• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Harris Called Out For Being A Communist

Pogo

Well-Known Member
No the trick there is to make a new formulation, discontinue the old one and ride the new patent for another 20 years.
I've not yet seen any conservative answer to big business ripping off consumers because of their ability to set prices because there is little or no competition. For example, and it's a classic, the price of insulin.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
Right because ths govt allows for only one provider.
How many competitors are going to run water lines to all the houses? That's absurd.

With power lines, rooftop solar is a direct competitor. In my area, PG&E has a competitor for generation - again running multiple power lines to houses is an absurd statement.

There is also no competition for fire and police protection. If you think there should be, name ONE city or county that has such competition.

Hint: Look up "natural monopoly" and read what it says.
 

Yerda

Veteran Member
That's the point. None. If there was youd be paying lower prices for water and other utilities but low intelligence leftists think govt have to control prices.
Utilities are typically what economists natural monopolies. There are huge barriers to enter these markets meaning heavy state involvement is required for the service to exists. The market magic that brings down costs for consumers only works where it is easy to enter the market and compete.
 

Ignatius A

Well-Known Member
Utilities are typically what economists natural monopolies. There are huge barriers to enter these markets meaning heavy state involvement is required for the service to exists. The market magic that brings down costs for consumers only works where it is easy to enter the market and compete.
Isnt that what I said? Govt control of business is communism.
 

Ignatius A

Well-Known Member
Still, one shouldn't conflate "communism" & "socialism".
You don't want to sound like Donald Jessica Trump.
No of course not because cancer of the liver is so much better than cancer of the lungs.
You don't want to sound like Brandon, the kamal or the tampon
 

Yerda

Veteran Member
Isnt that what I said?
I don't think so.

Reading back through the comments you seemed to making a point about lack of choice in utilities without understanding why there is no choice and why markets tend toward monopoly in industries like that (or why active government participation is required most of the time).

Govt control of business is communism.
But every government sets the conditions under which businesses can operate. Do you mean when all production is owned or controlled by the government like in the Soviet Union?

That's coming
You really think that the group of people owned by Wall Street, with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of stocks, reliance on multinational banks, lobbysists and PACs controlled by billioniares are going to bring about a system that would make their lives work worthless?

Does that not sound positively bananas to you?
 

Clizby Wampuscat

Well-Known Member
What do you think Trump intends to do when he says he will ask every agency in the government to do what they can to lower prices? No comment? Run away?
Can you answer my question? Trump's plan to reduce prices is to reduce energy costs. He has said this many times. I have never heard him say he will dictate prices to anyone.
 

Ignatius A

Well-Known Member
I don't think so.

Reading back through the comments you seemed to making a point about lack of choice in utilities without understanding why there is no choice and why markets tend toward monopoly in industries like that (or why active government participation is required most of the time).


But every government sets the conditions under which businesses can operate. Do you mean when all production is owned or controlled by the government like in the Soviet Union?


You really think that the group of people owned by Wall Street, with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of stocks, reliance on multinational banks, lobbysists and PACs controlled by billioniares are going to bring about a system that would make their lives work worthless?

Does that not sound positively bananas to you?
Oh brother. I literally said why there was no choice. It never fails
 

Ignatius A

Well-Known Member
If he wanted to reduce energy costs, he would be pushing wind and solar which are cheaper than fossil fuels at this point.
And a hand saw is cheaper than a circular saw. Its cheaper because it's less efficient. I wouldnt want to build a house with just a hand saw. Developing countries also don't want to build their economies on wind and solar power and frankly to do so would be the end of their economic development.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
And a hand saw is cheaper than a circular saw. Its cheaper because it's less efficient. I wouldnt want to build a house with just a hand saw. Developing countries also don't want to build their economies on wind and solar power and frankly to do so would be the end of their economic development.

How do you know that?
I mean, you might be right, but I have so far not given it much tought or looked into it. You seem to have done so, so how do you know it?
 

Pogo

Well-Known Member
And a hand saw is cheaper than a circular saw. Its cheaper because it's less efficient. I wouldnt want to build a house with just a hand saw. Developing countries also don't want to build their economies on wind and solar power and frankly to do so would be the end of their economic development.
800px-Electricity_costs_in_dollars_according_to_data_from_Lazard.png


This is 2024 not 1974 and we do have a greenhouse gas problem.
 
Top