Topic: No Taxation...Donation! (Read 4595 times)

Quote from: myrkul on April 27, 2013, 02:25:27 PM

You really think that one company will be able to dominate the market?

Yes, one or few large ones. Which isn't really that different scenario.

Why, then, are there so many different brands of Automobiles?

10 companies control 86.4% of market. And there is some government intervention involved.

I see. And in the US? How many car companies are available over here in the US? (And what about the other 13.6% of the market?)

One statistic I found was 68.7 for top 5 companies... So likely very similar.

Indeed. But you'll note that both of those numbers are greater than 1, and the percentages are less than 100%

Can Ford prevent you from buying a Honda?

Ekaros

hero member

Activity: 728

Merit: 500

Quote from: Mike Christ on April 27, 2013, 02:23:28 PM

You really think that one company will be able to dominate the market?

Yes, one or few large ones. Which isn't really that different scenario.

Why, then, are there so many different brands of Automobiles?

10 companies control 86.4% of market. And there is some government intervention involved.

I see. And in the US? How many car companies are available over here in the US? (And what about the other 13.6% of the market?)

One statistic I found was 68.7 for top 5 companies... So likely very similar.

I don't see the 13.6 lasting too long if companies had every possible means available, that include things like sabotage...

Ekaros

hero member

Activity: 728

Merit: 500

Why, then, are there so many different brands of Automobiles?

Or brands of icecream--and phone companies. Also, computer manufacturers Tongue

Pizza delivery services... Video game publishers... Bicycle makers...

Is there so many really? Stats from 2011 for Europe:
http://www.statista.com/statistics/12782/market-share-of-selected-car-maunfacturers-in-europe/

10 companies control 86.4% of market. And there is some government intervention involved.

There isn't really too many groups in automobile market.

Which system are you rooting for, btw? If not capitalism.

EDIT:
And true, if you go deeper into things in many fields there is worryingly small amount of big players...

I believe the best spot is in the middle. State providing most security services, some of basic infrastructure, education, social security and health care. Private industry is free to compete in these areas, but their operations are limited by sensible regulation. That is protection of nature and people and limiting the merges as such there isn't too big players.

Too far in either direction just end disaster for majority.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

You really think that one company will be able to dominate the market?

Yes, one or few large ones. Which isn't really that different scenario.

Why, then, are there so many different brands of Automobiles?

10 companies control 86.4% of market. And there is some government intervention involved.

I see. And in the US? How many car companies are available over here in the US? (And what about the other 13.6% of the market?)

Mike Christ

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1003

Why, then, are there so many different brands of Automobiles?

Or brands of icecream--and phone companies. Also, computer manufacturers Tongue

Pizza delivery services... Video game publishers... Bicycle makers...

Is there so many really? Stats from 2011 for Europe:
http://www.statista.com/statistics/12782/market-share-of-selected-car-maunfacturers-in-europe/

10 companies control 86.4% of market. And there is some government intervention involved.

There isn't really too many groups in automobile market.

Which system are you rooting for, btw? If not capitalism.

Ekaros

hero member

Activity: 728

Merit: 500

You really think that one company will be able to dominate the market?

Yes, one or few large ones. Which isn't really that different scenario.

Why, then, are there so many different brands of Automobiles?

Is there so many really? Stats from 2011 for Europe:
http://www.statista.com/statistics/12782/market-share-of-selected-car-maunfacturers-in-europe/

10 companies control 86.4% of market in sales per unit. And there is some government intervention involved.

There isn't really too many groups in automobile market.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

You really think that one company will be able to dominate the market?

Yes, one or few large ones. Which isn't really that different scenario.

Why, then, are there so many different brands of Automobiles?

Ekaros

hero member

Activity: 728

Merit: 500

Quote from: Ekaros on April 27, 2013, 01:57:53 PM

I don't trust in free market,

This is all you really needed to say.

Quote from: Ekaros on April 27, 2013, 02:07:26 PM

I see it like this:
Now there is one large force which I have very minor say in.
In other scenario I believe it ends up with one large force with me having no say in.

You really think that one company will be able to dominate the market?

Yes, one or few large ones. Which isn't really that different scenario.

That is on now comparable to nation scale. And I don't see too much movement population between areas controlled by them.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: Ekaros on April 27, 2013, 01:57:53 PM

I don't trust in free market,

This is all you really needed to say.

Quote from: Ekaros on April 27, 2013, 02:07:26 PM

I see it like this:
Now there is one large force which I have very minor say in.
In other scenario I believe it ends up with one large force with me having no say in.

You really think that one company will be able to dominate the market?

Ekaros

hero member

Activity: 728

Merit: 500

Quote from: Mike Christ on April 27, 2013, 02:01:14 PM

Quote from: myrkul on April 27, 2013, 01:43:37 PM

So from one force to an other, but this time private one... I'm not really sure it's preferable situation, as the size of companies isn't limited. The system presented in video seems scary...

Would you rather have competing services for security, who you use and pay for on a voluntary basis, or a single, all-powerful monopoly on the security service industry, which you must pay for involuntarily? Personally, I wouldn't like it if McDonalds was the only burger joint in the nation, of which I had to pay them every time they set up a new store, or risk jail time; they could then charge 20$ a burger and take their time filling out orders at the drive thru--I mean, where else are you gonna go for fast food?

I think, when it boils down to it, people are always willing to pay for security, so there may as well be competition to provide the best service possible. As in the case of the monostatism, they can essentially do what they want without fear that another government will out perform them. They can provide a terrible service and charge out the butt to use it; since they own the military, they can also force you to pay for their service, whether you want it or not. It's a pretty ugly system that we have now, if you ask me, full of bullying and corruption.

I see it like this:
Now there is one large force which I have very minor say in.
In other scenario I believe it ends up with one large force with me having no say in.

States do have some rules, non-states don't have to have any. They could just say that you did something wrong and you have to pay. And if you don't pay the make you a slave. And if they are sufficiently large and profitable no one can stop them. And we are back to feudalism...

Mike Christ

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1003

A stateless society does not solve all the world's problems. It simply solves the problem of the state. From there, we can stop running around in circles and actually solve problems, instead of throwing band-aids on them.

Birdy

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

So you want to distribute all species to people?
Ok, tell me who is gonna own midges/mosquitos and what they are gonna do with their population.

No, I'm saying distribute all the land/sea to people. People could then protect the animals on their property. For instance, all scimitar oryx breeding populations are on private hunting reserves. As for midges and mosquitoes, whoever wants 'em is welcome to them.[/quote]

Nobody wants them and that's the problem. There are a lot of plants and animals that nobody has any use for, but are important for our eco-system.
I don't see distributing land solve the problem.

Quote from: Birdy on April 27, 2013, 01:33:11 PM

So, you're saying that clearcutting and selling the resultant paper to 10% of the population would be more profitable than responsible use and selling to 90% of the population?

Take a look at ivory. It is.
I know you think market will solve this by demand, but it won't.
Maybe forests will still be okey, because you can reproduce them (although I also doubt that and it's still not like the original ones).

Take my word. If you are ever able to found a state like you have in mind, you will have to solve this problem.
(alongside with the problem of natural agglomeration of power , that's another big issue)

[Offtopic: I'm out of the discussion now, got a lot of other stuff to do right now. It was an exhausting, but also interesting discussion.]

Mike Christ

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1003

Quote from: myrkul on April 27, 2013, 01:53:29 PM

So from one force to an other, but this time private one... I'm not really sure it's preferable situation, as the size of companies isn't limited. The system presented in video seems scary...

Would you rather have competing services for security, who you use and pay for on a voluntary basis, or a single, all-powerful monopoly on the security service industry, which you must pay for involuntarily? Personally, I wouldn't like it if McDonalds was the only burger joint in the nation, of which I had to pay them every time they set up a new store, or risk jail time; they could then charge 20$ a burger and take their time filling out orders at the drive thru--I mean, where else are you gonna go for fast food?

I think, when it boils down to it, people are always willing to pay for security, so there may as well be competition to provide the best service possible. As in the case of the monostatism, they can essentially do what they want without fear that another government will out perform them. They can provide a terrible service and charge out the butt to use it; since they own the military, they can also force you to pay for their service, whether you want it or not. It's a pretty ugly system that we have now, if you ask me, full of bullying and corruption.

Ekaros

hero member

Activity: 728

Merit: 500

The system presented in video seems scary...

Why?

I see dystopian future of mega corporations, corporate war, lack of regulation and slavery.

I don't trust in free market, eventually some player will grow to be too large and it's too late for collective incentive to go against it... Really just think how many people go for the cheapest option, not regarding other cost involved. Corporations or large entities aren't moral, they are out for their own good and can be rather short sighted...

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM