FionaK |
|
| Another argument in favour of competition seems to be that it will foster "efficiency" as a direct consequence of the search for profit. That makes no sense to me either. As I noted above all the supermarkets near me are run by the same firm. That is the most "efficient" for them, as a moment's reflection will show. Let us suppose there was true competition. For that to happen I would have to have a choice of supermarket within reasonable travelling distance of my home. Those different supermarkets would have to offer a full range of goods at the best price they can manage and I would be free to pick where to spend my money.
If you think about it what that means is that there has to be duplication. But duplication is not "efficient": it is a waste of resource. That is why there is no choice, I think. Competition is a source of inefficiency, in and of itself. The supermarkets know this and they act on it. So why do the rest of us pretend otherwise?
|
| | |
