Total Posts:21|Showing Posts:1-21
Jump to topic:

Capitalism and Brand Names

Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:09:49 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I was wondering whether those who supported a "Free Market" philosophy (RR for example) had any opinion on how brand name designers and such affect the world. Are they considered a good or evil force on the free market? LV bags that aren't really of superior quality but are in high demand for no reason other than irrationality and have seriously inflated costs.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:12:12 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
They deplete the riches of the stupid without having to resort to force, sounds like a good thing to me.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:13:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Who drives that popularity? The consumer. If a product of X quality is deemed appropriate by consumers on a large scale, even if that product is of inferior quality, then really, who cares and who is to blame. :P

If you like better quality you have that option available to you. :)
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:17:29 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/22/2010 5:12:12 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
They deplete the riches of the stupid without having to resort to force, sounds like a good thing to me.

hahaha. this.
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:21:58 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Marginal utility.

I assume, Kleptin, that you're also puzzled as to why diamonds command a much higher price on the market than water. Since, after all, water is much more useful and necessary for life than water.

Value is subjective, and is in the eye of the beholder.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:22:24 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/22/2010 5:13:20 PM, Puck wrote:

even if that product is of inferior quality, then really, who cares and who is to blame. :P

I think his point was that it drives up the prices of other non-LV bags too, or something like that...
President of DDO
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:23:45 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/22/2010 5:21:58 PM, Nags wrote:
Marginal utility.

I assume, Kleptin, that you're also puzzled as to why diamonds command a much higher price on the market than water. Since, after all, water is much more useful and necessary for life than diamonds.

Value is subjective, and is in the eye of the beholder.

Fixed.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:28:18 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/22/2010 5:12:12 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
They deplete the riches of the stupid without having to resort to force, sounds like a good thing to me.

The economic model is supposed to penalize those who leech off of the positive contributions of the few and to reward the contributions of those who do something positive for society through competition.

With brand names, it rewards people for using coercion, and that's exactly what the brand name is: coercion. It has nothing to do with the superiority of the product or contribution to mankind. An LV bag costs as much to make as a knockoff, but they purposely produce less LV bags to extort huge sums of money from the population.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:29:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/22/2010 5:09:49 PM, Kleptin wrote:
I was wondering whether those who supported a "Free Market" philosophy (RR for example) had any opinion on how brand name designers and such affect the world. Are they considered a good or evil force on the free market? LV bags that aren't really of superior quality but are in high demand for no reason other than irrationality and have seriously inflated costs.

I think having "brand names" which actually provide a quality product... like Carthart, NewBalance, Columbia, etc... can be a rather nice thing to have, as you can count on quality...

The problem I have with some "brand names" (and I would suspect you have) is that they're recognized and demand a higher price for no other reason than that they're popular.... and these brands often don't provide higher quality... but rather a stupid sense of social superiority (or even moral superiority; see: smugness http://www.southparkstudios.com...)

Now one might say those who spend stupid money for stupid things are only digging their own grave, and since it's their fault... who cares...

But I think that purchasing "rights" to stupid feelings of superiority actually harms the economy generally in what it does not do. I think buying Luxury goods generally (like crazy expensive handbags) just tosses money back and forth between rich idiots... those who buy them and those who make them.... going in a nice circle... with little dribble down effect http://www.colbertnation.com... to meet the needs of those in labor oriented jobs...

Being that I don't like worthless crap.. and think some Taxes are necessary, AND need to appease re-distribution oriented folks... I'd propose a luxury tax on stupid, worthless, goods ( IF You can afford to buy stupid crap... I'm willing to steal from you to feed people)
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:29:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/22/2010 5:21:58 PM, Nags wrote:
Marginal utility.

I assume, Kleptin, that you're also puzzled as to why diamonds command a much higher price on the market than water. Since, after all, water is much more useful and necessary for life than water.

Value is subjective, and is in the eye of the beholder.

<3
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:31:37 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/22/2010 5:28:18 PM, Kleptin wrote:
At 4/22/2010 5:12:12 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
They deplete the riches of the stupid without having to resort to force, sounds like a good thing to me.

The economic model is supposed to penalize those who leech off of the positive contributions of the few and to reward the contributions of those who do something positive for society through competition.

With brand names, it rewards people for using coercion, and that's exactly what the brand name is: coercion. It has nothing to do with the superiority of the product or contribution to mankind. An LV bag costs as much to make as a knockoff, but they purposely produce less LV bags to extort huge sums of money from the population.
http://dictionary.reference.com...

Try again.

No one is forced to buy LV bags (unlike taxes). Thus there is no extortion, the term is "negotiation."
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:31:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/22/2010 5:28:18 PM, Kleptin wrote:
The economic model is supposed to penalize those who leech off of the positive contributions of the few and to reward the contributions of those who do something positive for society through competition.

Capitalism? I think you're talking about the wrong kind of system. Didn't some wall street executives that ran their companies into the ground just get some millions of dollars?

