3 ms·
> then clearly that company created an enormous amount of value No, it is more like these companies monopolized access to the high income market and exploited
by coliveira 1y ago
> then clearly that company created an enormous amount of value
No, it is more like these companies monopolized access to the high income market and exploited this inefficiency. It is similar to buying a stock for $10 then increasing the bid ask spread to sell it for $100.
- starspangled 1y ago> No, it is more like these companies monopolized access to the high income market and exploited this inefficiency. It is similar to buying a stock for $10 then increasing the bid ask spread to sell it for $100. Okay so we have this scenario you constructed where the Chinese company produced great value without engaging in any IP theft or unbalanced terms of trade or currency manipulation and the American company simply took that and gouged prices with anticompetitive practices. What exactly is your question? The hypothetical American company in your example did not create value, by definition. I don't see how that's particularly useful though.
- intended 1y agoThis applies to a very specific type of constrained market, and does not generalize in this manner, making your example trivial to argue against, and then confuse readers. If access was monopolized, then no competition would exist. Competition very much exists, and has resulted in a massive amounts of growth and improvement globally.