A Question for the Consumers

[Xavier434]

Let me guess. The entire point here is you don't like how the FDA and other orgs like it can sometimes make things more challenging and expensive for individuals to create and sell a new product due to regulation? I only skimmed the thread so maybe this was pointed out already and I missed it.

Basically, I have heard this a million times from a million other libertarians. It all boils down to a case by case basis as well as considering the other end of spectrum. In other words, some types of products really feel the weaknesses of the FDA unnecessarily while it is generally a good thing that others are so highly regulated. For example, I like that all of the medicine I buy over the counter has a really low chance at making me really sick. However, I wouldn't have that much of a problem if there was more flexibility when it comes to inventing and selling a new type of light bulb.

In summary, I want some products to have heavy standards and regulations and I am willing to pay for it. Others...not so much. Does that mean I am happy with certain things like the price of healthcare products? No, but I am not willing to sacrifice quality assurance and checks and balances in order to lower the cost.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Xavier434
Let me guess. The entire point here is you don't like how the FDA and other orgs like it can sometimes make things more challenging and expensive for individuals to create and sell a new product due to regulation? I only skimmed the thread so maybe this was pointed out already and I missed it. ...

I thought the point might be that as you reduce competition, consumers find higher prices and declining service. Many of the examples cited have limited competition within their local markets. Many others, for example financial services, rely on consumer ignorance and intimidation to support inflated prices.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
I'm not a big believer in purposely whipping up negativity.

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Check this space soon for a list of promises broken by BHO.

 

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: bamacre
How many people here in the USA have a choice in companies that offer Cable TV over fiber optic?

Only the lucky ones.... there are some of us just ouside the more densely populated cities who have only recently gotten a choice other than basic dial-up. Yet others b*tch about not getting 50Mb FIOS for an ourageous $50/month. Broadband policy and subsequent deployment in this country has been waaaay behind for a long time.

If you are trying to compare us to somewhere like Japan, that is rediculous. How small is that island? How dense is the population? It is MUCH easier to roll something out to an island nation.


Infrastructure takes massive investment. Then when they charge $50 for their premium package, you complain and say it is outrageous. They have to recoup the costs, or noone will invest.

No, I'm not trying to compare the US to Japan or some other densely populated country. I'm comparing areas entirely within the US. Hell, the best thing to happen to Japanese telcom infrastructure was American bombs. They basically had to rewire their country from scratch, whereas the US was still going off its ageing lines for a much longer time. Broadband deployment can be compared implementation-wise to the initial rollout of power and telephony services to rural populations. If we truly had a coordinated policy like we did for these, we would all have had access years ago and would be at better speeds than we are today.

Besides, sattelite networks are hardly a substitute for DSL, Cable, or Fiber connections. Anyone who has had to deal with Directway (Hughes...whatever...) knows this. Cellular networks leave much to be desired due to slow speeds and outrageous costs of data plans (as compared to other services by the same companies or the operating costs of celltowers after the initial investment of erecting them). WiMAX? You'd be lucky to find that in most places. Whatever happened to broadband over power lines anyway?

I have EVDO rev. A and it's decent. Usually can do about 1.5Mbps down and 400kbps up. The major downside is latency (usually around 150ms), but this is supposed to be improved with 4G networks.

Prices can be high, though, at least with a datacard. Some providers offer tethering at a reduced price. For Alltel, unlimited data tethering used to be $10/mo with a smartphone and $25/mo with a regular handset. I think prices got bumped up $5/mo a few months ago, but my $10/mo smartphone tethering was grandfathered in. It's kind of up in the air what will happen now that Verizon bought them out, though. Their tethering plans are much more expensive, and they also enforce a 5GB/mo bandwidth cap (I average probably 20GB/mo on my Alltel service).

I expect we'll start to see a lot more competition in the wireless market over the next few years, though. I'm hopeful this will help bring prices down among incumbent cell phone providers.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Craig234
I have a Canon printer I bought for $50 - the MP610 - with highly rated print and photo quality, a nice scanner, and LCD display, and more. When you think about the cost to make that printer in terms of *our* economics - our wages - it's absurd. We couldn't begin to make a printer like that without charging several times that amount.

Many companies that sell printers sell them at a loss. They hope to make up the cost in ink sales.

The only service I'm unhappy about is my landline. AT&T was screwing me. I'm changning over to another provider. They'll try to screw me too. Ain't competition a great thing?

Fair enough, but it applies to other items without that issue. Take the 9800 GS video card for $38 available now, take the radio alarm clock at Target for $4.99.

My landline is AT&T...

I haven't found a good deal on a landline, but my long distance is with CREDO/working assets to support liberal groups.

