Politics Capitalism, Competition, Prices, Globalism, Mergerism.

[pugsville]

Not what I said. Maybe read my post again re: consumer mortgages. Customers aren’t getting ripped at all- complete opposite.

Money is incredibly cheap for the consumer at the moment, hell strong enough applicants can get rates in the 4’s still for car finance.

You implied that the Banks were dealing fairly with the customers and reports in the Media about bad bank behavior were misleading and not factual.

You comments about one aspect of the banking sector mortgages and rates thereof does not invalidate criticism of the banks for extremely shonky rip off behavior in other sectors of their business,

Just because some customers in some transactions (even the vast majoirty) withe banks are not getting ripped off does not invalidate the argument that teh Banks do engage in significant behavior which does rip off customers. how much outright shonky, deceptive and little less than praying on customers by the major banks is acceptable?

 

[its free real estate]

So you agree that monopolist/cartel behavior, sectors or areas dominated by a few operators is generally for the detriment of the consumer and wider public?

But there is a pretty wide playbook of practices which don't all evolve around regulation.

What are you advocating no zoning what so ever?

I agree Zoning is one of the prime areas for corruption/influence a decision dramatically changes the value of land. Councils are rarely held up to real scrutiny.

Not absolutely no zoning, no one wants a coal fired power plant next door. But zoning allows councils to act as gatekeepers, and monopolists to use those regulations to their benefit.

 

[pugsville]

Not absolutely no zoning, no one wants a coal fired power plant next door. But zoning allows councils to act as gatekeepers, and monopolists to use those regulations to their benefit.

no question. But it's not just not monopolies, developers, council,zoning is just made for corruption.

But Market power of dominance and big pockets can and does work in all sorts of ways without regulation being a factor. It' s not like regulation invented monopolistic behavior, an absolutely free market is subject to all sorts of behavior that favors big players over small ones.

 

[its free real estate]

no question. But it's not just not monopolies, developers, council,zoning is just made for corruption.

But Market power of dominance and big pockets can and does work in all sorts of ways without regulation being a factor. It' s not like regulation invented monopolistic behavior, an absolutely free market is subject to all sorts of behavior that favors big players over small ones.

The problem is there are no absolutely free markets, nor can there be. There are always high barriers to entry in some markets, and natural monopolies.

I think the state should try to abolish monopolies where it is sensible for them to do so, instead in Australia we see it institute them.

 

[pugsville]

The problem is there are no absolutely free markets, nor can there be. There are always high barriers to entry in some markets, and natural monopolies.

I think the state should try to abolish monopolies where it is sensible for them to do so, instead in Australia we see it institute them.

The free market provides all the things needed to make an unfree market generally., It;'s just not a very stable state of affairs, monopolies/cartels are more stable,

major Infrastructure is a mostly natural monopoly, Power, Communications, transport. their privatization was also half arsed, it was never going to lead to a even vaguely free market in any of them. regulating a bunch of large companies in such circumstances is perhaps harder than running the sector for the Government. Though the benefits of some temporary cash and deniability about the problems (look ove there those guys are responsible) are their for Governments. At the end of the day the Government cannot walk away and let companies fail, is heavily involved regardless of liking it or not. Companies get higher profits generally form gaming whatever system is in place, as it's not a real market, Regulation is hard. over regulation is one pit fall, regulator capture (by business) is another.

Governments should not run businesses. Business should not run services.

 

[its free real estate]

The free market provides all the things needed to make an unfree market generally., It;'s just not a very stable state of affairs, monopolies/cartels are more stable,

major Infrastructure is a mostly natural monopoly, Power, Communications, transport. their privatization was also half arsed, it was never going to lead to a even vaguely free market in any of them. regulating a bunch of large companies in such circumstances is perhaps harder than running the sector for the Government. Though the benefits of some temporary cash and deniability about the problems (look ove there those guys are responsible) are their for Governments. At the end of the day the Government cannot walk away and let companies fail, is heavily involved regardless of liking it or not. Companies get higher profits generally form gaming whatever system is in place, as it's not a real market, Regulation is hard. over regulation is one pit fall, regulator capture (by business) is another.