With brand names, it rewards people for using coercion, and that's exactly what the brand name is: coercion. It has nothing to do with the superiority of the product or contribution to mankind. An LV bag costs as much to make as a knockoff, but they purposely produce less LV bags to extort huge sums of money from the population.

What? I've never been threatened at knifepoint to purchase a bag.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:32:21 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/22/2010 5:21:58 PM, Nags wrote:
Marginal utility.

I assume, Kleptin, that you're also puzzled as to why diamonds command a much higher price on the market than water. Since, after all, water is much more useful and necessary for life than water.

Value is subjective, and is in the eye of the beholder.

Diamonds are valuable by way of their natural rarity. This acts as a limiting factor. People are compensated for finding ways to get diamonds with that huge price tag. In addition, cheaply-gotten blood diamonds are illegal because these methods have no integrity and violate human rights.

The difference is that brand name bags don't have such a limitation. They are made with the same raw materials as other bags. It's just that manufacturers purposely make less bags because they would risk losing money. It is a rarity that is artificially instilled just by the designer and the manufacturers.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:32:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/22/2010 5:31:42 PM, Reasoning wrote:
At 4/22/2010 5:28:18 PM, Kleptin wrote:
The economic model is supposed to penalize those who leech off of the positive contributions of the few and to reward the contributions of those who do something positive for society through competition.

Capitalism? I think you're talking about the wrong kind of system. Didn't some wall street executives that ran their companies into the ground just get some millions of dollars?
That's Keynesianism Reasoning.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:32:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/22/2010 5:22:24 PM, theLwerd wrote:
I think his point was that it drives up the prices of other non-LV bags too, or something like that...

That wasn't the point he was making. Let's assume it was though.

His point wouldn't be valid to begin with. If the consumer is more attracted to LV bags (assumed), then the prices of non-LV bags would be forced to drop if they wanted to compete with the LV bags. Ford doesn't raise the price of their cars to compete with the prices of the cars of Cadillac. Ford lowers their prices to compete for consumers.

Let's assume his point was valid to begin with. Then so what? Don't buy the expensive bags and instead buy the cheaper bags. That would either force the expensive bag brands to (1) lose customers or (2) lower their prices.
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:32:59 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/22/2010 5:28:18 PM, Kleptin wrote:
With brand names, it rewards people for using coercion, and that's exactly what the brand name is: coercion. It has nothing to do with the superiority of the product or contribution to mankind. An LV bag costs as much to make as a knockoff, but they purposely produce less LV bags to extort huge sums of money from the population.

how is it "coercion" to offer an overpriced handbag? there are absolutely zero actions that LV will take against you for not buying one...
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:34:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/22/2010 5:31:37 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Try again.

No one is forced to buy LV bags (unlike taxes). Thus there is no extortion, the term is "negotiation."

I suppose that's true...no one is really forced to buy these bags and even if the value is artificial, it won't work without some dumb sheep to be willing to buy it...

Well, if there's really nothing wrong with it, I guess that's that. Thanks.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:37:30 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/22/2010 5:32:21 PM, Kleptin wrote:
Diamonds are valuable by way of their natural rarity. This acts as a limiting factor. People are compensated for finding ways to get diamonds with that huge price tag.

That's not how it happened. No director decided that people who find diamonds should be compensated with a large price tag.

Men dive for pearls because they are valuable. Pearls are not valuable because men dive for them.

It is a rarity that is artificially instilled just by the designer and the manufacturers.

This is known as artificial scarcity. See Intellectual Property laws.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:42:10 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/22/2010 5:32:21 PM, Kleptin wrote:
Diamonds are valuable by way of their natural rarity. This acts as a limiting factor. People are compensated for finding ways to get diamonds with that huge price tag.

No, diamonds are not valuable solely by way of their natural rarity. Their are things more rare that are less valuable, and things that are less more, yet more valuable. They are valuable because (1) they satisfy wants and needs and (2) they are scarce.

The difference is that brand name bags don't have such a limitation. They are made with the same raw materials as other bags. It's just that manufacturers purposely make less bags because they would risk losing money. It is a rarity that is artificially instilled just by the designer and the manufacturers.

See: above.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2010 5:45:14 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/22/2010 5:32:28 PM, Nags wrote:
At 4/22/2010 5:22:24 PM, theLwerd wrote:
I think his point was that it drives up the prices of other non-LV bags too, or something like that...

That wasn't the point he was making. Let's assume it was though.

His point wouldn't be valid to begin with. If the consumer is more attracted to LV bags (assumed), then the prices of non-LV bags would be forced to drop if they wanted to compete with the LV bags. Ford doesn't raise the price of their cars to compete with the prices of the cars of Cadillac. Ford lowers their prices to compete for consumers.

Let's assume his point was valid to begin with. Then so what? Don't buy the expensive bags and instead buy the cheaper bags. That would either force the expensive bag brands to (1) lose customers or (2) lower their prices.

True.
President of DDO