Supreme Court okays manufacturer price fixing

Okay, that's a bit different from "stunning display of ignorance." I disagree that it is impossible, just improbable.

Posted by Storm:

That's not what a civilized man would say.

I think that where price collusion is practical, it would be attractive. Why compete when one can effectuate a practical monopoly?

Even the Supreme Court's decision itself does not foreclose the showing of violation if sufficient market power is shown. It assumes that market power enough to dominate a market does not exist, but this assumption, as I said, is just that -- assumed. The decision has the effect of shifting the burden of proof on the question of whether the defendants have enough market power to limit competition by any means.

On the issue of supply elasticity, see: http://www.investopedia.com/university/economics/economics4.asp

That's not so much a defense of your position as an attack on the idea of big government, but the question isn't about big government. It's about big business.

Profit isn't enough of an incentive? The wholesale price could be high without affecting the retailers' profit margin. Assuming that the demand is high and the supply is inelastic. The manufacturer requires that the retailer sell at a price that is essentially the manufacturer's cost, plus its profit margin, plus a substantial profit margin for its authorized retailers. Why wouldn't the retailers want to carry the product? After all, the possibility of being undercut by competitive discounter is gone with this new decision.

Further, note that many manufacturers (in the broadest sense) will not wish to sell direct to the consumer; they do not want the responsibility. Still further, many products (e.g., perishables) are impractical to sell direct to the consumer.

A civilized man doesn't enslave his fellow men to ensure his own survival.

All of civilization is enslavement. To the individual, to the state, to the corporation.

We are social creatures, and with the exception of those of us who are crafty enough to survive completely withdrawn and hidden from society's eye, we are each other's slave.

Just see what happens when you don't pay your taxes.

Then call me a barbarian.

Don't conflate "society" with "government."

The two are not synonymous.

People can live and thrive without doing it at other people's expense.

Because the corollary to that is: slavery is morally acceptable if the slaveowner's survival is at stake.

The real corollary is that the slaveowner has no superior right of survival and thus cannot rightfully insist on his own survival over those of anyone else who at least theoretically could be similarly situated.

On unions:

I've never been comfortable with the idea of a labor union. I'll be perfectly honest; most employers should never have to deal with one.

But when the superintendent of the factory comes down and asks the foreman which is his best, most hard-working employee, only to fire him to intimidate the rest of the workers into working harder, I swallow whatever doubts I have and throw my lot in with my fellow workers. (This happened, in a General Motors factory, post labor organization in the 1960s)

There's no justifiable reason any group of workers should have to resort to industrial actions against their employers. It actively hurts them, as their employer loses market share and thus capital to pay wages.

But yet we are continually forced to do so as the alternative is self-destruction and immolation.

This simply legalizes the practice that Bose has been using for years with its retailers. You simply don't put Bose stuff on sale without their express approval. Anyone who did would find themselves out of the Bose business. They've always done it that way and now it's legal!

The result is self-destruction and immolation.

But survival isn't at issue with slaves. The issue is whether they live as free men or live as servants.

Isn't life grand?

A title we should all strive towards.

In any sort of representative democracy, absolutely they are. Hell, you could argue that by allowing it to exist, society is complicit in any sort of government, democratic or not.

People are evil. They will congregate and conspire on the most basic of levels to gain an advantage over each other. It is our nature.

The only way we can survive free from one another's tyranny is to go into exile and hide from the rest of the world.

Hence, democracy sucks.

Speak for yourself.

Or behave like adults by minding our own business and keeping our hands to ourselves.

Which is exactly what democracy hates.

I don't know what we're arguing about anymore, I think we basically agree with each other.

Except that you have some faith in people, and I have none.