tell me everything you guys know about economics and topic related to perfect and pure competition
>>515317
Perfect competition isn't logistically possible
>>515317
Read about John Law for a good economics laugh.
>>515479
I prefer tulipomania
Socialism is bad, capitalism is good.
Freedom is good.
>>515319
>High schooler career advice board
No thanks, theyre more of a quarantine than this board
>>515517
They're a quarantine for marginalism. And your post belongs there.
Around here we like economic historians and political economists.
>>515317
If you were in a perfectly competitive market, you would make no economic profit. And Adam Smith knew this.
>>515910
Are you suggesting that under perfect competition that labour will be capable of enforcing a wage exactly equal to [C' - mp]?
>>515317
> topic related to perfect and pure competition
http://tuvalu.santafe.edu/~wbarthur/Papers/Arthur_1989.pdf
http://tuvalu.santafe.edu/~wbarthur/Papers/El_Farol
>>515929
I don't know what your terms are?
>>516142
>I don't know what your terms are?
Time for you to go read Capital.
>>516165
Sorry, I thought we were discussing economics.
>>515317
You're on the wrong board for Economics buddy.
>>516172
>History & Humanities
Economics is neither of those.
>>515317
Perfect = all goods in a category are about the same, prices are around the same area.
The best example of this is the stock market, shares of apple are the same price at the exact same time.
Most things are not like that. Also, this is a liberal space, they don't take kindly to capitalism here.
>>516257
>this is a liberal space, they don't take kindly to capitalism here.
You'd need to define the concepts you are talking about for your comment to make sense
>perfect and pure competition
Merely theoretic.
>>516827
Nice one mate. Good observation that their terms are vacuous. I'm not bullshitting you at all. Really I'm not. The more I try to convince you I'm honest the more you'll believe I'm ironic. But I'm not being ironic. I genuinely think you did god's work there. Bloody oath.
>>515317
Monetarism: God tier
Keynesian: Okay tier
Marxist: Shit tier
Praxeology: Downs Syndrome tier
The rest is commentary, go learn it
>>516872
A high standard of discourse is expected here. (the sticky)
>>516252
>Economics is not part of the humanities
>>516880
No mate, its methodological assumption of a false proxy marx (ha ha) it as a social science.
>>517050
Yeah, because utilitarianism is so coherent.
>>516880
いいと思いだ
oligopolistic monopolic monospony master race here