Haven't seen anything about the 9800GS but it's probably an exception for pricing for that card, not the rule. Alarm clock at Target? Maybe a loss leader used to get people in stores?

For my landline Brighthouse finally showed up today and switched me over to their phone service. $40/month for unlimited local and long distance, including Canada, Mexico, and a few other places. That works well for me since my boss lives in Canada, my coworkers are all over the place in the US, and we have frequent conference calls. Beats paying AT&T $100+ per month.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
I'm not a big believer in purposely whipping up negativity.

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Check this space soon for a list of promises broken by BHO.

Holding politicians to their promises is purposely whipping up negativity? They are politicians and will break promises. Infact - BHO looks to be breaking one already with his promised job creation tax-cuts. Seems they don't have any Senate support - I wonder if he'll push for them in a week or so?

Anyway - I look at the BHO promises broken as a positive.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: bamacre
We all buy all kinds of goods and services. From shoes to LCD monitors, cars and houses, haircuts to doctor visits. It is really amazing how much money trades hands or goes through the intertubes every day.

My question is pretty simple. With what products and services are you unhappy? Cost to benefit. I'm not talking about comparing different brands or different companies. What do you think is too expensive for what you get in return, or where is the quality in your opinion too low, regardless of what brand or company you choose from which to buy? The answers could be anything, good or service.

Before anyone asks, yes, this is a serious topic.

This one should hit home with you. The New Ebay absolutely sucks!

 

[Schadenfroh]

The college textbook industry.

 

[Zebo]

Nothing I buy has a poor price to performance ratio. I am a happy consumer.

 

[KlokWyze]

Cell phones, car repair, rent.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: Xavier434
Let me guess. The entire point here is you don't like how the FDA and other orgs like it can sometimes make things more challenging and expensive for individuals to create and sell a new product due to regulation? I only skimmed the thread so maybe this was pointed out already and I missed it. ...

I thought the point might be that as you reduce competition, consumers find higher prices and declining service. Many of the examples cited have limited competition within their local markets. Many others, for example financial services, rely on consumer ignorance and intimidation to support inflated prices.

It falls in the same line of what you are thinking. The idea here is that the regulations that the FDA enforces reduce the free markets ability to compete in exchange for quality assurance which to me may or may not be worth it depending on the product. Now, arguing about whether or not the FDA does their job well is something different. They do some things with some products really well and they do not do such a good job with others as it turns out.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: Xavier434
Let me guess. The entire point here is you don't like how the FDA and other orgs like it can sometimes make things more challenging and expensive for individuals to create and sell a new product due to regulation? I only skimmed the thread so maybe this was pointed out already and I missed it. ...

I thought the point might be that as you reduce competition, consumers find higher prices and declining service. Many of the examples cited have limited competition within their local markets. Many others, for example financial services, rely on consumer ignorance and intimidation to support inflated prices.

It falls in the same line of what you are thinking. The idea here is that the regulations that the FDA enforces reduce the free markets ability to compete in exchange for quality assurance which to me may or may not be worth it depending on the product. Now, arguing about whether or not the FDA does their job well is something different. They do some things with some products really well and they do not do such a good job with others as it turns out.

Just an FYI here, this thread was posted because I knew that the vast majority of answers would be goods or services that are either highly regulated by government, subsidized, and/or an industry where there is large government intervention.

It was certainly not posted in regards to specific government agencies (FDA), or just regulated products and services, leaving out government subsidized goods.

Like it or not, agree with it or not, the answers in this thread speak for themselves.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: bamacre
Just an FYI here, this thread was posted because I knew that the vast majority of answers would be goods or services that are either highly regulated by government, subsidized, and/or an industry where there is large government intervention.

It was certainly not posted in regards to specific government agencies (FDA), or just regulated products and services, leaving out government subsidized goods.

Like it or not, agree with it or not, the answers in this thread speak for themselves.

I don't know that the examples given support your premise very well; there are just as many examples of dissatisfaction with lightly-regulated or increasingly deregulated industries as there are with heavily-regulated industries. For example, two glaring counterexamples I can think of are banking and airlines. The quality of service of both declined sharply with deregulation, banking costs continue to skyrocket, and while airline prices dropped in busy markets, smaller markets are gouged.

I agree that over-regulation can stifle innovation and discourage competition. Unfortunately, so can an unregulated market that encourages the development of effective monopolies and cartels. As with most things, the secret is balance and moderation. In the U.S. we seem to swing from one extreme to the other, overreacting to the day's headlines and political fads.

 

[bozack]

Pays to read the post...my bad...

So that is an interesting question.

I would also say for my list:

Standard phone service...kinda costly when one considers cell phone costs.

