Hell. We haven't even gotten to what their attempts to hurt the 1% do to the millions of retirement accounts if the "owners" just suck it up. Yes, there are large share holders in companies, but where do these people think all the money in retirement accounts/funds come from?
Be sure to work hard and get lots of overtime. People on welfare want more steaks and free upgrades to smart phones with unlimited data packages.
Moderator's Warning: The sly attempts to call posters "ignorant" or accuse them of breaking rules like "trolling" need to stop. Stick to the topic folks
"I am appalled that somebody who is the nominee...would take that kind of position"
"A court took away a presidency"
"...the brother of a man running for president was the governor of the state..."
It's horrifying because Trump is blunt instead of making overt implications.
You each could use a course in economics. Prices are set by the market; not by the supplier of the product. The ability of a player in the market to change prices is governed by a concept known as price elasticity. To the degree the commodity / product is high inelastic, such as oil, the companies can pass costs along and not bear as much of the cost themselves. To the extent the commodity / product is highly elastic, then they have little latitude to off-load costs in the form of price increases and eat more of the cost themselves. Much of the travel industry, particularly airlines, have a high degree of price elasticity.
Now granted, in inefficient markets with oligopolistic participants, there is generally less price elasticity than in a free market.... but, generally less does not mean that companies can dictate prices.
Companies already set prices to maximize revenue based upon what the market will bear. If companies could simply dictate the price, they would naturally just charge more. But, they can't, so they don't.
Last edited by upsideguy; 02-23-15 at 02:43 PM.
Btw the "market" is a non existent thing. It doesn't actually set a price. It simply decides what a good price should be in a theoretical sense.
As far as companies go: your argument defeats itself. Your argument is that a company can't raise costs because the consumer doesn't have the money to pay. You increase the pay of all consumers then a company CAN raise prices.
The Crowd is not the sum of its parts.