no
in my perfect world would be no junk. not in food, not in medicine, not in technology, not in cars, not in anything. multiple manufacturers, all increasing efficiency of their r&d investment not cutting corners in the race to the bottom.
imagine the increases in r&d investment. a billion galaxy s5 and iphone 5s sold... and guess what? overall increase in user experience. suddenly everybody has a good phone. isnt that worth something?
tell me, how do you design a phone thats purposely bad so it can be cheap. what kind of human you must be? did you try galaxy young for example? how can anybody sell that phone as practically new in 2014?? and they are basically making NO MONEY with it!!
and this is not a communism theory. government regulations of economy are absolutely necessary, we're all witness to that. when you leave people to do what they want, they'll only go after profit. so you need to direct them to a greater good while they are still making money. you need to 'govern'. this is a small modification to the invisible hand theory by adam smith.
they just need to set the minimal price, like they did with the minimal wage. the rest is up on competition, just like in the minimal wage case.
or do you think price dumping should also be allowed?
and yeah, this too, people in my world would be much better educated 😉
a bunch of capitalists, nobody knows what capitalism is. sounds like a meme
Call your communism/socialism whatever you want, dude. Put all the lipstick on that pig you want. If it walks like a duck . . . well, you know the rest. Government interference does not help foster ingenuity; it stymies it.
And remember, Adam Smith's Invisible Hand Theory was all about capitalism WITHOUT government interference. That through the free market, with little to no interference from Big Brother, an individual's (and a corporation's) desire to maximize profits can, as a byproduct (rather than as a direct goal or requirement) help benefit society as a whole.
And you call your idea of government regulation a
small modification of Adam Smith's theory? That's like saying the theory that the sun orbits the earth was just a small modification of the theory that the earth actually orbits the sun. While the central characters in those theories are the same, the roles of each of those characters is markedly different, wouldn't you say?
And who gets to determine what the "junk" is that can no longer go in technology, cars, medicine or food? Are you the final arbiter of what that "junk" is? Is it the government? Who in the government is in charge of making that decision? And I'm sure you've heard the old adage that "one man's junk is another man's treasure". In other words, something that is "junk" by your definition may be absolutely indispensable to someone else. Be careful, that "junk" may someday be the ability to get on the internet from your phone or send a message to your family/friends. Or it may that Big Brother decides that air conditioners and radios in cars are "junk" items that us serfs don't need. Be careful giving out that much power to government. Historically it hasn't worked out very well for those societies.
Free market capitalism, with all of its "evil" profit motives and ego-centric desires to compete to be the best in a given profession or industry, allows the cream of the crop to rise to the top. It is the best economic model this world has ever known. And one of the many great things about a successful free market economy is that society as a whole shares in the benefits.
To address the topic of this thread, if there was no third-party cable support and hence no third-party manufacturers willing to enter the fray, my guess is that Apple's smart cable would cost a good bit more than $20 and likely would be made with very little quality control. Why? Because Apple would have no competition.
And if these third-party companies make cables that don't work as advertised, that information will become common knowledge amongst consumers and no one will buy the product. No sales/no profit/bye-bye company. Up to the plate steps other companies willing to compete to take the now-defunct company's place in line. The successful ones will continue on while the unsuccessful ones will die out. There are some things that Darwin got right.
😉
----------
[MOD NOTE]
Lets stay on topic and keep the PRSI material out of this thread. If you wish to discussion politics, we have a forum specifically for that topic, please use that.
Sorry. Just saw your note after making my post. Feel free to move it as you see fit. I'm done with the political discourse anyway. Again, sorry for derailing the thread.