Gourmet coffee chains...not a big starbucks fan when I compare it to dunks

High end (if there is such a thing) chain places to eat...these really tick me off as they usually put good local places out of business, I am always amazed at the crowd a suck ass PF changs or Cheescake factory brings in.

High end department stores ...Nordstroms took over for Filenes here under the guise that they would compete with Macys...not the case as Nordstroms is considerably more expensive, sure better quality stuff but personally why bother when I can get even better stuff from other places for less money.

Luxury Jewelery stores...can find most branded stuff on the net from reputable places or you can find authorised dealers out of state that are willing to discount and ship for free.

Razor blades...one reason I switched to a high end german made double edge razor was I was tired of getting a sub standard shave from those gillette mach/fusion series razors...sure the handle was expensive ($40) as were the accessories for a good shave ($90 brush and typically $30 shave cream), but the stuff lasts forever and blades cost about $5 for a pack of ten and even that is expensive.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: bamacre
Just an FYI here, this thread was posted because I knew that the vast majority of answers would be goods or services that are either highly regulated by government, subsidized, and/or an industry where there is large government intervention.

It was certainly not posted in regards to specific government agencies (FDA), or just regulated products and services, leaving out government subsidized goods.

Like it or not, agree with it or not, the answers in this thread speak for themselves.

I don't know that the examples given support your premise very well; there are just as many examples of dissatisfaction with lightly-regulated or increasingly deregulated industries as there are with heavily-regulated industries. For example, two glaring counterexamples I can think of are banking and airlines. The quality of service of both declined sharply with deregulation, banking costs continue to skyrocket, and while airline prices dropped in busy markets, smaller markets are gouged.

I agree that over-regulation can stifle innovation and discourage competition. Unfortunately, so can an unregulated market that encourages the development of effective monopolies and cartels. As with most things, the secret is balance and moderation. In the U.S. we seem to swing from one extreme to the other, overreacting to the day's headlines and political fads.

The banking system and the airlines are glaring counterexamples? I don't know if I should be or :laugh:.

But you can't take a heavily regulated market, remove a few regulations, and compare that to a market that is not or very little regulated.

To add, sure, seeing free, or even much freer markets is probably a pipe dream. But so is your "balance." You're never going to get "balance" when we allow government to manage the economy and intervene in the markets. The most important goods/services will always be just the first markets to be intervened/managed by government. Food, health care, money, communications, travel, weaponry, all just a beginning.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: bamacre
Just an FYI here, this thread was posted because I knew that the vast majority of answers would be goods or services that are either highly regulated by government, subsidized, and/or an industry where there is large government intervention.

It was certainly not posted in regards to specific government agencies (FDA), or just regulated products and services, leaving out government subsidized goods.

Like it or not, agree with it or not, the answers in this thread speak for themselves.

Sorry pal, but as I already stated, I would much rather have the government regulate certain products like medicine so that when my kid is sick I don't have to walk down the pharmacy isle fearing that one of the products I buy for him might make him a lot worse and maybe even put him in the hospital. The regulation on these products and services is not always a good thing as I have already mentioned, but it is a great thing in other cases. At the very least, the regulation in many cases is a lot better than what it would be like without it. Price is not always everything that matters.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Xavier434
Sorry pal, but as I already stated, I would much rather have the government regulate certain products like medicine so that when my kid is sick I don't have to walk down the pharmacy isle fearing that one of the products I buy for him might make him a lot worse and maybe even put him in the hospital.

It happens all the time.

And the FDA isn't the only organization that could do this job. If the government wasn't doing it, someone else would. And they'd most likely do a better job of it. If not, another organization would simply do it.

 

[BoomerD]

I'm pissed that it's getting more and more difficult to find anything "Made in America."

I'm pissed that when I call my telephone company, my satellite tv company, or even my bank, I get routed to some mutt in India named "Steve" who can barely speak Engrish, and can't manage to deal with anything not covered by his script. I usually bitch enough to get passed on to someone in the USA.

I get pissed every month with my city utility bill. It goes up every dammed month even though the service doesn't get any better...same for all the utilities such as electric, gas, satellite tv, and phones.

Grocery prices irritate me, but it pisses me off that farmers can't make enough on their crops to cover their expenses, even though prices keep going up.

It really pisses me off that car & truck prices are so dammed high. There's no reason for a new pick-up to be $30K or more, and it's almost impossible to find a decent car under $25K. (I'm a big guy and can't shoehorn myself into most of the econoboxes)


Hell, I'm getting old...EVERYTHING pisses me off nowadays.

Hey! You kids...get the fuck off my lawn!

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
I'm pissed that it's getting more and more difficult to find anything "Made in America."

