Bitcoin Forum
April 23, 2024, 10:17:57 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Capitalism and immorality  (Read 10628 times)
Leina
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 152
Merit: 100


View Profile
June 14, 2014, 06:35:42 PM
 #141

So it's ethical to overcharge for a lamp, but unethical to overcharge for healthcare?

What is your definition of over charging?

Buyers don't buy based on price alone. You need to take trust, after sales service into account.
Let me rephrase the question. Is it ethical to overcharge for a lamp, but unethical to overcharge for healthcare?

The term "overcharging" cannot be easily defined. It is fair to allow people to make a profit off of the time and capital they invest in their business.

The only true way to "overcharge" someone for something is to charge a price that is above the market rate, but if you charged this much then you would not be able to sell your product/service.

What planet are you from that doesn't have salesmen?


Buyer also bear responsibility for buying over price cap for not doing their own homework.

Same reasoning for choosing the right doctor to trust and the right care provider.

With internet, people can find out which doctor is scum bag very fast if they do their homework.
"Bitcoin: mining our own business since 2009" -- Pieter Wuille
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1006

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
June 15, 2014, 02:38:29 AM
 #142

So it's ethical to overcharge for a lamp, but unethical to overcharge for healthcare?

What is your definition of over charging?

Buyers don't buy based on price alone. You need to take trust, after sales service into account.
Let me rephrase the question. Is it ethical to overcharge for a lamp, but unethical to overcharge for healthcare?

The term "overcharging" cannot be easily defined. It is fair to allow people to make a profit off of the time and capital they invest in their business.

The only true way to "overcharge" someone for something is to charge a price that is above the market rate, but if you charged this much then you would not be able to sell your product/service.

What planet are you from that doesn't have salesmen?


Buyer also bear responsibility for buying over price cap for not doing their own homework.

Same reasoning for choosing the right doctor to trust and the right care provider.

With internet, people can find out which doctor is scum bag very fast if they do their homework.

The average joe doesn't have the financial resources to vet a medical institution and their billing/insurance practices and policies. They often don't have time for a second opinion if they are told their appendix burst. They are at the mercy of a predatorial medical/industrial complex. You average doctor also cannot compete with those medical institutions to fight the system if they ever hope to repay their enormous student debt. Doctors get sucked into the system. Nowadays a lot of good doctors are quitting their beloved profession because of the immoral business practice forced upon them by hospital administrators and insurance companies.

Quote
With internet, people can find out which doctor is scum bag very fast if they do their homework.
Oh, that's just adorable naivete.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
Erdogan
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512
Merit: 1005



View Profile
June 15, 2014, 11:02:57 AM
 #143

So it's ethical to overcharge for a lamp, but unethical to overcharge for healthcare?

What is your definition of over charging?

Buyers don't buy based on price alone. You need to take trust, after sales service into account.
Let me rephrase the question. Is it ethical to overcharge for a lamp, but unethical to overcharge for healthcare?

The term "overcharging" cannot be easily defined. It is fair to allow people to make a profit off of the time and capital they invest in their business.

The only true way to "overcharge" someone for something is to charge a price that is above the market rate, but if you charged this much then you would not be able to sell your product/service.

What planet are you from that doesn't have salesmen?


Buyer also bear responsibility for buying over price cap for not doing their own homework.

Same reasoning for choosing the right doctor to trust and the right care provider.

With internet, people can find out which doctor is scum bag very fast if they do their homework.

The average joe doesn't have the financial resources to vet a medical institution and their billing/insurance practices and policies. They often don't have time for a second opinion if they are told their appendix burst. They are at the mercy of a predatorial medical/industrial complex. You average doctor also cannot compete with those medical institutions to fight the system if they ever hope to repay their enormous student debt. Doctors get sucked into the system. Nowadays a lot of good doctors are quitting their beloved profession because of the immoral business practice forced upon them by hospital administrators and insurance companies.

Quote
With internet, people can find out which doctor is scum bag very fast if they do their homework.
Oh, that's just adorable naivete.

So it makes sense to subcontract that function to those who neurish the predatorial medical/industrial complex?
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1006

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
June 15, 2014, 12:04:25 PM
 #144

So it's ethical to overcharge for a lamp, but unethical to overcharge for healthcare?

What is your definition of over charging?

