• 0 Posts
  • 32 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 5th, 2023

help-circle


  • The point being that if company A cuts their price to compete, and company B has an artificially inflated price

    Now we have company B with no sales, and are forced to match or beat their competitor

    Repeat until the price is fair. This breaks if both companies are co-ordinating with each other and forcing all other competition in line. But that’s a crime and would be regulated


  • Who are you paying? Other owners of the apartment? So they put in extra up front so they can rent to you? If so do you get to pay back their initial investment over time? If it’s non profit does that mean they can’t take anything in excess of what they paid or do they get payed x amount over the top?

    I’m fine with co-ops generally but when it comes to rentals I just don’t see how you’d make a “not for profit” rental But I mean if someone wants to set one up and prove me wrong that’d be cool. In theory nothing is stopping them


  • I’m not sure I’d agree that corporate ownership is necessarily bad If you want to rent an apartment because you don’t want to buy into a co-op then how do you go about this? Someone needs to own the apartment to rent to you Personally I don’t mind if that initial investment comes from a person or a corporation


  • The incentive here would be that a new company could sell far more fridges when reasonably prices compared to their competitors and take all of their market share

    But yes of course govt regulation is required when there is actual price fixing going on. I’d also like to know the alternative way of pricing goods/services from people with the alternate view














  • Actually quite interesting in the case of Ballmer as he was an employee compensated via stock rather than straight up cash

    You’d consider that an investment as he was investing his time to be a business manager while being compensated probably less in cash that would be normal for the position

    So as early Microsoft didn’t have the cash on hand, or didn’t want to give up that cash they could use elsewhere they gave equity as compensation

    How do you suggest we should remove this situation? Should we not allow compensation in the form of equity? Or should ownership of equity not exist generally?