On 1/16/2018 5:20 PM, Mad Roger wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 14:41:54 -0800 (PST),
> trader_4 wrote:
>
>> You did when you said:
>>
>>
>> "I think price is not an indication of anything other than what the
>> marketing can make people pay. It's certainly not an indication of quality."
>>
>> Do you really think that a prime steak has the same price as a choice
>> steak, or a select grade steak? That a top quality 10" chef's knife
>> from Henckel, Wusthoff, Misono doesn't reflect that quality and require
>> a much higher price than the $5 10" chef knife at the discount store?
>> The prices are correlated to the quality of the product. The same applies
>> to brake pads, certainly to some extent.
>
> You didn't understand a single word I said.
> Either that, or you just want to argue.
>
> We agree on the curves being *different* for things that are perceived to
> be different.
>
> If a tire to a billion people is NOT a commodity (there doesn't seem to be
> a word for the opposite of a commodity), then each one has a certain demand
> curve.
>
> If those same tires *are* considered a commodity to another billion people,
> then those tires, to those people, have a *different* (lumped together as
> one) commodity-based demand curve.
>
> Either you understand that, or you just want to argue for argument's sake.
> I am done with arguing what is in *every* Economics textbook on the planet.
>
> I can't teach you an entire course in Economics 101 in just a Usenet
> thread. You either understand the basics, or you don't.
>
> It's marketing's job to increase *perception* of value.
>
> If you like beef and don't like pork, then the curves are different.
> If you don't care, and if it's all just "meat" to you, then they're not.
>
> This is extremely basic stuff covered in the first weeks of class.
>

The exam question you missed was Veblen.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971