5 ms·
Let's not forget the benefits either. Reduced redundancy is _good_ (as long as nothing fails in the chain, ofc). It enables society to make more, for lower co
by gameshot911 4y ago
Let's not forget the benefits either. Reduced redundancy is _good_ (as long as nothing fails in the chain, ofc). It enables society to make more, for lower costs. And it works remarkably well, overall.
- falcolas 4y agoBut thats the problem being expressed - things will fail. Things will always fail, and ignoring that is the equivalent of burying your head in the sand and thinking your ass is covered.
- gameshot911 4y agoIf things go right 8 times out of 10 overall, that's a net win. Expected value - I get Product X $2 cheaper if things go right, but lose $6 if things go wrong. Expected value = 2*.8-6*.2 = .4. Overall net positive.
- falcolas 4y ago"The price for something is measurably higher if the manufacturer maintains a surplus of components with an inelastic supply" is not really true though. Once the initial investment in creating a stock of those items is done, there's only a minimal storage cost. For things like chips for cars, that storage cost is probably measured in double-digit dollars a year to create billions of dollars worth of vehicles. Is investing in a business to smooth over supply chain problems really so taboo to a modern businessman?