Buyers don't buy based on price alone. You need to take trust, after sales service into account.
Let me rephrase the question. Is it ethical to overcharge for a lamp, but unethical to overcharge for healthcare?

The term "overcharging" cannot be easily defined. It is fair to allow people to make a profit off of the time and capital they invest in their business.

The only true way to "overcharge" someone for something is to charge a price that is above the market rate, but if you charged this much then you would not be able to sell your product/service.

What planet are you from that doesn't have salesmen?


Buyer also bear responsibility for buying over price cap for not doing their own homework.

Same reasoning for choosing the right doctor to trust and the right care provider.

With internet, people can find out which doctor is scum bag very fast if they do their homework.

The average joe doesn't have the financial resources to vet a medical institution and their billing/insurance practices and policies. They often don't have time for a second opinion if they are told their appendix burst. They are at the mercy of a predatorial medical/industrial complex. You average doctor also cannot compete with those medical institutions to fight the system if they ever hope to repay their enormous student debt. Doctors get sucked into the system. Nowadays a lot of good doctors are quitting their beloved profession because of the immoral business practice forced upon them by hospital administrators and insurance companies.

Quote
With internet, people can find out which doctor is scum bag very fast if they do their homework.
Oh, that's just adorable naivete.

So it makes sense to subcontract that function to those who neurish the predatorial medical/industrial complex?


That's what the term means. It's an unavoidable monopoly. You can always go to a socialist country instead if you can get a passport in time before you die.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
Justine
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 169
Merit: 100


View Profile
June 15, 2014, 05:45:08 PM
 #145

That's what the term means. It's an unavoidable monopoly. You can always go to a socialist country instead if you can get a passport in time before you die.


Monopoly is not unavoidable. If this is the case, counties and dynasty will last forever rather than fade into history and being replaced by a better managed country/dynasty.
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1006

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
June 15, 2014, 05:54:00 PM
 #146

That's what the term means. It's an unavoidable monopoly. You can always go to a socialist country instead if you can get a passport in time before you die.


Monopoly is not unavoidable. If this is the case, counties and dynasty will last forever rather than fade into history and being replaced by a better managed country/dynasty.

Very true. Many monopolies only last a few normal human lifetimes. I'm glad your immortality is working out for you.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
ShakyhandsBTCer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 250


It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin


View Profile
June 15, 2014, 07:39:15 PM
 #147

That's what the term means. It's an unavoidable monopoly. You can always go to a socialist country instead if you can get a passport in time before you die.


Monopoly is not unavoidable. If this is the case, counties and dynasty will last forever rather than fade into history and being replaced by a better managed country/dynasty.

Very true. Many monopolies only last a few normal human lifetimes. I'm glad your immortality is working out for you.

Monopolies, like empires will fall when they get too cocky
leezay
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 363
Merit: 100


SWISSREALCOIN - FIRST REAL ESTATE CRYPTO TOKEN


View Profile
June 15, 2014, 09:02:22 PM
 #148

That's what the term means. It's an unavoidable monopoly. You can always go to a socialist country instead if you can get a passport in time before you die.


Monopoly is not unavoidable. If this is the case, counties and dynasty will last forever rather than fade into history and being replaced by a better managed country/dynasty.

Very true. Many monopolies only last a few normal human lifetimes. I'm glad your immortality is working out for you.

Technology advancement speed up the process of downfall.


cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1006

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
June 15, 2014, 11:14:34 PM
 #149

That's what the term means. It's an unavoidable monopoly. You can always go to a socialist country instead if you can get a passport in time before you die.


Monopoly is not unavoidable. If this is the case, counties and dynasty will last forever rather than fade into history and being replaced by a better managed country/dynasty.

Very true. Many monopolies only last a few normal human lifetimes. I'm glad your immortality is working out for you.

Technology advancement speed up the process of downfall.


Technology progress creates monopolies. Look at mining pools. The superior efficiencies give the most payout, that's how monopolies are born. Oil companies may change names, but the same families are running the companies for many decades. Companies like TI and IBM own so many patents, they monopolize technology development. Revolution speeds up the process of downfall, but we're a long way from that.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
kerafym
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224
Merit: 100


THE GAME OF CHANCE. CHANGED.


View Profile
June 29, 2014, 02:17:49 AM
 #150

That's what the term means. It's an unavoidable monopoly. You can always go to a socialist country instead if you can get a passport in time before you die.


Monopoly is not unavoidable. If this is the case, counties and dynasty will last forever rather than fade into history and being replaced by a better managed country/dynasty.

Very true. Many monopolies only last a few normal human lifetimes. I'm glad your immortality is working out for you.

Technology advancement speed up the process of downfall.


Technology progress creates monopolies. Look at mining pools. The superior efficiencies give the most payout, that's how monopolies are born. Oil companies may change names, but the same families are running the companies for many decades. Companies like TI and IBM own so many patents, they monopolize technology development. Revolution speeds up the process of downfall, but we're a long way from that.

Monopoly is fine if the company is providing an efficient and superior service.

        S P 8 D E        ♠       THE GAME OF CHANCE. CHANGED.       ♠         READ WHITEPAPER       
    TOKENS        A DECENTRALIZED PLATFORM FOR GAMING DAPPS        ROADMAP   
ANN THREAD       FACEBOOK       TWITTER       TELEGRAM       YOUTUBE       MEDIUM       REDDIT
Ron~Popeil
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 250



View Profile
June 29, 2014, 05:24:36 AM
 #151

That's what the term means. It's an unavoidable monopoly. You can always go to a socialist country instead if you can get a passport in time before you die.


Monopoly is not unavoidable. If this is the case, counties and dynasty will last forever rather than fade into history and being replaced by a better managed country/dynasty.

Very true. Many monopolies only last a few normal human lifetimes. I'm glad your immortality is working out for you.

Technology advancement speed up the process of downfall.


Technology progress creates monopolies. Look at mining pools. The superior efficiencies give the most payout, that's how monopolies are born. Oil companies may change names, but the same families are running the companies for many decades. Companies like TI and IBM own so many patents, they monopolize technology development. Revolution speeds up the process of downfall, but we're a long way from that.

Monopoly is fine if the company is providing an efficient and superior service.


An enforced monopoly would be a problem. With an open market the monopolistic entity would have to provide a great product at a fair price to avoid other companies entering the market and successfully competing. The problem we have now is that our governments support large oligopolies.

efreeti
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 104


View Profile
June 29, 2014, 01:41:55 PM
 #152

That's what the term means. It's an unavoidable monopoly. You can always go to a socialist country instead if you can get a passport in time before you die.


Monopoly is not unavoidable. If this is the case, counties and dynasty will last forever rather than fade into history and being replaced by a better managed country/dynasty.

Very true. Many monopolies only last a few normal human lifetimes. I'm glad your immortality is working out for you.

Technology advancement speed up the process of downfall.


Technology progress creates monopolies. Look at mining pools. The superior efficiencies give the most payout, that's how monopolies are born. Oil companies may change names, but the same families are running the companies for many decades. Companies like TI and IBM own so many patents, they monopolize technology development. Revolution speeds up the process of downfall, but we're a long way from that.

Monopoly is fine if the company is providing an efficient and superior service.


An enforced monopoly would be a problem. With an open market the monopolistic entity would have to provide a great product at a fair price to avoid other companies entering the market and successfully competing. The problem we have now is that our governments support large oligopolies.

And the governments supporting the oligopolies are slowly being price out of the market.
DannyElfman
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 250



View Profile
June 29, 2014, 04:00:37 PM
 #153

That's what the term means. It's an unavoidable monopoly. You can always go to a socialist country instead if you can get a passport in time before you die.


Monopoly is not unavoidable. If this is the case, counties and dynasty will last forever rather than fade into history and being replaced by a better managed country/dynasty.

Very true. Many monopolies only last a few normal human lifetimes. I'm glad your immortality is working out for you.

Technology advancement speed up the process of downfall.


Technology progress creates monopolies. Look at mining pools. The superior efficiencies give the most payout, that's how monopolies are born. Oil companies may change names, but the same families are running the companies for many decades. Companies like TI and IBM own so many patents, they monopolize technology development. Revolution speeds up the process of downfall, but we're a long way from that.

Monopoly is fine if the company is providing an efficient and superior service.

