less elastic. The magic words `I can get this for less at Joe's' can work wonders.
Again, true. It works pretty well for things like automobiles and home electronics. But try haggling over your cable bill. Or your credit card's interest rate >:)
What law states that a corporation must be profit-motivated?
I can see why you're posting as AC.
The result: no change in consumer's flow of payment, but an increase in the consumer's reward for that payment. I come to this conclusion based on this reasoning (which could be flawed :)
[snip]
5.Consumers will be charged a personalized maximum price per good.
That would be the flaw }:). Corporations are inherently profit-motivated (as required by law...) Consumers being charged a *minimum* price per good would be more realistic. Expecting this price to be >= the present price would be even more realistic.
Think about who pays your salary. Corporation's success cause econonic prosperity for all of us through the DOW, NASDAQ, lower inflation, and a generally higher standard of living (just think, more money for research!!)
Thinking.... Done. Now read this comment. I'm also pretty sure this practice is at best quasilegal, but IANAL.
I think it's an attempt at unicode.