tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post3969338687577346488..comments2024-02-29T03:34:23.190-05:00Comments on Who Were the Sea Peoples?: More economic nonsense from David J. Andersongcallahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10065877215969589482noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-7080100369031374752017-06-05T11:56:28.145-04:002017-06-05T11:56:28.145-04:00Changing the location of the washing machine could...Changing the location of the washing machine could be looked at as a transformation in the machine. Advertising also transforms it: from one you didn't know about to one you do know about. (Kirzner made this point.)gcallahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10065877215969589482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-87830230255470564502017-06-04T23:24:19.088-04:002017-06-04T23:24:19.088-04:00Yes, I have never seen transportation or installat...Yes, I have never seen transportation or installation counted as "transaction costs": those usually include search costs (finding the seller or buyer) and bargaining costs.gcallahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10065877215969589482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-47008681229715069052017-06-04T21:00:37.925-04:002017-06-04T21:00:37.925-04:00Changing the form of your materials or changing th...Changing the form of your materials or changing their location (transformed or not) were both productive and valuable. I think Harry Stottle knew that back in the day.Joseph R. Stromberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04150171845073669140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-60946115142475343532017-06-04T07:41:03.979-04:002017-06-04T07:41:03.979-04:00'Reducing "transaction costs" is cer...'Reducing "transaction costs" is certainly a good thing.'<br /><br />Yes: reducing *any* cost is good!gcallahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10065877215969589482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-24668242430738726462017-06-04T07:38:52.085-04:002017-06-04T07:38:52.085-04:00Wow -- that really IS a stupid way of looking at t...Wow -- that really IS a stupid way of looking at things. <br /><br /><br />Reducing "transaction costs" is certainly a good thing. I was involved in implementing JIT practices in a manufacturing environment. It allowed the factory I worked at to drastically reduce the need for additional warehouse space and for more forklifts and drivers to move things more times from material truck to finished product truck, etc. And that in turn allowed lower prices on the final product, "adding value" to that product from the final consumer perspective (e.g. the company still turned its profit with a bottle of mustard costing $1 instead of $1.50 at the store).<br /><br />But this guy seems to think, to paraphrase you, that the mustard seed, vinegar, turmeric, etc. is just as "valuable" before going through the manufacturing and delivery process as it is once it's in a bottle in a customer's refrigerator. The whole point for everyone is that that's not the case.Thomas L. Knapphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16271473384378782680noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-14930978371665507812017-06-03T23:54:04.344-04:002017-06-03T23:54:04.344-04:00Btw, isn't he also technically wrong, i.e. Wro...Btw, isn't he also technically wrong, i.e. Wrong in his terminology, about delivery being a transaction cost? It seems that aside from spouting nonsense, he is spouting misdefined nonsense. Ken Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08207803092348071005noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-62167043380130215072017-06-03T23:47:40.198-04:002017-06-03T23:47:40.198-04:00Value = pi * caloricValue = pi * caloricKen Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08207803092348071005noreply@blogger.com