>No, it doesn't. If you profit from my excellent goods, and indeed many
>others do also, I will earn a profit from my service to you consumers.
>
>When a trade takes place, both sides are better off (have made a profit)
or
>they wouldn't have traded.
Well Ed, this thread is a little old now and others have posted their
opinions. I guess in idealistic Adam Smith sense of the world, you may be
right. But the question is the profit. Charles has been posting a lot re
Microsoft lately and the gripe with Bill Gates is that through a
manipulation of the capitalistic system he is making an inordinate profit
and yet I find I have to buy his operating system to be effective in this
communication. Now, I know you could argue that I could buy a Mac or use
OS2 and there is some truth in that but to exercise that freedom, I have to
be willing to put up with their prices and the limitations or benefits of
there product. I do not feel I am better off if I pay too much for a
product because the seller has me over a barrel.
As all sellers are out to maximize their profit, the marketplace through
competition is supposed to keep that within reason. However in many
situations from renting my suite to buying an operating system, the market
doesn't protect me without also inconveniencing me. This compounding of
profit maximization through all the component parts and services in a
product produces a product that has costs and profit - I would argue excess
profit in every product. Much like the Canadian Goods and Service Tax,
taxes every item 7% through all of it's transactions which means the end
purchaser pays much more than just 7%.
Respectfully,
Thomas Lunde