If you have a monopoly then you do not have incentives to provide "superior service" as you do not have any real competition

This spot for rent.
hodap
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 306
Merit: 102


View Profile
June 30, 2014, 12:22:16 AM
 #154

If you have a monopoly then you do not have incentives to provide "superior service" as you do not have any real competition


Incentive is hold on to what you have and keep other from starting a business to compete with you.
ShakyhandsBTCer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 250


It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin


View Profile
June 30, 2014, 12:26:32 AM
 #155

If you have a monopoly then you do not have incentives to provide "superior service" as you do not have any real competition
Incentive is hold on to what you have and keep other from starting a business to compete with you.
Monopolies have enough control of the market so other businesses cannot easily compete.
Alex_green
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 19
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 30, 2014, 06:36:45 PM
 #156

Capitalism itself has no moral standpoint...
cosmicapex
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 87
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 30, 2014, 06:43:20 PM
 #157

Capitalism itself has no moral standpoint...

Yeah, this.  How can freedom to compete in an open market, where you're not allowed to hurt people and steal people's stuff, be immoral?
Marlo Stanfield
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 280



View Profile
June 30, 2014, 07:05:39 PM
 #158

That's what the term means. It's an unavoidable monopoly. You can always go to a socialist country instead if you can get a passport in time before you die.


Monopoly is not unavoidable. If this is the case, counties and dynasty will last forever rather than fade into history and being replaced by a better managed country/dynasty.

Very true. Many monopolies only last a few normal human lifetimes. I'm glad your immortality is working out for you.

Technology advancement speed up the process of downfall.


Technology progress creates monopolies. Look at mining pools. The superior efficiencies give the most payout, that's how monopolies are born. Oil companies may change names, but the same families are running the companies for many decades. Companies like TI and IBM own so many patents, they monopolize technology development. Revolution speeds up the process of downfall, but we're a long way from that.

Monopoly is fine if the company is providing an efficient and superior service.


Well the main problem lies with the fact that when there is an actual monopoly the incentive to continue to provide an efficient and superior service fades away. You can't exactly have superior service if there's no longer anything else to compare it to. And since there is no longer an alternative efficiency becomes irrelevant for the monopoly.
cosmicapex
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 87
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 30, 2014, 07:16:24 PM
 #159

That's what the term means. It's an unavoidable monopoly. You can always go to a socialist country instead if you can get a passport in time before you die.


Monopoly is not unavoidable. If this is the case, counties and dynasty will last forever rather than fade into history and being replaced by a better managed country/dynasty.

Very true. Many monopolies only last a few normal human lifetimes. I'm glad your immortality is working out for you.

Technology advancement speed up the process of downfall.


Technology progress creates monopolies. Look at mining pools. The superior efficiencies give the most payout, that's how monopolies are born. Oil companies may change names, but the same families are running the companies for many decades. Companies like TI and IBM own so many patents, they monopolize technology development. Revolution speeds up the process of downfall, but we're a long way from that.

Monopoly is fine if the company is providing an efficient and superior service.


Well the main problem lies with the fact that when there is an actual monopoly the incentive to continue to provide an efficient and superior service fades away. You can't exactly have superior service if there's no longer anything else to compare it to. And since there is no longer an alternative efficiency becomes irrelevant for the monopoly.

When there's no longer an efficient monopoly, more efficient players should enter the market.
Marlo Stanfield
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 280



View Profile
June 30, 2014, 08:32:02 PM
 #160

That's what the term means. It's an unavoidable monopoly. You can always go to a socialist country instead if you can get a passport in time before you die.


Monopoly is not unavoidable. If this is the case, counties and dynasty will last forever rather than fade into history and being replaced by a better managed country/dynasty.

Very true. Many monopolies only last a few normal human lifetimes. I'm glad your immortality is working out for you.

Technology advancement speed up the process of downfall.


Technology progress creates monopolies. Look at mining pools. The superior efficiencies give the most payout, that's how monopolies are born. Oil companies may change names, but the same families are running the companies for many decades. Companies like TI and IBM own so many patents, they monopolize technology development. Revolution speeds up the process of downfall, but we're a long way from that.

Monopoly is fine if the company is providing an efficient and superior service.


Well the main problem lies with the fact that when there is an actual monopoly the incentive to continue to provide an efficient and superior service fades away. You can't exactly have superior service if there's no longer anything else to compare it to. And since there is no longer an alternative efficiency becomes irrelevant for the monopoly.

When there's no longer an efficient monopoly, more efficient players should enter the market.

The problem comes when the monopoly takes steps to block or create barriers to entry that make entering the market difficult.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!