Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[XXSockXX]

What about things that don't even have a market value, but that are still produced, with gigantic industrial chains devoted to making them, like nuclear weapons? Are they also doomed to be shut down?

Eh...nuclear weapons have no market value?

[Sergarr]

What about things that don't even have a market value, but that are still produced, with gigantic industrial chains devoted to making them, like nuclear weapons? Are they also doomed to be shut down?

Eh...nuclear weapons have no market value?

There's no market for nuclear weapons, therefore, they have no market value.

[XXSockXX]

What about things that don't even have a market value, but that are still produced, with gigantic industrial chains devoted to making them, like nuclear weapons? Are they also doomed to be shut down?

Eh...nuclear weapons have no market value?

There's no market for nuclear weapons, therefore, they have no market value.

Just because you can't buy it in a supermarket doesn't mean there is no market for it. I'd say they're in high demand actually.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Speaking about "outputs lower then market value of inputs"

Russia will soon mass-produce its own 10kg heavy, 4*800mhz, 1 hour battery, $3000(yes, three thousand dollars) worth laptop.  Cool, isn't it?

[Sergarr]

What about things that don't even have a market value, but that are still produced, with gigantic industrial chains devoted to making them, like nuclear weapons? Are they also doomed to be shut down?

Eh...nuclear weapons have no market value?

There's no market for nuclear weapons, therefore, they have no market value.

Just because you can't buy it in a supermarket doesn't mean there is no market for it. I'd say they're in high demand actually.

To have market, you need to have demand and supply, otherwise you can call "flights to another planet" a market. And you simply can't buy nukes, no matter how much money you bring. Nobody will sell you them, not for money at least.

Speaking about "outputs lower then market value of inputs"

Russia will soon mass-produce its own 10kg heavy, 4*800mhz, 1 hour battery, $3000(yes, three thousand dollars) worth laptop.  Cool, isn't it?

It's unimaginably cool. People were very recently legitimately saying that Russia would be unable to produce it's own computers at all.

[mainiac]

There is a market for flights to other planets.  There simply isn't a market that contains any customers willing to pay what it would currently cost.  The market clears at a quantity of zero flights to other planets.

Markets can sometimes clear with a quantity of zero.  Markets can sometimes clear with a single customer (the government operated military for example).  Market is a very general term.

[XXSockXX]

To have market, you need to have demand and supply, otherwise you can call "flights to another planet" a market. And you simply can't buy nukes, no matter how much money you bring. Nobody will sell you them, not for money at least.

You have supply and demand. It's a state monopoly on both sides (if you disregard illegal demand which is what I had in mind), but it's there.

[mainiac]

The term for a single buyer is monopsony.

[Sergarr]

There is a market for flights to other planets.  There simply isn't a market that contains any customers willing to pay what it would currently cost.  The market clears at a quantity of zero flights to other planets.

Markets can sometimes clear with a quantity of zero.  Markets can sometimes clear with a single customer (the government operated military for example).  Market is a very general term.

If we can call everything a market, and it sure looks like that, then market value should be, in a general case, not a real number, but an array of numbers, since there's no way you can assign a single number to rate the "public interest" for every single thing, so there are a whole array of "market values" that a thing can have, and different actors will optimize on different "market values", while calling each other "irrational" and "doomed to shut down" for having "output lower than market value of input".

Generalization, ho!

To have market, you need to have demand and supply, otherwise you can call "flights to another planet" a market. And you simply can't buy nukes, no matter how much money you bring. Nobody will sell you them, not for money at least.

You have supply and demand. It's a state monopoly on both sides (if you disregard illegal demand which is what I had in mind), but it's there.

At least you agree that there's no market value for these things, right?

[XXSockXX]

At least you agree that there's no market value for these things, right?

They're not free to produce and someone pays for it, so of course they have market value.

The term for a single buyer is monopsony.

Thanks, didn't think I'd learn something from this. 

[wobbly]

To have market, you need to have demand and supply, otherwise you can call "flights to another planet" a market. And you simply can't buy nukes, no matter how much money you bring. Nobody will sell you them, not for money at least.

You have supply and demand. It's a state monopoly on both sides (if you disregard illegal demand which is what I had in mind), but it's there.

Is it completely a state monopoly? It wouldn't surprise me if at least parts of the missile system are designed by 1 of the major defense contractors but a quick search didn't bring up much & I don't really feel like doing too much poking around.

[mainiac]

If we can call everything a market, and it sure looks like that, then market value should be, in a general case, not a real number, but an array of numbers, since there's no way you can assign a single number to rate the "public interest" for every single thing,

Well you haven't quite hit the nail on the head but it's sort of like the way I model markets in my research.

Is it completely a state monopoly?

Generally not.  And it's generally not a pure monopsony either.  Pure ideals generally dont exist in real economies.  But in both cases we can say there is very high concentration that means market power is a significant factor in determining the market clearing behavior.

[Bohandas]

What about things that don't even have a market value, but that are still produced, with gigantic industrial chains devoted to making them, like nuclear weapons? Are they also doomed to be shut down?

Eh...nuclear weapons have no market value?

There's no legal market for nuclear weapons

ftfy

[Zrk2]

This is way too much economics for me, can we bring back the stupid porn-filter stuff?

[RedKing]

Speaking about "outputs lower then market value of inputs"

Russia will soon mass-produce its own 10kg heavy, 4*800mhz, 1 hour battery, $3000(yes, three thousand dollars) worth laptop.  Cool, isn't it?

It's unimaginably cool. People were very recently legitimately saying that Russia would be unable to produce it's own computers at all.

This sounds remarkably like Communist economics. The Trabi was an outdated piece of shit, but it was YOUR piece of crap.

The whole point of globalization is to figure out what you have a competitive advantage in and do that thing. Computer manufacturing is not Russia's competitive advantage. (computer hacking, on the other hand...)