Tom Lunde quoted me but ascribed it to Ed (see below):
His Microsoft example doesn't alter the fact that we buy Gates' products
because we are better off. Surely we won't pay money to be worse off.
That's silly.
So that isn't an issue.
However, perhaps we feel we should be better off at less cost. So, why can
Gates get so much from us for his products.
The answer is the patent law, which gives him the privilege of extracting
the extra bucks.
The patent is a privilege, which you'll remember is a private law ('privi'
'lege'). a law is supposed to apply to everyone equally. A privilege takes
from one and gives to another.
When Windows is wanted by the public, the price goes up. If the market
worked properly, the higher price would attract the competition. But, there
isn't any, because the patent law won't allow it.
Now, there is a something to attack, if you have the stomach for it. But, I
fear that the network of privileges which raise prices, hurt consumers and
keep people from working is too tough a target.
Let's flail away at capitalism - whatever that is - and chase after the
sillies like overpopulation and global warming.
Bah! Humbug!
Harry
-------------------------------------------------------
>>HARRY: 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
--------------------------------------------------
