May The Best Mode Win
in [Drive]
|
From: gpsman on 19 Oct 2009 01:37 On Oct 18, 11:55 pm, Brent <tetraethylleadREMOVET...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > The supplier that is to remain in business adds in the cost of > having the building space, their money being tied up, the labor to > manage the inventory, and all other costs associated with it. All their > customer 'saves' in the end is the cost of having their money tied up in > the supplier's profit margin. It doesn't matter what the customer saves, what matters to the corporation is profit. Reducing unnecessary expenditures frees capital for more productive investment. > Maybe not even that because smart > suppliers will also include the cost of not seeing their profits > until later. But now instead of just the final assembler having > wearhouse space and people managing inventory, both companies do. And both inventories may be minimized according to demand forecasts. Parts needn't be manufactured beyond demand, or expected demand. I'd be disappointed if you couldn't extrapolate like crazy from there. > Then weather, traffic, or other problems cause lines to shut down. Even > more cost. Not that much JIT, you imbecile. > I am unconviced that JIT is more than shuffling numbers around so it > looks like a savings so someone gets a promotion. You're an established ignoramus with far more opinion than brains, or anything else... except perhaps the back rent you owe your mother. > The burden is just > shifted to reduce part cost later. It's all a conspiracy to reduce parts costs, huh? ----- - gpsman
From: George Conklin on 19 Oct 2009 08:40 "Larry Sheldon" <lfsheldon(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:7k1uk4F3839qsU1(a)mid.individual.net... > George Conklin wrote: > > "Larry Sheldon" <lfsheldon(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:7k14uvF36mirbU1(a)mid.individual.net... > >> Miles Bader wrote: > >>> Scott in SoCal <scottenaztlan(a)yahoo.com> writes: > >>>> The reason it will probably be less is because when > >>>> private industry is in charge, there is a strong financial incentive > >>>> to maximize efficiency - an incentive that simply does not exist when > >>>> the government is in charge of roads. > >>>> > >>>> In a truly free market, on a truly level field of competition, most > >>>> cost-effective mode of transport will will. > >>> That's not necessarily true. It's common for them to get stuck in local > >>> minima. Government intervention can help such situations (though of > >>> course it doesn't always do so). > >> In a truly free market, there is no Government Intervention. If there > >> is government intervention there is no free market of any sort. > > > > Wrong. Governments preserve free enterprise by making sure you don't have a > > monopoly, like Blue Cross and Blue Shield got to be because they have an > > exemption from the rules against monopolies. > > In a free market, a "monopoly", by definition, can not form. In a free market, a monopoly is always the end result. Government must preserve the marketplace.
From: George Conklin on 19 Oct 2009 08:41 "Brent" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:hbgode$uvt$2(a)news.eternal-september.org... > On 2009-10-19, Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > George Conklin wrote: > >> "Larry Sheldon" <lfsheldon(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > >> news:7k14uvF36mirbU1(a)mid.individual.net... > >>> Miles Bader wrote: > >>>> Scott in SoCal <scottenaztlan(a)yahoo.com> writes: > >>>>> The reason it will probably be less is because when > >>>>> private industry is in charge, there is a strong financial incentive > >>>>> to maximize efficiency - an incentive that simply does not exist when > >>>>> the government is in charge of roads. > >>>>> > >>>>> In a truly free market, on a truly level field of competition, most > >>>>> cost-effective mode of transport will will. > >>>> That's not necessarily true. It's common for them to get stuck in local > >>>> minima. Government intervention can help such situations (though of > >>>> course it doesn't always do so). > >>> In a truly free market, there is no Government Intervention. If there > >>> is government intervention there is no free market of any sort. > >> > >> Wrong. Governments preserve free enterprise by making sure you don't have a > >> monopoly, like Blue Cross and Blue Shield got to be because they have an > >> exemption from the rules against monopolies. > > > > In a free market, a "monopoly", by definition, can not form. > > A monopoly might form without government intervention but it cannot last > without it. It's the same with a cartel. When the government isn't there > to (help) prevent new businesses from starting or businesses cheating on > the cartel's rules monopolies and cartels fall apart. Wrong again.
From: George Conklin on 19 Oct 2009 08:44 "gpsman" <gpsman(a)driversmail.com> wrote in message news:82a94eb7-8de6-48ec-b628- Then what is their cause in those roads not traveled by truck? > Transit buses and big rig trucks can do > the most damage. What's "damage" and what's "normal wear and tear"? --------- It is a question of degree. When one vehicle can do 9,000 times more damage than another, it is no longer an issue of "normal" wear and tear. Transit buses and big rigs do 9,000 times more damage than a car.
From: Brent on 19 Oct 2009 09:00
On 2009-10-19, George Conklin <nil(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > > "Brent" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:hbgode$uvt$2(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> On 2009-10-19, Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> > George Conklin wrote: >> >> "Larry Sheldon" <lfsheldon(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> news:7k14uvF36mirbU1(a)mid.individual.net... >> >>> Miles Bader wrote: >> >>>> Scott in SoCal <scottenaztlan(a)yahoo.com> writes: >> >>>>> The reason it will probably be less is because when >> >>>>> private industry is in charge, there is a strong financial incentive >> >>>>> to maximize efficiency - an incentive that simply does not exist > when >> >>>>> the government is in charge of roads. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> In a truly free market, on a truly level field of competition, most >> >>>>> cost-effective mode of transport will will. >> >>>> That's not necessarily true. It's common for them to get stuck in > local >> >>>> minima. Government intervention can help such situations (though of >> >>>> course it doesn't always do so). >> >>> In a truly free market, there is no Government Intervention. If there >> >>> is government intervention there is no free market of any sort. >> >> >> >> Wrong. Governments preserve free enterprise by making sure you don't > have a >> >> monopoly, like Blue Cross and Blue Shield got to be because they have > an >> >> exemption from the rules against monopolies. >> > >> > In a free market, a "monopoly", by definition, can not form. >> >> A monopoly might form without government intervention but it cannot last >> without it. It's the same with a cartel. When the government isn't there >> to (help) prevent new businesses from starting or businesses cheating on >> the cartel's rules monopolies and cartels fall apart. > > > Wrong again. Explain how a monopoly or cartel can endure without government intervention on behalf of the monopoly or cartel. |