RE: Classical Liberalism
April 9, 2011 at 3:25 pm
(This post was last modified: April 9, 2011 at 3:53 pm by reverendjeremiah.)
Quote:Say the costs of making the drink are $0.30 for each bottle. Selling the drink at $0.30 will get them the most amount of consumers, but won't make them any profit. Selling the drink for $0.50 each will make them a small amount of profit, but they will lose some consumers who aren't willing to fork out the extra $0.20. Selling the drink at $1.00 maximizes their profit, whilst maintaining that a large number of their consumers will purchase it (it won't be as many consumers as they got selling the drink for $0.30, but the increased price compensates that).And you say my posts are "imaginary conversation". Honestly man, you screwed up when you started using numbers. When I was a restaurant manager, our greatest profit maker was soft drinks (which is why I used them as an example). The large drink generated the greatest profit, especially if it was iced tea. Large sodas sold for .99 plus tax, which equaled to about $1.05 at the time. Our over head on the soda was $0.05. 95% profit margin on the drink opposed to overhead. And if it was iced tea, the over head was 1/100 of a cent. The profit was 99.99%. You claim I am posting "imaginary conversations" (which is some ways I am) but I can easily toss out some REAL numbers that I have experienced. You make it seem like these Cola companies are just making an honest living. In reality they make MAD profits through overcharging (something that libertarians smile upon) and then they bankroll that cash.
Now this is where you say; "But people dont have to buy the product..they can set their own prices". Well, yeah, if that were the case. Coke PAC contributes hundreds of thousands of political donations to BOTH PARTIES in EQUAL AMOUNTS, or close to equal amounts.
Exhibit A: http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cach...dJxw&pli=1
if you get an html prompt, select "plain html" hyperlink to view stats.
This PDF shows all of the political contributions to ensure that no matter WHO wins the elections, that Coca Cola's corporate interests come first before the actual electorate. Libertarians say this is okay. It is their companies money, and they can spend it how they like. Well, thanks to libertarian minded people, we common folk no longer have a say so in our social or economic future. Why would a politician listen to us (who are forced to pay them regardless, but cant line their pockets with more money) when Coke tosses BOTH parties cash to run their parties? Coke is screwing the public on prices, then using that money to take our politicians away from us so that they only pay attention to Coke. THAT is what libertarians want, and that is what libertarians do..and just because you say "but they arent libertarians"...last I checked this is ALL alowed on the libertarian political platform. So therefore, libertarians allow it, and they stand behind it. Try to say I made a strawman again.
Progressives are against this. Progressives are against corupt business interfering in our political system with corupt politicians. Money = power = social influence. Libertarians love that this happens. Libertarians talk social and economic freedom, but in reality they smile upon companies like Coke controlling our political system. Because libertarians are about economic libertarianism as their main driving force, not social libertarianism. Profit is their main driving force.
Now, you will probably say "how does COKE badly affect our American economics and social influence..they are just a softdrink looking to make a profit."
Look at how their profit margin has climbed from 6/13/01 to 6/11/09:
Exhibit B: https://ycharts.com/analysis/story/near_...ndervalued
please scroll down and look at the linear charts that spans 8 years of profits..not a single dip down
Why is that so? Because Coke screws the population on an almost 98% profit margin opposed to overhead and uses that money to buy off BOTH parties so that they can have their control over military contracts. Coke does not want someone like me in charge because it will cost them profits and power. They want ECONOMICALLY LIBERTARIAN types, like centrist Democrats, Republicans, and libertarians. Their profit margin has grown since 01 because of the war on terror. While we middle class strugle to make ends meet more and more, Coke's profit is gradually climbing and climbing because of the war, and they want a war without end. Where ever our millitary goes. Coka Cola is there to be sold. So why would Coke want a stop to this war? So now we have one corporation, who's product is innocent enough, but whos intent is to make profit, control our government and ultimately sacrifice the lives of our military in order to get their product more easily distributed. We pay the price with our money and lives, and Coke gets all of the power and profit.
Is that realistic enough for you?
Now go ahead and say Coke corp. isnt libertarian.