Re: They're at it again

On May 11, 8:02 am, Nick <nicknom...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Tchiowa <tchio...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote innews:1178765873.839312.144650@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

On May 9, 3:55 pm, justicefora...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On May 9, 11:59 am, Tchiowa <tchio...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On May 9, 7:57 am, justicefora...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

On May 9, 7:52 am, Tchiowa <tchio...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Now the Thai government is trying to block chains like
Carrefour and Tesco from further investment in Thailand.

Now? The Thaksin government also kept a close watch on these chains and
seems to have repeatedly let it's ears hang down to protests.

I looked and just can't find where I said that this government is the
only one to act stupidly like this. That doesn't alter the fact that
it's stupid.

Short sighted, again. Just like the attempts to manipulate the
currency to appease shrimp exporters, just like the attempts to
break patents on drugs.

Progress requires change and change means disruption. Block
disruption and you block change and you prevent progress.

That depends on how you define disruption, if you define disruption as a
violent dissolution of continuity it's actually good to block some of the
"violence" this will facilitate the process of bringing about desired
changes as it will further acceptance.

Change will *always* cause disruption. That doesn't mean that
disruption is good or that you should have disruption for the sake of
disruption. But if you block disruption per se then you block change.

If people don't want it then it won't succeed and will get shut
down and then Lotus, etc. will stop themselves. If they succeed
then that means the people *do* want it.

So people now expressing they don't want them should be ignored?
What about their rigths to have their voices heard NOW?

What about the rights of *ALL* to have their voices heard? The only
Thai having their voices heard right now are the small business owner
who don't want the competition. What about the Thai that *DO* want the
new businesses? Should their voices be heard?

If you allow the competition then the Thai people, ALL the Thai
people, get to choose. If the hyper markets fail then the people have
been heard that they are against it. But it the markets succeed then
the people will have been heard when they voted with their feet and
wallets.

But block the market and you block people from being allowed to be
heard.

Let the market take care of itself. Or, to put it another way, the
market *WILL* take care of itself. If you stand in front of it and
try to block progress you will eventually get trampled.

Which ignores that these people (specifically small business people) won
(at least for now) and maybe will be given precious time to adapt to
changes in the market, so that they will be better able to deal with them.

?????? You don't adapt by blocking changes so that you don't have to
adapt.

Well the little business people stood in the way and another Lotus
will not be built in Chiang Mai, nor any other large supermarket
chain. People don't want and small business people don't want. Bottom
line it won't be built. PERIOD !!

Does this relate to what you wrote above Bob?
"500 merchants oppose Tesco Lotus

Nopniwat Krailerg
500 merchants in Mae Malai Market, Mae Taeng district, Chiang Mai, rejected
plans to construct a Tesco Lotus supermarket in the locality. Many of the
market traders were afraid of getting less income, which is quite
understandable when you realize that nearly all the merchants buy goods
from Tesco Lotus to sell on their stalls.
Tesco Lotus is proposing to construct a 900 sq meter supermarket near Mae
Malai Market, on an area of five rai, causing great alarm to the local
merchants.
Tambon San Mahaphon Municipality, Mae Taeng district will arrange a public
hearing with local people if the plans are rejected. Representatives from
Tesco Lotus will also be notified if the plans will not go through."http://www.chiangmai-mail.com/188/news.shtml#hd3

500 people oppose. Maybe 100 times that many might shop at Tesco if it
were allowed to open. Their voices aren't being heard.

Do they represent enough
of the people to justify it? The only way to properly find out is to
let the market work itself.

They could have held a referendum, if Thai law provides such a possibility
and they really wanted too.

Yes they could. And that would accomplish the same thing.

The article I quoted above speaks about a public hearing.
Do you think these small business people should just give up their rights
to fight against what they feel is a threat because of some free market
democracy idea that they might not be particular fond of?

No. They should be allowed to protest.

Now do you think that the majority should give up their rights to shop
where they want to in order to prevent the 500 protestors from having
to change?

Why are you supportive of Thaksin's policies to encourage rural poor to
start small businesses but at yet the same time you seem to be
unsympathetic to the plight of small businesses when they feel threatened
in it's existence by big business.

Yes, on both cases. I support starting businesses. I also support
allowing the market to decide which of those businesses will succeed.

It's the only way to make sure you get it right.

*SOME* people protected their own small businesses. *OTHER* people
will now be denied an opportunity to shop where they want to (lower
prices, better selection, whatever motivation they might have).

You mess with market forces and eventually you will lose.

So what are market forces? I would think those pop and moms shops
are also market forces and they might have felt they were messed with so
they used whatever (political) influence they have and this time they
seemed to have won.

Yes they won. Who lost? Maybe a whole lot more people.

Remember that market forces are nothing more than the people voting
with their wallets on what they want.

That's something that one part of the market forces, basically the
suppliers would like consumers to believe, ignoring consumers at times are
quite powerless and suppliers sometimes collude against consumers or other
parties.
How much power do for instance rural poor really have to freely vote when
these wallets are relatively empty, how much choice do these people really
have?

Very little. Particularly when they are forced to shop at small shops
that have to recoup their costs with limited sales as opposed to
larger shops that are often cheaper. So those with relatively empty
wallets often prefer the Tescos and Wal-Marts of the world.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Theyre at it again
    ... Carrefour and Tesco from further investment in Thailand. ... That's something CP accused the Thai government of doing so already back in ... to adjust in order to survive in the business at competitive prices. ... changes in the market, so that they will be better able to deal with them. ...
    (soc.culture.thai)
  • Re: My Migrations
    ... particular model with "Windows, Linux, or BeOS" they lose a million ... If a competitor looks like gaining market share they simply buy them, ... MS wanted a share of the entertainment business, ... monopolies. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: On Topic Sorta - Attending Trade Shows Frugally?
    ... anyone who thinks print media will give their show or ... business or whatever more coverage than a long lasting, ... key issue that determines it is your current market share; ... with them, at least, in industry. ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Ebooks Forum
    ... The Implications of Market Integration for R & D- ... Internationalization of U.S. Manufacturing: Causes and Consequences ... International Business: Adjusting to New Challenges and Opportunities ... Managing Relationship for Teamwork and ...
    (sci.med.nutrition)
  • Re: Born Again American
    ... and playing the same song. ... Free market is how we got here but his ilk of entertainer don;t ... the smartest biz folks is the expansion of business to very distant ... actually own the damn banks and start throwing their weight around. ...
    (rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic)