Economics v. business --The Huck incident

[rtwngAvngr]

Huck said "Why would a supplier want to sell more units?"

Is economics for socialist morons and business for smart republicans?

What is the actual difference?

 

[nakedemperor]

Huck said "Why would a supplier want to sell more units?"

Is economics for socialist morons and business for smart republicans?

What is the actual difference?

Man, Huck consistantly makes you look silly and illuminates the vast gulf between your respective understandings of economics in general. It would be one thing if you didn't respond to all of his posts saying "You're completely wrong in all ways....again". It would be another if you argued with him without being antagonistic and emotional. Obviously I don't expect you to admit where you've been proven wrong, that rarely happens on this board. But why on earth, when you've been so consistantly and soundly argued against, if not beaten, do you call him a socialist moron? It shows a lack of grace and its really petty.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Man, Huck consistantly makes you look silly and illuminates the vast gulf between your respective understandings of economics in general. It would be one thing if you didn't respond to all of his posts saying "You're completely wrong in all ways....again". It would be another if you argued with him without being antagonistic and emotional. Obviously I don't expect you to admit where you've been proven wrong, that rarely happens on this board. But why on earth, when you've been so consistantly and soundly argued against, if not beaten, do you call him a socialist moron? It shows a lack of grace and its really petty.

He hasn't proven me wrong.

He's written more words, but his ideas are ineffective and separated from how the business world really works.

If he's so smart why would he say this "why would a supplier want to sell more units?" That's idiotic.

Economics is an abstract study of things taken out of the realities of the competitive marketplace. That's the difference.

You're petty, but a bit graceful, polesmoker.

 

[nakedemperor]

He hasn't proven me wrong.

He's written more words, but his ideas are ineffective and separated from how the business world really works.

If he's so smart why would he say this "why would a supplier want to sell more units?" That's idiotic.

Economics is an abstract study of things taken out of the realities of the competitive marketplace. That's the difference.

You're petty, but a bit graceful, polesmoker.

I won't argue about who is right and wrong, but calling me a polesmoker, what on EARTH does that accomplish, other than showing how little respect you have for fellow human beings. Especially during the holiday season; spread some cheer maybe, instead of being a name-calling grinch.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I won't argue about who is right and wrong, but calling me a polesmoker, what on EARTH does that accomplish, other than showing how little respect you have for fellow human beings. Especially during the holiday season; spread some cheer maybe, instead of being a name-calling grinch.

mmmm. blow me.

 

[Huckleburry]

Right wing,
Are sure you are literate, it seems you can't read beyond the first few sentences of any of my arguments. I mean really if you don't understand some of the bigger words just ask me for a definition I will be happy to provide one, I would much rather do that than continue killing you in these debates. Lastly I will point out that you, in typical boorish fashion, took my words completely out of context so that they would serve your interest. I am not going to waste any more time arguing with you, you have yet to understand, let alone refute a single one of my arguments and choose instead to call me names.
Merry Christmas
HUCK

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Right wing,
Are sure you are literate, it seems you can't read beyond the first few sentences of any of my arguments. I mean really if you don't understand some of the bigger words just ask me for a definition I will be happy to provide one, I would much rather do that than continue killing you in these debates. Lastly I will point out that you, in typical boorish fashion, took my words completely out of context so that they would serve your interest. I am not going to waste any more time arguing with you, you have yet to understand, let alone refute a single one of my arguments and choose instead to call me names.
Merry Christmas
HUCK

Dude, you lost a long time ago. I explained the dynamics of how tax cuts stimulate the economy, by incenting investment, resulting in real growth. You said you saw my point. That's when you lost. It was a long time ago. Being condescending is not the same as winning arguments.

An honest reread of all threads by any competent person would support my case.

Are you still confused as to why a supplier would want to sell more units? Come back and admit your idiocy and I'll see if i can kick some sense into your ignorant ass.

Of course you're done; libs always run away when they lose. LOSER!


Here's the thread where you seemed confused about increasing business volume. Increased volume doesn ALWAYS mean increased marginal cost, in fact, many times it means less. You're daft.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showpost.php?p=207684&postcount=141

 

[rtwngAvngr]

My assessment stands. Academic economists are socialist, pointy-headed, clueless, morons, for the most part.

 

[Huckleburry]

But you failed to address the marginal propensity to consume. Also you failed to address firm incentive and you failed to separate micro from macro. You failed to explain why your model automatically leads to greater out put (what about monopolies, Oligopolies, and monopsonys) You failed to address constant or decreasing returns to scale, in fact you failed to really make an argument other than say that I am a pointy head liberal.
I wonder right wing is the old maxim true...is ignorance really bliss?
Cheers
Huck

 

[rtwngAvngr]

But you failed to address the marginal propensity to consume. Also you failed to address firm incentive and you failed to separate micro from macro. You failed to explain why your model automatically leads to greater out put (what about monopolies, Oligopolies, and monopsonys) You failed to address constant or decreasing returns to scale, in fact you failed to really make an argument other than say that I am a pointy head liberal.
I wonder right wing is the old maxim true...is ignorance really bliss?
Cheers
Huck

We were talking about how tax cuts for the wealthy grow the economy.


