Unions: The New 'Dinosaurs'?

[Rshermr]

So, first question should have been "what is the definition of monopoly.?", because obviously you do not understand.

Definition of monopoly: A situation in which a single company owns all or nearly all of the market for a given type of product or service.

Definition of Monopoly Power: Monopoly power is the degree of power held by the seller to set the price for a good.

So, if you understand near (I decided it would not be necessary to define that word for you. Let me know if you need help), and you understand monopoly, then you understand near monopoly. Also known as oligopoly, or monopolistic.

Something either is a monopoly or it isn't.

Only in your really simplistic mind. A course in economics whould be helpful, if you really believe that statement. See above. And, you are apparently suggesting a Pure Monopoly, which is a condition that essentially does not exist. Almost.

You have about zero credibility at this point. I'd quit while I was behind.

Based on this post, I would say you must be talking to yourself.

Let me know if you need additional education, rabbi. I or someone else can help you. But my god, rabbi. This post seems to suggest that you are really, really ignorant. Or are you just lying again.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Definition of Monopoly Power: Monopoly power is the degree of power held by the seller to set the price for a good.

Yes to set the price high, not low!!!. Since Walmart sets the price extremely low because of all its competition it must be the opposite of a monopoly?



See why we are 1000% positive a liberal will be slow, so very very slow?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

yes absolutely brain dead liberal unions have driven 30 million jobs off shore. Unions should be made illegal again!! Imagine if a very very stupid Republican policy had led to the loss of 30 million jobs??



of course you don't fight for rights by stealing from other people or raising their prices with your high wages. Most of the hunger in America has been caused by unions; this was especially true 100 years ago when so many were poor and hungry. Unions are pure evil!




wrong wrong wrong!! Marx was all about class warfare. Unions created the Anti american idea that there must be a permanent loser worker class who can never get ahead. Thats where his army came from!! Workers of the world unite!!!!If people know the can get ahead they have no need for unions or the psychological destruction that comes from being told you are too stupid to get ahead and your fate is to put a bolt on a car for your entire career.




why not have the government put all of us in a union and make $100/ hour the basic wage in America??

As an illiterate liberal you will have no idea how to answer that question

Edward, don't be mean to others. It turns society off to anything you are saying.

That is his intention. The venom some spew towards unions smacks of paid trolls. They DO exist. Comments like "why don't we just make the minimum wage $100" show he has no desire to discuss...just dismiss.

why not have the government put all of us in a union so we make $100/ hour or $50/hour the basic wage in America??

If you cant answer you must admit to being a liberal

 

[Toronado3800]

Please define "near monopoly." Something either is a monopoly or it isn't.
You have about zero credibility at this point. I'd quit while I was behind.

Rabbi, what do you mean you want me to define "near monopoly" for you. It just does not seem that difficult to understand.....how about "almost a monopoly"? I just don't get what you need.

 

[Toronado3800]

Definition of Monopoly Power: Monopoly power is the degree of power held by the seller to set the price for a good.

Yes to set the price high, not low!!!. Since Walmart sets the price extremely low because of all its competition it must be the opposite of a monopoly?



See why we are 1000% positive a liberal will be slow, so very very slow?

Edward, you have been mean again.

Walmart still needs to beat target btw. Don't be angry at folks who disagree.

 

[The Rabbi]

So, first question should have been "what is the definition of monopoly.?", because obviously you do not understand.

Definition of monopoly: A situation in which a single company owns all or nearly all of the market for a given type of product or service.

Definition of Monopoly Power: Monopoly power is the degree of power held by the seller to set the price for a good.

So, if you understand near (I decided it would not be necessary to define that word for you. Let me know if you need help), and you understand monopoly, then you understand near monopoly. Also known as oligopoly, or monopolistic.

Something either is a monopoly or it isn't.

Only in your really simplistic mind. A course in economics whould be helpful, if you really believe that statement. See above. And, you are apparently suggesting a Pure Monopoly, which is a condition that essentially does not exist. Almost.

You have about zero credibility at this point. I'd quit while I was behind.

