Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (322018)	1/22/2007 12:13:47 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1575183

With price limits at time you might not even have that one source. A monopoly is better than no source. With a monopoly you can choose to buy or not to buy at the high prices, with no source you don't have that choice. Also a temporary monopoly after a disaster is temporary. It might not last a full day. Monopolies put in place through government favors, anti-competitive behavior, or collusion (technically a cartel not a monopoly, but if its a tight enough cartel the effect is almost identical) the monopoly can be durable. High prices encourage competition to emerge. Government enforced monopolies forbid competition, and privately formed monopolies with an entrenched position can in theory scare off competition, or ask for government protection. More importantly, how can anyone consider his behavior justified and morally acceptable given that he is taking advantage of the bad luck of his neighbors? He is voluntarily going through a transaction that the other person is free to say no too, but chooses not to because the transaction is mutually beneficial. Also in the example I gave the supply ONLY exists because of the possibility for higher prices. Its not like there was a big stockpile, and every other seller was wiped out, it higher prices and get a supply, or pre-disaster prices and zero supply. Both with sports stars and bags of ice, there is no inherently correct price. The correct price is determined by supply and demand. That seems to be your fundamental error. You seem to think there is some price that is inherently correct, but there isn't.