I get your point. But the buyer will only pay for the value that the buyer perceives for the service or product. That’s not just capitalism, that has been the case since trade was invented. So you are paying a certain sum for a bicycle, because it is a transportation solution for a challenge that you and similar people have: how to get from A to B, it must be sturdy, comfortable etc. As the buyer, you don’t care whether one of the screws was produced under terrible circumstances, you won’t pay a higher price for that bike to help that poor person somewhere down the line, that whole concept is too abstract. I’m not saying that’s a good thing; but I’m skeptical we will ever be able to completely change that, as most buyers will just look at the price and check whether it reflects the value (eg many of us may know that, for many reasons, we shouldn’t buy Chinese products, but weirdly enough Chinese exports are still booming).
Too many people’s entire understanding of Economics is based on learning about two lemonade stands competing to sell lemonade. For some reason they stopped there and apply it to literally everything.
It’s like learning the food pyramid and then trying to use it to explain the digestive system.
I would further disagree that ppl don’t buy stuff out of ethical considerations. There are eggs from cage and free running henns. They are functional the same but free running hens have a better life, so ppl buy that.
The problem is not if it is ethical but if it is measurable or comparative more ethical
Inelastic services like healthcare, lawyers, etc. Your first sentence is not some “great truth” mate. Even basic capitalist economics contradicts it. Do you think people are paying massive spikes in Diesel because they see it’s value has increased? No. It has a near inelastic demand.
And why should we “not buy Chinese products?” Are you still stuck in the 90s thinking “Chinese product means poorly produced?”
I get your point. But the buyer will only pay for the value that the buyer perceives for the service or product. That’s not just capitalism, that has been the case since trade was invented. So you are paying a certain sum for a bicycle, because it is a transportation solution for a challenge that you and similar people have: how to get from A to B, it must be sturdy, comfortable etc. As the buyer, you don’t care whether one of the screws was produced under terrible circumstances, you won’t pay a higher price for that bike to help that poor person somewhere down the line, that whole concept is too abstract. I’m not saying that’s a good thing; but I’m skeptical we will ever be able to completely change that, as most buyers will just look at the price and check whether it reflects the value (eg many of us may know that, for many reasons, we shouldn’t buy Chinese products, but weirdly enough Chinese exports are still booming).
That’s only true if demand is perfectly elastic
Too many people’s entire understanding of Economics is based on learning about two lemonade stands competing to sell lemonade. For some reason they stopped there and apply it to literally everything.
It’s like learning the food pyramid and then trying to use it to explain the digestive system.
I would further disagree that ppl don’t buy stuff out of ethical considerations. There are eggs from cage and free running henns. They are functional the same but free running hens have a better life, so ppl buy that.
The problem is not if it is ethical but if it is measurable or comparative more ethical
Inelastic services like healthcare, lawyers, etc. Your first sentence is not some “great truth” mate. Even basic capitalist economics contradicts it. Do you think people are paying massive spikes in Diesel because they see it’s value has increased? No. It has a near inelastic demand.
And why should we “not buy Chinese products?” Are you still stuck in the 90s thinking “Chinese product means poorly produced?”