Based on this post, I would say you must be talking to yourself.

Let me know if you need additional education, rabbi. I or someone else can help you. But my god, rabbi. This post seems to suggest that you are really, really ignorant. Or are you just lying again.

Someone who obviously flunked out of 9th grade should not be lecturing anyone.
A monopoly is a situation marked by one seller or provider in any market. There are limited examples of monopolies in this country, virtually all of them the result of government action. E.g. the Post Office for 1st class mail.
Since there are many many employers, including potentially every individual as self-employed, there cannot be a monopoly of employers.
You lose. Once more, with feeling. You are one pitifully uninformed son of a bitch.

 

[The Rabbi]

Please define "near monopoly." Something either is a monopoly or it isn't.
You have about zero credibility at this point. I'd quit while I was behind.

Rabbi, what do you mean you want me to define "near monopoly" for you. It just does not seem that difficult to understand.....how about "almost a monopoly"? I just don't get what you need.

A monopoly is a situation with one provider in a given market. Anything that is not that is not a monopoly. Period.
You just don't get it, period.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Walmart still needs to beat target btw.

yes and Kohl's and Home Depot and Best Buy and the internet so it has nothing like monopoly power!! Capitalism prevents monoploy whereas under liberalism it is encouraged under government control as in Obamacare

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Idiotic liberals will imagine a monopoly in America (virtually impossible under capitalism, but average case under Marx's view of capitalism) so they have yet another reason to socialize or sovietize the economy.

 

[The Rabbi]

Idiotic liberals will imagine a monopoly in America (virtually impossible under capitalism, but average case under Marx's view of capitalism) so they have yet another reason to socialize or sovietize the economy.

They're idiots. They sit around Starbucks in their Nikes typing on their Apples about how Big EEvul Corporations are ripping people off.

 

[HUGGY]

Idiotic liberals will imagine a monopoly in America (virtually impossible under capitalism, but average case under Marx's view of capitalism) so they have yet another reason to socialize or sovietize the economy.

They're idiots. They sit around Starbucks in their Nikes typing on their Apples about how Big EEvul Corporations are ripping people off.

The big corps are not doing anything worse than the drug cartels dropping the price of cocaine by ten fold over the last 30 years so a rock of crack can be sold on the street for around 10 dollars.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Idiotic liberals will imagine a monopoly in America (virtually impossible under capitalism, but average case under Marx's view of capitalism) so they have yet another reason to socialize or sovietize the economy.

They're idiots. They sit around Starbucks in their Nikes typing on their Apples about how Big EEvul Corporations are ripping people off.

yes and of course Walmart is the focus of evil for them....and when forced for a reason to explain why it is evil they say, monoply power because as liberals they lack the IQ to know that monopoly leads to high prices not WalMart low low prices.

Voting IQ tests as required by the Constitution would eliminate all liberals!!

 

[Toronado3800]

Idiotic liberals will imagine a monopoly in America (virtually impossible under capitalism, but average case under Marx's view of capitalism) so they have yet another reason to socialize or sovietize the economy.

They're idiots. They sit around Starbucks in their Nikes typing on their Apples about how Big EEvul Corporations are ripping people off.

yes and of course Walmart is the focus of evil for them....and when forced for a reason to explain why it is evil they say, monoply power because as liberals they lack the IQ to know that monopoly leads to high prices not WalMart low low prices.

Voting IQ tests as required by the Constitution would eliminate all liberals!!

Are you in favor of voting IQ tests or are there some in the constitution you say?

 

[Toronado3800]

Please define "near monopoly." Something either is a monopoly or it isn't.
You have about zero credibility at this point. I'd quit while I was behind.

Rabbi, what do you mean you want me to define "near monopoly" for you. It just does not seem that difficult to understand.....how about "almost a monopoly"? I just don't get what you need.

A monopoly is a situation with one provider in a given market. Anything that is not that is not a monopoly. Period.
You just don't get it, period.

