--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 10:39 AM 3/7/2004 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote: > >> Nevertheless, if by "loyalty" you mean keeping their goods and services > >> more expensive than those of their competitors, I think that it is very > >> unreasonable to expect that of anybody. > > > >Exactly. That's one of the reasons why an unrestricted free market is an > >unhealthy system, IMO. We value loyalty but the free market doesn't. > > But I would argue that the converse is just as unhealthy. > > As an economist, I believe in looking for ways to increase efficiency in an > economy. With greater efficiency more goods and services are produced. > To do this, it will periodically be necessary to fire workers from > inefficient jobs. Ideally, they can eventually be redeployed in more > efficient sectors of the economy. > > Neverthless, the point remains that I have never seen an economic model > whereby prosperity is achieved by making goods and services *more* > expensive. To the extent that "loyalty" is a force keeping goods and > service *more expensive* then "loyalty" is a force acting against our > prosperity. > > Indeed, in general, "loyalty", by which I mean actions which keep goods and > services more expensive, has almost always been found to be unsustainable. > Today, the difference between "loyalty" and pursuing cheaper prices may > be small.... but tomorrow that difference will only widen, and eventually > that gap will widen to the point where "loyalty" will be nearly impossible > to maintain, and the consequences will be much more severe.
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
