this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2024
1135 points (92.8% liked)
Microblog Memes
5412 readers
1403 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
- !whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works
- !best_of_mastodon@sh.itjust.works
- !curatedtwitter@sh.itjust.works
- !curatedtumblr@sh.itjust.works
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
See you're assuming they wouldn't jack up the prices even without theft, as someone who studied business it's literally taught to see how far you can push before the breaking point. line go up. It does suck in undeserved communities but there's not much we can do, people in those communities often vote against their best interest.
The breaking point, though, is the point when consumers will look to alternatives, e.g. a different store. As long as there are other options available, competition does usually do a decent job of keeping prices down.
And companies in a free market would never, ever collude to keep prices high in the face of that very competition you think will keep prices down, right? In fact that's exactly what we're seeing right now, is prices being kept down by the absolutely healthy competition in the Canadian grocery market, right?
Look collusion is a thing, but it's illegal. Grocery stores, even the big chains in the US anyways are pretty cutthroat, they aren't making huge profits they're fighting to survive vs Amazon and the like. Anyways my point is that the claim that costs don't affect prices (and therefore losses from theft don't affect prices) is just silly.