I got some issues with Supply/Demand ...

All of those things affect equilibrium. There existence in no way, whatsoever takes S & D off the table. It makes no difference whatsoever what you put in quotations, your wrong, dead wrong.

 

This makes no logical sense.

 

Equilibrium has nothing whatsover to do with supply/demand. Equilibrium has to do with committee meetings in command economies.

 

Thank you for highlighting your ignorance on the subject. Why don't you try educating yourself on the topic before continuing to spew this unsupportable garbage?

 

Actually, everything you buy is based on supply and demand. The mere fact you have things to buy is proof of it! You are able to buy milk because there is suffcient demand for milk to ensure its supply.

 

I think our economy has proven me correct. Supply and demand mean nothing if either are artificial. All they do is give you a meaningless point on a graph.

 

as supply increases then its the price that needs to change in order to absorbe that extra supply...otherwise if prices remained the same there would be a glut. On the other hand if supply dropped you need a higher price until people stop buying so that once again supply and demand meet at some price.

The key is price so that no matter what the supply there is a price where suppy and damand shall meet...too low a pirce will create shortages as there will be too many buyers.....too high a price will result in a glut as there will be more supply than buyers.

Price is the key!

 

No amount of pointless platitudes are going to "prove" anything your saying. This isn't an area where Phoebe's anecdotal observations matter, this is very basic economics and there's really no wiggle room.

Again, go and at least make an attempt at educating yourself on the subject before replying.

 

and that whole graph shifts vertically on the instantaneous level of inflation. Hence prices eternally rise and steal value from you.

 

Usually it decreases price, but in certain situations it can have other effects. Sometimes increase in the supply of luxury goods decreases demand.

In classical economics, increase of supply will just reduce price, not demand. But in reality, there can be equilibrium shifts (willingness of workers to work for less money if it requires less money to maintain the same standard of living), so it arguably it could be the case that supply would also be reduced. (But this would be the wrong answer on a school economics exam!)

Demand typically remains unchanged.

 

I hope you haven't deluded yourself into thinking we have anything approaching a market economy. If you have, please tell me what you're smoking.

 

I remember a while back when there was very little purified bottled water for sale. Its popularity was not established by the masters of the universe.

 

Do you exchange currency for goods and services?

I rest my case.

 

You obviously don't understand what a market economy is... as opposed to a PLANNED economy.

 

Quite the contrary. The prices of those goods and services are determined by a free price system. To be frank, my statement didn't really exemplify either (I was frustrated chatting with Phoebe), since in either you'd exchange currency for goods and services. The important caveat I should have mentioned is that prices are set by the sellers of these wares and not by the state or other entities.

 

We have neither in America. Our system is mixed leaning towards market, although the huge amounts of cartels and oligopolies we have drives up prices.

 

The US has a planned fascist economy.

 

This is hyperbolic nonsense. There is no state control over long term production planning, much less in price setting.

I was hoping based on your avatar you might have something thoughtful to contribute, but it seems your just another PF sensationalist.

 

Right...our economy is planned...we have bread lines and you have to wait years to buy a car...

Do you even know what a planned economy is?

 

Neither of you understands what the Federal Reserve does or what role government legislation plays in the economy.

 

And you're one liners do nothing to enlighten us on how either of those actors adds up to us being in a fascist planned economy.

I've read enough of Quest posts to know that both he and I have a very clear understanding of the role of the FED and even with that knowledge intact, it does not in anyway whatsoever support the notions that you've presented.

 

Dude, they exchanged currency for goods and services in Stalinist Russia.

What was your case again?

 

The Fed's semi-control over the money supply and interest rates is one of the few aspects of planning in our mixed economy. It does not make our economy planned however.

 

It's not my job to enlighten you. You post no evidence to counter my claim.

The US economy is thoroughly planned, the Fed dictates interest rates and provides inflation while the state regulates monetary and fiscal policy. Plus the state also regulates what businesses stay solvent (Lehman Bros as opposed to GM). The state can overturn private contracts, as in the case with private security holders being shafted in favor of unions. The state can implement non-scientific environmental regulation that can bury entire industries, as in oil and coal. The state can cause a housing bubble that when popped sends the entire economy into a tailspin. Etc. Etc.

 

Oh lookie! Another person who fails to understand the concept of burden of proof. You made the claim, the burden lies with you. Your consternation is understandable since you've got nothing to support your half cocked nonsense.