[ExI] Economic laws/was Re: retrainability of plebeians

[Damien Broderick]

>>As just one example, if GM cut the price of their cars by 10%,
>>consumers probably wouldn't rush to buy. Why not? Where has the 'law'
>>gone that says cut prices = sell more? It is because of expectations
>>that next month prices will be even cheaper.
>
>This show that you don't really understand the law.
>It say that if prices go down the number of car sold will not go 
>down. They could stay the same or they could go up. And there is no 
>prior way to know exactly how many more cars would be sold, as this 
>depend on the preferences of the single persons.

Actually "there is no prior way ever to know how many cars would be 
sold" just as there was no way at the end of the 19th century to know 
how many horses would be sold by 1950. It's quantification of 
guesswork. How many SUVs will be sold if the price of oil goes up intolerably?

>If GM sell 1M car at 20K $/car, slashing the price 10% will not 
>guarantee that the number of car sold will grow, but only that the 
>number of car sold will not reduce.

This explains why the number of buggy whips, manual typewriters and 
ice boxes sold each year has never fallen even though price has 
plummeted. (You might reply that demand for these items has been 
affected by more than price alone. That's true. Add another epicycle 
to that effect.)