I'm pissed that when I call my telephone company, my satellite tv company, or even my bank, I get routed to some mutt in India named "Steve" who can barely speak Engrish, and can't manage to deal with anything not covered by his script. I usually bitch enough to get passed on to someone in the USA.

I get pissed every month with my city utility bill. It goes up every dammed month even though the service doesn't get any better...same for all the utilities such as electric, gas, satellite tv, and phones.

Grocery prices irritate me, but it pisses me off that farmers can't make enough on their crops to cover their expenses, even though prices keep going up.

It really pisses me off that car & truck prices are so dammed high. There's no reason for a new pick-up to be $30K or more, and it's almost impossible to find a decent car under $25K. (I'm a big guy and can't shoehorn myself into most of the econoboxes)


Hell, I'm getting old...EVERYTHING pisses me off nowadays.

Hey! You kids...get the fuck off my lawn!

7/10

Hey I saw in the paper this morning a F150 XLT 4x4 for $18,000 probably a price leader but now is the time to get cheap trucks if ever.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Xavier434
Sorry pal, but as I already stated, I would much rather have the government regulate certain products like medicine so that when my kid is sick I don't have to walk down the pharmacy isle fearing that one of the products I buy for him might make him a lot worse and maybe even put him in the hospital.

It happens all the time.

And the FDA isn't the only organization that could do this job. If the government wasn't doing it, someone else would. And they'd most likely do a better job of it. If not, another organization would simply do it.

I'd rather leave it in the hands of the government.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: Zebo
[7/10

Hey I saw in the paper this morning a F150 XLT 4x4 for $18,000 probably a price leader but now is the time to get cheap trucks if ever.

You can find "plain jane" trucks for around $20K if you look hard enough.

I'd love to have a 2009 F150 King Ranch to match our 2005 Expedition King Ranch...but I'm just not gonna fork over $42K to have one...

 

[piasabird]

Even though you have cable it may be fiber until it gets to the telephone pole or some combination thereof.

I have a lot of complaints.

Cars. I dont think automobiles are worth what they want for them. Have not purchased a new car in about 15 year.

Groceries are way overpriced. It is like in the last year prices went up 15-40% tepending on what it is. I think the American consumer is being ripped off. This is the one item that has to be hurting the poorest of the poor the most.

Telephone service has been getting better. I dont know what the deal is with texting. Who has time to try to type letters into a phone? That is almost as bad as people in the grocery store who have conversations with invisible people and the stupid comm devices in their ears. Looks like a computer zombie. My main complaint is what are all those charges for an actual telephone at a residence. Line fees + Whatever turns a $30.00 phone service into a $75.00 phone service. So I disconnected my land based phone and went totally cellular. I guess what might be nice is table top cellphone you can plug into the wall power plug. Better yet would be a docking station like they have for a MP3 player. That way your cell phone can be a home phone that can ring all over the house.

Dont Smoke.
Dont Drink Alcohol.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Xavier434
Sorry pal, but as I already stated, I would much rather have the government regulate certain products like medicine so that when my kid is sick I don't have to walk down the pharmacy isle fearing that one of the products I buy for him might make him a lot worse and maybe even put him in the hospital.

It happens all the time.

And the FDA isn't the only organization that could do this job. If the government wasn't doing it, someone else would. And they'd most likely do a better job of it. If not, another organization would simply do it.

I'd rather leave it in the hands of the government.

Yeah, because they are so effective and efficient.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Yeah, because they are so effective and efficient.

They would be if Ron Paul was in charge, right?

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Xavier434
Sorry pal, but as I already stated, I would much rather have the government regulate certain products like medicine so that when my kid is sick I don't have to walk down the pharmacy isle fearing that one of the products I buy for him might make him a lot worse and maybe even put him in the hospital.

It happens all the time.

And the FDA isn't the only organization that could do this job. If the government wasn't doing it, someone else would. And they'd most likely do a better job of it. If not, another organization would simply do it.

I'd rather leave it in the hands of the government.

Yeah, because they are so effective and efficient.

See, that is where you and I share a different opinion. I don't believe that everything in government is ineffective and inefficient. In the case of orgs like the FDA, it depends on the product we are talking about like I keep mentioning post after post. Personally, I don't have any problems with the medicines. I live without fear that my medicines have a very low chance of hurting me or my loved ones when I buy them. I am satisfied with the quality and the reason I am satisfied is because the FDA does a good job most of the time when it comes to my medicines. I am generally happy with most of my products and services for that matter.

Why would I want to completely revamp the system considering the number of unknowns and risks involved if we did when I am mostly satisfied now? I recognize that there are flaws but they are not nearly large enough to convince me that we should privatize the whole thing. That is lunacy imo.