Got it. You do not believe any situation can nearly be a monopoly. My world is more shades of grey than black and white but hey, I understand your point even if I disagree.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

They're idiots. They sit around Starbucks in their Nikes typing on their Apples about how Big EEvul Corporations are ripping people off.

yes and of course Walmart is the focus of evil for them....and when forced for a reason to explain why it is evil they say, monoply power because as liberals they lack the IQ to know that monopoly leads to high prices not WalMart low low prices.

Voting IQ tests as required by the Constitution would eliminate all liberals!!

Are you in favor of voting IQ tests or are there some in the constitution you say?

english please

 

[Rshermr]

So Rabbi, needing to prove his ignorance, says:

Someone who obviously flunked out of 9th grade should not be lecturing anyone.

Actually, you are wrong again. Which is pretty normal I have an MBA, and undergraduate degree in economics. But, what the hell. If I had, I would still be light years ahead of you in knowledge.

A monopoly is a situation marked by one seller or provider in any market.

Well, yes, that would be a pure monopoly. However, many economists refer to companies that have substantial economic power monopolies. Do a google search, if you are capable.

There are limited examples of monopolies in this country, virtually all of them the result of government action. E.g. the Post Office for 1st class mail.

First class mail is simply package delivery that will deliver a product in 2 to 3 days in the US. UPS, FedEx and others have such delivery. But if you want to say it is a monopoly, be my guest. Like all countries, we have a gov controlled mail system. BUT, your problem with this less than profound statement is that any company can set up the same service as 1st class mail. The service itself is not a monopoly at all.
And you are talking about something quite different. Regulated monopolies, which are monopolies that are regulated bh the federal gov (Just clarifying so you don't have to come back with another stupid question or statement) are what are supposed to exist when a company becomes a monopoly or has significant monopoly power, according to nearly all economist from the inception of the concept of capitalism.

Since there are many many employers, including potentially every individual as self-employed, there cannot be a monopoly of employers.

Ah, but you are redefining monopoly power. And if they heard you, economists are laughing their but off at you.

Let me give you an example. I know a person who worked at McDonnald Douglas, running really complex machine tools. Had been doing so for years and years. MD was purchased by Boeing. Now, there was more than one aerospase manufacturer even after the merger. But my friend had two choices, stay and do something different, or move to Seattle and try to find an opening there. By your definition, that is not monopoly. But it had a major impact on his ability to earn. His annual pay was decreased substantially.

So, to you, this was not monopoly. He could move. He could change professions. But you miss, or should I say choose to ignore, the point entirely. The monopoly power of Boeing cause he and many others to loose earning power.

You lose. Once more, with feeling. You are one pitifully uninformed son of a bitch.

Again, I assume you must be talking about yourself. You see, my poor ignorant con tool, no economist would other than laugh at your statements. Which is why I suspect you have NO links to proof of your statements. Back to your pablum, now me poor ignorant con tool.

 

[Rshermr]

Quick. There it is again. Ed and Rabbi patting each other on the backs and talking smart. Not often you get to see such profundity. Why. I bet their IQ must be around 110. Combined.

 

[The Rabbi]

Quick. There it is again. Ed and Rabbi patting each other on the backs and talking smart. Not often you get to see such profundity. Why. I bet their IQ must be around 110. Combined.

You've already used that line.
If you want a real good punch line post again how you have a degree in Econ and an MBA. That was a knee-slapper.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Quick. There it is again. Ed and Rabbi patting each other on the backs and talking smart. Not often you get to see such profundity. Why. I bet their IQ must be around 110. Combined.

a name calling child like liberal who is afraid to say exactly why conservatism is mistaken. A liberal will rely on a Nazi like feeling and so have no need whatsoever to say exactly why something makes sense or not.

 

[The Rabbi]

Quick. There it is again. Ed and Rabbi patting each other on the backs and talking smart. Not often you get to see such profundity. Why. I bet their IQ must be around 110. Combined.

a name calling child like liberal who is afraid to say exactly why conservatism is mistaken. A liberal will rely on a Nazi like feeling and so have no need whatsoever to say exactly why something makes sense or not.

He's a total 'tard. Everything he knows is wrong. And when called on it he changes the subject and/or name calls.
Not. Worth. It.