[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: new year's mandate
alec:
>As hesitant as I am to open up another discussion with Friar Callahan, I
>nonetheless must point out that (assumimg he is defining "consensus" to
>include people outside the corporate oligarchy) he is falling prey to one
>of the great corporate mind-schemes, that being that "You can't blame the
>coroporations (in this case chains) for moving in; it's merely a case of
>supply and demand and the consumer getting what he wants."
as hesitant as i am to open up another discussion with massuh vance,
i nonetheless dare to point out that, no, that's not it at all, alec.
i blame the corporations, and i blame the would-be corporations.
you could not project your triumph of the marx all over me if you would.
>Once again, friends, 3.2.3 is the hapless intellectual lapdog of Wall
>Street.
hapless lapdog of your intellectual frustrations i am, as much as any.
>Demand is not created by the consumer. It is sometimes participated
>in by the consumer, but it is primarily created by (1) the creation of a
>perceived demand (advetizing, advertorials, local "news" "stories," etc.)
>(2) the obliteration of competition (usually locally owned) through
>buy-outs, political bribery, or flat-out price war in which the chain
>outlet temporarily sells things below profit in order to steal the
>customers of its neighborhood competitors, and once the latter have been
>driven out of business, it brings its prices back up. Having the resources
>of a national corporation, it can afford to do this; Mom and Pop can't.
half-right. you were awake in econ, asleep in psych. desire is embedded
in the consumer. producers translate that into consumption by substituting
the product for the aim of the desire (sex!). mom and pops are just as
willing to provide that at a higher price as corporations in order to
'compete'. pleasant children work for both.
3.2.3
Follow-Ups: