A lot of times they do. My grandmother was on her city council when they opened a Sam's Club there. They gave them a big tax incentive to locate there.
Eh? Who's prices went up? Sears lost because everyone else's prices went down.
Walmart has a monopoly in plenty of places, but it never raises prices beyond what is standard (inflation and all). Even the world's most "evil, monopolistic" company of all time, Standard Oil, never really raised their prices. Hell, they knocked prices down by 90% from the time they started to the time they were broken up.
You SAY that, but I sure as hell wouldn't. If I could have everything delivered to me for cheap/free, I would do it in a heartbeat, and save 25+% on my gas bill. Those who aren't lucky enough to have 90% of the stores they patronize on the road directly between work and home as I do would save even more.
Yes, because unlike Mom and Pop, Safeway and Co make use of advanced techniques to satisfy their customer base.
It seems like magic, yes, but that is the free market at work. Of course, I'm sure that Amazon will lobby for a tremendous amount of new regulation on brick and mortar to the point that everyone else IS run out of business. But that will be the fault of those making and enforcing the fascist regulations, not the free market.
I did, and you are full of shit. Walmart turned my hometown into a hoppin little city. I shit you not. Got a Chilis and everything now. Prior to that, you had a half hour drive if you wanted something other than fast food or crappy TexMex.
Except that doesn't actually happen. You know--the internet. There are a billion sellers there, and any one of them would curbstomp Amazon in a second if they could. Amazon raising prices would give them a chance to.
Even the most reviled "monopoly" of all time, Standard Oil, never raised their prices, even after seizing 90% market share. Why? Because the remaining 10% not owned by them stepped up their game to compete with SO, and would have jumped at the chance to take some of their market share.
It's like you never took math. The prices for everyone go down more than the lost salaries. That is a net win for society. The extra money left over will create more employment elsewhere in the economy.
And exactly which government regulation is it that you want here? Perhaps "thou shalt not become more efficient"? Or maybe "Thou shalt not improve the lives of your customers"? Or just "don't change anything, ever"?
But that fails in practice. You want the most efficiency possible. Keeping a bunch of inefficient people in business makes everyone poorer. What exactly do you have against the public that you want to make them poorer by making prices higher?
The unspoken argument is that once all the little shops are gone, the big boys will raise prices. But that doesn't seem to happen in practice. All the little guys around here and in my hometown were wiped out ages ago, but Walmart continues to offer better prices than they ever did.
Re:Nuclear waste will be the crude oil of the futu
on
A Million-Year Hard Disk
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Actually, this is quite true. LFTRs as they were originally designed were in fact for nuclear powered aircraft. They were the only possible design that was safe enough for such an application.
Anyone thinking of burying this "waste" is a bleeding buffoon. LFTR consumes nuclear waste to produce usable fuel that is useless for nuclear weapons. It burns nearly 100% of the fuel, and the only leftovers at the end are highly useful for medical applications.
Congratulations, you are the 10%. Everyone else who has a cold can use WebMD.
The last two times I have been to a doctor, they have put my symptoms into a smartphone which kicked out a diagnosis, and they wrote me a prescription. It's such an utter waste. But they have an oligopoly. Can't have a medic with 6 months of training set a kid's broken bone. Can't even buy strong athlete's foot medication without giving them money.
If YOU have a severe condition, then YOU can go to the doctor. You gain nothing but higher bills by making everyone else go to the doctor for their piddly little conditions or straightforward procedures.
Point one: "he disagrees with me, therefore he is crazy." If you don't like his tone, then you probably should have said "he acts like an asshole in all his posts". IE-1 disagree
Point two: "he disagrees with me therefore he deserves to be voted down." IE -1 disagree
Point three: "I don't like what he is saying". IE -1 disagree
Point four: "I don't like what he implies as the answer, therefore I will pretend he didn't give an answer." IE -1 disagree.
Eh? You never heard of the Mississippian culture? The mound builders of Cohokia? They build an Earthworks nearly the size of the Great pyramid there. It's called "Monk's Mound". Look it up.
I see, so you are bigoted and proud. Such a sad little man with no apparent faith in his own reasoning abilities. That is, if you really believed, rather than simply believing that you believe, then you wouldn't feel the need to insult people for disagreeing with you.
And as to your argument, no, the reason for the Mayan collapse is NOT KNOWN, and asserting that it is only destroys your own credibility. Climate change is ONE of a NUMBER of theories, and the most likely form of climate change was LOCAL, having to do with the water cycle. Also, the Pueblo civilization never collapsed. What are you talking about? I know for a fact it hasn't collapsed, as I have been there. FYI, the Pueblo hate it when you call them Anasazi. It means "Ancient Enemy" in Navajo. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pueblo_Indians
I'll have to find it again. I was quite surprised when I read it, but it talked about how the European explorers could tell when they were close to land because they could smell the native's campfires. MIght have been Guns, Germs, and Steel, but I don't remember.
Slashdot Mirror
Good riddance to bad rubbish with that one.
A lot of times they do. My grandmother was on her city council when they opened a Sam's Club there. They gave them a big tax incentive to locate there.
Eh? Who's prices went up? Sears lost because everyone else's prices went down.
Walmart has a monopoly in plenty of places, but it never raises prices beyond what is standard (inflation and all). Even the world's most "evil, monopolistic" company of all time, Standard Oil, never really raised their prices. Hell, they knocked prices down by 90% from the time they started to the time they were broken up.
I take it someone has never been to the interne...wait, what? How could you possibly think that while clearly having been to the internet before?
Oh, that's right. Cognitive dissonance.
There are no capitalist countries. You are thinking of fascist countries.
You SAY that, but I sure as hell wouldn't. If I could have everything delivered to me for cheap/free, I would do it in a heartbeat, and save 25+% on my gas bill. Those who aren't lucky enough to have 90% of the stores they patronize on the road directly between work and home as I do would save even more.
Yes, because unlike Mom and Pop, Safeway and Co make use of advanced techniques to satisfy their customer base.
It seems like magic, yes, but that is the free market at work. Of course, I'm sure that Amazon will lobby for a tremendous amount of new regulation on brick and mortar to the point that everyone else IS run out of business. But that will be the fault of those making and enforcing the fascist regulations, not the free market.
You assume that the money saved by the people from the lower prices doesn't create other jobs. You should examine that assumption.
I did, and you are full of shit. Walmart turned my hometown into a hoppin little city. I shit you not. Got a Chilis and everything now. Prior to that, you had a half hour drive if you wanted something other than fast food or crappy TexMex.
Where has Walmart ever raised prices?
Empiricism trumps ideology. Show me the statistics.
Except that doesn't actually happen. You know--the internet. There are a billion sellers there, and any one of them would curbstomp Amazon in a second if they could. Amazon raising prices would give them a chance to.
Even the most reviled "monopoly" of all time, Standard Oil, never raised their prices, even after seizing 90% market share. Why? Because the remaining 10% not owned by them stepped up their game to compete with SO, and would have jumped at the chance to take some of their market share.
Really? My neighbors opened a small manufacturing business. Not sure why you think that people can only do one thing for their entire lives.
:(
If you had your way, we would all still be driving around in buggies because otherwise the poor buggy-whip manufacturers would go out of business
Wow. Just wow.
It's like you never took math. The prices for everyone go down more than the lost salaries. That is a net win for society. The extra money left over will create more employment elsewhere in the economy.
And exactly which government regulation is it that you want here? Perhaps "thou shalt not become more efficient"? Or maybe "Thou shalt not improve the lives of your customers"? Or just "don't change anything, ever"?
But that fails in practice. You want the most efficiency possible. Keeping a bunch of inefficient people in business makes everyone poorer. What exactly do you have against the public that you want to make them poorer by making prices higher?
The unspoken argument is that once all the little shops are gone, the big boys will raise prices. But that doesn't seem to happen in practice. All the little guys around here and in my hometown were wiped out ages ago, but Walmart continues to offer better prices than they ever did.
Actually, this is quite true. LFTRs as they were originally designed were in fact for nuclear powered aircraft. They were the only possible design that was safe enough for such an application.
Anyone thinking of burying this "waste" is a bleeding buffoon. LFTR consumes nuclear waste to produce usable fuel that is useless for nuclear weapons. It burns nearly 100% of the fuel, and the only leftovers at the end are highly useful for medical applications.
Watch this, then tell me that we need to engineer million year data storage, much less a million year bunker: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK367T7h6ZY
Congratulations, you are the 10%. Everyone else who has a cold can use WebMD.
The last two times I have been to a doctor, they have put my symptoms into a smartphone which kicked out a diagnosis, and they wrote me a prescription. It's such an utter waste. But they have an oligopoly. Can't have a medic with 6 months of training set a kid's broken bone. Can't even buy strong athlete's foot medication without giving them money.
If YOU have a severe condition, then YOU can go to the doctor. You gain nothing but higher bills by making everyone else go to the doctor for their piddly little conditions or straightforward procedures.
It helps to put in the right gender.
We have free health care. It's called WebMD. Remove prescription requirements for non-narcotics and you eliminate 80-90% of health care demand.
You would need trillions of tons of unobtanium for that. Boy oh boy are some giant sexy smurfs going to be sad now :(
Feh, that only happens to tourists.
Your "four" points are all the same.
Point one: "he disagrees with me, therefore he is crazy." If you don't like his tone, then you probably should have said "he acts like an asshole in all his posts". IE-1 disagree
Point two: "he disagrees with me therefore he deserves to be voted down." IE -1 disagree
Point three: "I don't like what he is saying". IE -1 disagree
Point four: "I don't like what he implies as the answer, therefore I will pretend he didn't give an answer." IE -1 disagree.
Eh? You never heard of the Mississippian culture? The mound builders of Cohokia? They build an Earthworks nearly the size of the Great pyramid there. It's called "Monk's Mound". Look it up.
I see, so you are bigoted and proud. Such a sad little man with no apparent faith in his own reasoning abilities. That is, if you really believed, rather than simply believing that you believe, then you wouldn't feel the need to insult people for disagreeing with you.
And as to your argument, no, the reason for the Mayan collapse is NOT KNOWN, and asserting that it is only destroys your own credibility. Climate change is ONE of a NUMBER of theories, and the most likely form of climate change was LOCAL, having to do with the water cycle. Also, the Pueblo civilization never collapsed. What are you talking about? I know for a fact it hasn't collapsed, as I have been there. FYI, the Pueblo hate it when you call them Anasazi. It means "Ancient Enemy" in Navajo. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pueblo_Indians
I'll have to find it again. I was quite surprised when I read it, but it talked about how the European explorers could tell when they were close to land because they could smell the native's campfires. MIght have been Guns, Germs, and Steel, but I don't remember.
A quick search brought up the wiki article, which says that the high estimate was 100 million for all of the Americas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_history_of_indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas
Note that North American Indians were prodigious mound builders (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monks_Mound), and also had entered the copper age: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallurgy_in_pre-Columbian_America
From the same article, it seems that the Aztecs were actually on the verge of entering the Bronze Age when they were invaded.
A suggestion on how to identify bias is trolling?
You really, REALLY need to take a break from commenting and spend some time growing up.