 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
I checked the link posted and found what looks like another 'economists' viewpoint on what appears to be a 'theory' based upon a pricing scheme, in general usage, that limits price to: That which a thing will bring. In other words the price is determined by how much a buyer is willing to pay for something.
The principle of adjusting price to the buyers willingness to pay more costs than the costs involved in producing the product is called nothing by the promoters of that principle to my knowledge. I've asked.
To the critics of that economic 'theory' that utilizes the power to transfer costs from the producer to the buyer do label that as a principle.
The critics call that unlimited price principle as:
The value principle.
Price is set to the value determined by the buyer or buyers trying to get the last one of a scarce item.
I call it scarcenomics or the scum bag theory of value.
I'm a new age critic. The old age critics like Josiah Warren, Stephen Pearl Andrews, perhaps Zeno, Aristotle, and certainly W.B. Greene - Those guys; they criticized the scum bag theory of value and scarcenomics too. Those guys explained in detail and conducted controlled experiments successfully, and, found numerous sources of historical references confirming a principle or two that actually does work to promote peaceful economic prosperity.
So the thing is:
Two 'theories' exist.
One is proven to work.
One is based upon natural law and basic moral principles.
One is simple and easy to understand and can be explained fully in a small volume or pamphlet.
The other is highly complex and bound upon undeniable invasive aggressive use of violence and fraud.
One is called Equitable Commerce.
The other is called nothing ever certainly not by the promoters of it.
One points out exactly where the other goes wrong and why it is wrong.
The other completely avoids any discussion on principle.
What is done, on principle, is the construction of a fabricated bogey man called "The Labor Theory of Value" which only exists in the minds of invasive aggressive promoters of the other nameless, faceless, and phantom 'Scum Bag Theory of Value" that is: Scarcenomics.
I'll Google that term:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=scarcenomics
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=scarcenomics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=scarcenomics
Scarce - Economics
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=scarce
scarce ( P ) Pronunciation Key (skârs)
adj. scarc·er, scarc·est
1. Insufficient to meet a demand or requirement; short in supply: Fresh vegetables were scarce during the drought.
2. Hard to find; absent or rare: Steel pennies are scarce now except in coin shops.
ec·o·nom·ics ( P ) Pronunciation Key ( k -n m ks, k -)
n.
1. (used with a sing. verb) The social science that deals with the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services and with the theory and management of economies or economic systems.
2. (used with a sing. or pl. verb) Economic matters, especially relevant financial considerations: “Economics are slowly killing the family farm” (Christian Science Monitor).
Here is then: The first usage of the term Scarceconomics:
Definition:
1. The theory whereby the haves manage to program the have nots into thinking there is a need to continue the flow of power; for their own good from them, the have nots, to the theorists of Scarceconomics.
2. A nebulous reincarnation of the devil in human form.
3. A phantom 'theory' having no actual professors of the theory only 'bogey' men who are scum bags responsible for not saving and are guilty of a general lack of economic knowledge despite their labors to produce just about everything not yet fully automated.
4. A nebulous phantom 'theory' that proposes to limit the supply of products below common sense and thereby accelerate the flow of power from the consumers to the producers of the nebulous phantom scum bag theory.
Also known as Scarceonomics:
Not yet googling:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=scarceonomics
Not yet defined by the general population:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=scarceonomics
Scarceonomics defined by a discoverer of scarceonomics:
1. An ill conceived short term practice of calculating sales volume in the effort to maximize the flow of power from the consumer to the producer of scarceonomics.
2. Predatory commerce designed to liquidate individual power and move that liquidated power to a central location for the purpose of utilizing that method to accelerate the flow of power from the target group of individuals to the collection agency.
3. Destructive power utilized to accumulate centralized destructive power and then accelerate the flow of power from the many to the few.
4. Destructive power used to produce ever greater supplies of destructive power wielded by the producers of scarceonomics.
5. The theory of value that proposes to limit knowledge of economics and utilize the scarcity of knowledge to a competitive advantage in commerce.
6. The promotion of falsehood for purposes of fraud.
7. A political and economic fraud that was once the bane of mankind.
8. Ancient history during a past age when productive capacity depended greatly on human labor and strict discipline.
I've got much more to discuss on this topic if a promoter of their favorite economic theory is willing to defend their own theories concerning economics.
What I cannot do is defend some nebulous myth such as "The Labor Theory of Value" since that Straw Man is a hoax and a construction of Scarceonomic or Scarceconomic theorists who may have once roamed the planet but their breed have apparently become extinct.
I can try to submit my new term to Wikipedia to see if that historical curiosity catches on.
Try a search for Power-Independence.
Google measures something. Some might call it utility.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Power-Independence
Results 1 - 10 of about 21,000 for Power-Independence. (0.30 seconds)
Last edited on Wed May 24th, 2006 12:42 pm by Joe Kelley