SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: yard_man who wrote (102457)5/15/2001 7:14:16 PM
From: Ilaine  Read Replies (1) of 436258
 
"In the market there are always only single individuals."

econlib.org

>>The mere presence of a single seller does not imply the presence of exploitation, much less the need for
regulatory action, or else consumers would never benefit when a business first provides a product or
service. Being the first jewelry store in rural Montana, for example, gives the jeweler a temporary
monopoly, but to the extent he makes a go of it, consumers clearly benefit by having more choice of
where to buy jewelry than they had before. Moreover, it hardly matters that the single seller’s status
occurs at the end rather than the beginning of a time period–say there is only one remaining jewelry store in rural Montana. In either case, the degree of market concentration does not demonstrate the existence
of exploitation. In a market economy, it demonstrates that, for whatever reason, economic conditions
have temporarily dictated that only one seller is necessary to achieve market efficiency.<<

acton.org
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News