<snipped by Robert>

Olafur wrote:

> Olafur wrote:

<more snipped by Paul>
>>> [The good news is that Kitty and I now have in Arizona a wireless
>>> broadband system which is actually faster than DSL. So finally we can
>>> do everything that we need on the Internet while receiving continuous
>>> streaming dance or classical music at the same time. And it only costs
>>> $30 monthly for only the six months we are in AZ. Now if only there is
>>> something similar available in Canada when we get back there next
>>> April, we will be all set. --Paul]
>>
>> 30$ a month is a lot cheaper than anything available here in Iceland.
>> The cheapest company here offers you unlimited download on a wireless
>> broadband connection for about 90$ a month. And it's the only company
>> here currently offering unlimited download. Just a year ago there was
>> no company in Iceland that offered unlimited download. These are some
>> of the negatives of living in such a small country.
>>
>> [Unless the Icelandic government has permitted the company you
>> mention to operate a government protected monopoly, there is an
>> opportunity for enterprising individuals to compete by offering
>> service at a lower rate. We are not in a metropolitan area; in fact
>> our house is too far away from the nearest town to even have cable TV.
>> The wireless is new to the area, and the very first company that
>> offered it about 4 years ago did not stay solvent; for some reason it
>> went broke. The company we have is owned and operated by someone with
>> a fair amount of experience in the Intenet service providing business
>> including wireless. When governments stay out of it, the market place
>> operates just fine. **Kitty]
>
> I am not aware of any government restrictions that inhibit competition
> in this market. This company I'm talking about is new and just
> started about a year ago. Before that there were only two major
> companies here (I think) offering broadband internet service and
> neither of them offered unlimited download. And their prices were
> pretty high. When this third company hit the marked with lower prices
> and unlimited download the prices at the other two companies dropped
> substantially. The problem is that there isn't room for many internet
> service companies in such a small country as Iceland is. I don't
> think there was any need for a third company offering internet
> service, the first two could easily provide all Icelanders with
> internet service, the only reason the third company came in is because
> there was an opportunity to offer better service and lower prices.
>
> [It sounds like the two original companies were likely colluding to keep
> the price high and the third company saw an opening to out-compete them.
> Grabbing every "opportunity to offer better service and lower prices" is
> what the free market is all about. --Paul]
>
>

Why did you use the word "colluding to keep the price high" instead of
"cooperating to keep the price and their profits high"? I assumed that
colluding would also be on your list somewhere near price gouging perhaps.

[Robert has raised a point that needs to be considered. How should such phrases
as "colluding", "price gouging" and other phrases, which are generally used to
describe "unfair business practices" of one form or another, be viewed and
understood in terms of the philosophical approach that I maintain is the only
one which is valid for human reality?

The standard meaning of these phrases is based on the notion that there exists
some meaning of fairness in terms of what prices of goods or services should be
charged under various circumstances, which meaning is based on the views of
either those who are paying the prices or others (except the seller) examining
the situation. However, this is inconsistent with the theory of Social
Meta-Needs, which clearly shows that all exchanged values should be such as to
maximize the Lifetime Happiness of the exchange participants - the Lifetime
Happiness of everyone else thereby being also maximized relative to the
exchange. Therefore, under the theory of SMN, the only logical meaning to give
to such "unfair business practice" terms is that they are practices that are
actually *not* in the interest of maximizing the Lifetime Happiness of the
persons practicing them, as long as the market is sufficiently free and fluid
enough to allow their less than optimal effects to actually happen.

So in the above particular case, while I could have said "cooperating to keep
the price and their profits high", such cooperation would not be effective in
keeping either their prices or profits high unless there were also governmental
interference and/or individual irrational actions (people not acting to maximize
their Lifetime Happiness) in the marketplace. My use of the word "colluding"
instead of "cooperating" was an implication that such lack of a truly free
market existed at that time. Hopefully, the vendors involved have learned their
lesson and now realize that if they had charged lower prices and offered more
service options, then it would not likely have been worthwhile for a new service
supplier to enter the market, and so their customer base would not have been
eroded and their long range income would have remained higher. This is what
happens when one tries to be greedy (short term self-interest). --Paul]

[An article at mises.org this past Thursday was prompted by hearings underway in
Congress on "price gouging" in the energy markets following the hurricanes this
year. "Four Thousand Years of Price Control" by Thomas DiLorenzo is an
especially good read for those who are not familiar with the historically
demonstrated folly of price controls and think that government intervention in
the marketplace is the way to obtain products/services at more desirable prices.
http://mises.org/story/1962 **Kitty]


Regards,
R. Rolen

P.S. I'm still working on those other messages whenever I get a free minute.
I haven't yet received those partial comments you said you'ld send me.

[I have just sent what I had. --Paul]

Have an ETA for the revised NSC?

[No. But I will shortly post a detailed example illustrating some of it. --Paul]