You conflated the issue with a pricing discussion. I went along.

Firms lower prices to DO MORE BUSINESS and beat out the competition.

None of this is difficult. Why is it hard for you?

I believe the intention of the socialist academes is to teach a generation of bleary eyed, mushy skulled youngsters that the world can be controlled through price fixing. What gave this away is your insistence that firms are merely price takers. That is obviously wrong. Firms are market makers.

Price fixing cause the flu shot shortage we just experienced.

I thought you were done arguing? I guess when you realized how stupid you look you figured you'd try again. You failed again.

You are monumentally dense which brings us to physics. Go away, black hole.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I believe the closest to coherence you came was "But But, suppliers are not FORCED to reinvest" or something like that. Yeah. They're not slaves.

 

[Huckleburry]

The only economic system in which firms are not price takers is communism...haha commie, keep arguing like this and soon ashcroft will be after you.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

The only economic system in which firms are not price takers is communism...haha commie, keep arguing like this and soon ashcroft will be after you.

No. Firms set their prices based on various strategies.

You're acting as if all prices of goods are published in some big book or something and then firms decide if they'll take it or leave it. Maybe that's what you totalitarians want, but that's not how the real world is at this point.

You're a tard.

 

[hylandrdet]

We were talking about how tax cuts for the wealthy grow the economy.


You conflated the issue with a pricing discussion. I went along.

Firms lower prices to DO MORE BUSINESS and beat out the competition.

None of this is difficult. Why is it hard for you?

I believe the intention of the socialist academes is to teach a generation of bleary eyed, mushy skulled youngsters that the world can be controlled through price fixing. What gave this away is your insistence that firms are merely price takers. That is obviously wrong. Firms are market makers.

Price fixing cause the flu shot shortage we just experienced.

I thought you were done arguing? I guess when you realized how stupid you look you figured you'd try again. You failed again.

You are monumentally dense which brings us to physics. Go away, black hole.

Price fixing cause the flu shot shortage? Bullsh..

We had the money to pay for the shots; we decided to say No! Why? Because we thought we were all that when it came to medical research and financing. Look at us now; I have more confidence in the CIA than I have in the FDA.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Price fixing cause the flu shot shortage? Bullsh..

We had the money to pay for the shots; we decided to say No! Why? Because we thought we were all that when it came to medical research and financing. Look at us now; I have more confidence in the CIA than I have in the FDA.

Here's what happened. The clinton's fixed the prices of flu vaccine, to "make it affordable". The price was so low most firms producing it got out of the business of producing it. Hence, a shortage occurred.
Simple.

 

[shadrack]

Supply side relies on the principle "if you're not expanding, you're dying". Of the three elements of profit, increasing volume is the least effective at increasing profits because rise in volume carries with it a rise in costs.

Price is the element producers have little influence over. Raising the price with no reduction in sales is possible in an expanding market where demand outstrips supply.

1% increase in price returns a 12% increase in profits, prividing there is no increase in production costs or redution in sales.

A 20% increase in price can still be profitable as long as sales drop less than 33%.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Supply side relies on the principle "if you're not expanding, you're dying".

This is true in business, life, everthing.

Of the three elements of profit, increasing volume is the least effective at increasing profits because rise in volume carries with it a rise in costs.

No. Wrong. Ever hear of economies of scale?

Price is the element producers have little influence over. Raising the price with no reduction in sales is possible in an expanding market where demand outstrips supply.

Actually they have a lot of control over it. I would posit that the market is not expanding when only demand is increasing. THis is dirty u.n. style corrupt business. People will pay more for a potato when they're starving.

1% increase in price returns a 12% increase in profits, prividing there is no increase in production costs or redution in sales.

A 20% increase in price can still be profitable as long as sales drop less than 33%.

Where do you get your numbers? This was a sad, sad effort.

 

[shadrack]

No. Wrong. Ever hear of economies of scale?

Decreasing costs is the only element that gives a direct return to profit. Assuming that the dollar saved will not cause a direct reduction in sales.

Actually they have a lot of control over it.

Within the U.S., producers have little influence over price. The buyer sets price and the specifications.

Where do you get your numbers?

McKinsey

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Decreasing costs is the only element that gives a direct return to profit. Assuming that the dollar saved will not cause a direct reduction in sales.
Within the U.S., producers have little influence over price. The buyer sets price and the specifications.
McKinsey

The profit PER ITEM may go down, but when you do MORE BUSINESS, you can still make MORE MONEY in the end.

Suppliers set their prices. This is the fact. Their various pricing philosophies may differ. God bless america! Successful business follow the demand line as much as they can. Snooty high price, gougers go out of business, as they should.

Do you tire of being wrong, ever?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

When will we hear "race to the bottom?"