8 ms·

If the transaction didn't also benefit the buyer, they wouldn't voluntarily enter into it. If I have a dollar but would rather have a soda, buying the soda make

If the transaction didn't also benefit the buyer, they wouldn't voluntarily enter into it. If I have a dollar but would rather have a soda, buying the soda makes me slightly better off. I might prefer a free soda, but I'd still rather have the soda than the dollar. If I perceived the soda as being worth less than a buck, I would have kept the money. There are a million other things I could have done with my dollar, but I chose to exchange it for a soda; that simple choice reflects a profound truth about the market. Nothing is "absolutely worth" anything. The same bottle of soda is worth 25 cents at Costco and $4 at a ball game. It's up to the customer to decide whether the product is worth the price it's being sold for.

rdiddly 10y ago
See my reply to WalterBright below. The transaction absolutely does benefit the buyer. But it benefits the seller more. What you're left with (a soda), you consume and it's gone. What the seller is left with, he can invest (essentially renting it out) and turn into more money. Something good I could say about the soda is that it's 200 calories that keeps you alive a couple hours longer, and you have a chance to make some money in that time. So it might be a good investment. It's not black & white. Or a car (a cost you incur) that enables you to commute to a job you couldn't otherwise reach, that kind of thing comes close to an even benefit. Edit to clarify: What I'm thinking of as the "absolute worth" of a good or service, is basically, "exactly the cost of providing it." If you provide everything "at cost" then you are making zero profit. Agreed that market price/supply/demand/etc. may dictate that you make more (or less) than that.