Governments should not run businesses. Business should not run services.

I agree, power and infrastructure were always going to be monopolised. But the argument for privatising them was that they would be more efficient. Which is true, but if those efficiency gains are simply pocketed, what’s the difference?

 

[pugsville]

I agree, power and infrastructure were always going to be monopolised. But the argument for privatising them was that they would be more efficient. Which is true, but if those efficiency gains are simply pocketed, what’s the difference?

On what evidence are they more efficient. I think they are less efficient. Has the power bills been going down? rising less than CPI? Pocketed by who?

Why would a private monopoly be efficient? it's not in their interest. Power they are on cost plus contracts. It's in their interest to maximize costs.If a train company is penalized in the contract for late trains but not cancelled trains, why would they not cancel trains rather than run a late service, and which one is better for the public?

I was briefly involved in power company bill door to door stuff. (back room IT) and they are trying to scam customers on to higher costs through complex bills. There is ore profit in gaming the system rather than concentrating on being more efficient. With a cost plus model why would they ever bother?

 

[its free real estate]

On what evidence are they more efficient. I think they are less efficient. Has the power bills been going down? rising less than CPI? Pocketed by who?

Why would a private monopoly be efficient? it's not in their interest. Power they are on cost plus contracts. It's in their interest to maximize costs.If a train company is penalized in the contract for late trains but not cancelled trains, why would they not cancel trains rather than run a late service, and which one is better for the public?

It is in their interest to be efficient if they cream the efficiencies off the top. The profit incentive is a massive enticement to be efficient.

 

[pugsville]

It is in their interest to be efficient if they cream the efficiencies off the top. The profit incentive is a massive enticement to be efficient.

the contracts are not arranged that way. They get a percentage of their costs. They profit is a function of their costs. they higher the costs the higher the profit. Their incentive is actually to be as ineffective as possible. Cost plus contracts. I'm talking power distribting networks in Australia.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Think about how Westfield operates. If you want to open a retail shop in suburbia, you probably have to go through one of their malls. You have to play by Westfield’s rules to keep your shop running. You have little alternative because their mall is the only zoned retail space in kilometres, and the next mall is owned by QIC, who operate the same way.

Local councils heavily restrict land use, and this favours monopolists.

Any suburb that has a high street without the monopoly on retail space has a greater diversity of retailers, both in terms of independence and what services they provide.

If Westfield wants to open a mall, a council or state government will bend over backwards to provide social amenity for them to make their mall the “centre” of the community. If you want to turn your house into retail space, you’ll be denied.

I wouldn't paint Westfield as being bad guys as they provide a lot of employment opportunities at their malls.

Problem is that in Australia we are very anti business which prevents overseas companies from investing in Australia leading to lack of competition and monopolies.

If Australia lowered corporate taxes, lowered the minimum wage, cut back on penalty rates, stopped trying to reduce emissions and had a more sensible IR policy you would see lots of big businesses from overseas coming into this country which means the end of monopiles.

 

[its free real estate]

I wouldn't paint Westfield as being bad guys as they provide a lot of employment opportunities at their malls.

You don't understand anything.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

You don't understand anything.

Yes I do, how many people have jobs thanks to Westfield ?

There are shopping strips everywhere , you guys are just making stuff up about councils and government not letting shops that are not owned by Westfield be build.

You guys do realise that its actually a risky investment building or even buying a shop ? its not like a house and there's a reasonable chance you wont be able to rent it out.

 

[its free real estate]

Yes I do, how many people have jobs thanks to Westfield ?

Fewer than if they didn’t monopolise the retail space.

 

[smokingjacket]

I wouldn't paint Westfield as being bad guys as they provide a lot of employment opportunities at their malls.

I suppose you support the Soviet Union's heavy industry firms because they provide a lot of employment?

 

[Long Live HFC]

You don't understand anything.

truer words have never been spoken.