At 05:01 PM 7/17/01 +1200 K.Feete wrote:
>At any rate... there are a couple of flaws with the entire "free market
>environmentalism" approach. First, it assumes that the good of the
>company is the good of the world, or perhapst that the company is
>considering the long term whenever they make a decision, which, sadly, is
>not true.
First off, it *is* true that what is bad for the world is bad for companies.
Secondly, given that something like 80% of the world's population that is
above the poverty line draws their quality of life from companies - I think
that there is a strong correlation that what is good for companies is good
for the world.
>Second, it assumes that the only way to manipulate the laws of
>supply and demand are to make prices artificially high (self-defeating)
>when in fact prices can equally easily be kept artificially low. Witness
>the price of gas in the US; witness the WalMart phenomenon. In fact,
>there are dozens of "resources" that are sold for something less than
>their "true" value. I had a lovely article by a noted economist on the
>subject in my (grrrr) textbook.
I have never seen a free-market environmentalist approach that made this
assumption.
More importantly, though, as far as artificially low prices go - yeah, we
can't have any of that now, can we. People might actually improve their
quality of life if there were low prices.
>The "efficient use of resources" is *not* a major concern of many big
>companies, as far as I have been able to tell, because big companies can
>afford to be less efficient. As long as the cost of resources is minor,
>well... who notices a little waste here and there? Who *can* notice in a
>company the size of, say, Coca-Cola?
Ever attend an MBA class? Apparently not, because if you had, you would
realize how silly this sounds.
If you want to talk about inefficiency - let's talk about governments.
Study after study has shown that the more closely companies are controlled
by governments, the more inefficient they become.
More importantly, exactly *how* do you think the Wal-Mart effect works?
Why is it that Wal-Mart can offer cheaper prices than *anybody* else?
It's called efficiency, Kat. Wal-Mart is the most efficient retailer in
human that's why they're successful. Nick Arnett recently brought up the
example of Enron. Why is Enron so big? Because they are the most
efficient energy brokerage in human history.
Kat, the very reason companies succeed is by being more efficient than
their competitors. If Coca-Cola wasn't efficient, then Pepsi would be
able to start selling a bottle of Pepsi for 10 cents less than a bottle of
Coke, and Coke would begin to wither.
>Let's say that there's a strike ("feedback" from the workers) and demands
>for better environmental measures; or, alternatively, that the neighbors
>start complaining about the mercury in the water. Does the company raise
>wages or reduce pollution? Hell no; they move across the border to
>Mexico.
Which, I might add, is also "feedback" from the workers. I'm all for the
right of worker's to strike for higher wages, but if somebody comes along
who is willing to do the job for less - then more power to him.
>Thank you. Do I sound *that* gloomy? You know, in my classes everybody
>thought I was anti-environmentalist....
He he hee...... You had me going to there for a moment......
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
We are products of the same history, reaching from Jerusalem and
Athens to Warsaw and Washington. We share more than an alliance.
We share a civilization. - George W. Bush, Warsaw, 06/15/01
