Re: [ox-en] Re: "At Cost"

• From: "Patrick Anderson" <agnucius gmail.com>
• Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:47:31 -0600

Stefan Meretz wrote:

Patrick Anderson wrote:

Profit disappears when Competition is Perfect, but Competition is
usually not Perfect, so Profit is usually not Zero.

Profit and Competition are inversely related, while Profit and
Monopoly are directly related.  A Perfect Monopoly would enjoy
Infinite Profit, right?

OMG, Patrick, this is simply wrong! What are saying here?

This is wrong?  In what way?

This is very standard economics as far as I can tell.

For instance:

If profit and competition are not inversely related, then what is
their relationship?

If profit and monopoly are not directly related, then what is their
relationship?

If you owned the only well in the middle of a desert, wouldn't you be
able to charge me an infinitely high price?

If I had 50% ownership of that well, wouldn't I be able to drink "at
cost", without paying profit?  If not, then who would I pay the profit
to?

Sincerely,
Patrick
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de

• Follow-Ups:
  • What is profit? (was: Re: [ox-en] Re: "At Cost")
    • From: Stefan Meretz

• References:
  • [ox-en] reprap, exploitation, free goods etc
    • From: graham
  • Re: [ox-en] Re: "At Cost"
    • From: Patrick Anderson
  • RE: [ox-en] Re: "At Cost"
    • From: Paul Cockshott
  • Re: [ox-en] Re: "At Cost"
    • From: Stefan Meretz

• Next in thread: What is profit? (was: Re: [ox-en] Re: "At Cost")
• Previous in thread: RE: [ox-en] Re: "At Cost"
• First in thread: [ox-en] reprap, exploitation, free goods etc
• Last in thread: Re: [ox-en] reprap, exploitation, free goods etc
• Previous thread: [ox-en] Admin: Major major problem with server infrastructure
• Next thread: [ox-en] Freedom Hardware - or - Hardware Freedom
• Next by Date: Re: [ox-en] Re: "At Cost"
• Prev by Date: Re: [ox-en] Re: "At Cost"