₦airaland Forum

You guys, are you sure this man Donald Duke is not a 'film trick'? For me to support a politician, I need to listen to him giving a speech or read an article he has written. In a politician, I look for sincerity and also a good understanding of the issues (I despise populists). Donald Duke has never impressed me in such a manner, so I remain reserved. However, his popularity is not disputable. At most I want him as VP, not president. I'm watching him.

Microsoft (late 80's & early-mid 90's) were in near total control of the software market with a sub-standard product.

Which product was better than MS-DOS? It wasn't perfect, but it did the job at an attractive price! Which product was better than MS Windows? It wasn't perfect, but it ran on cheap 16-bit computers, was compatible with MS-DOS programs, and was relatively inexpensive. MS Excel and MS Word? They were very good, and compatible with existing products like Lotus 123 and Wordperfect

Now in this situation Windows dominated not because it was a superior product, but because consumers had no order choice because IBM PCs came bundled with Windows.

That's very false. IBM tried to create their own OS to run on their PCs, but failed. the bundling only served to introduce customers to the Microsoft product. they got hooked on their own. People use Windows because Microsoft has worked with hardware and software engineers to make sure their products work perfectly with Windows. other products promise imaginary benefits, but Windows delivers immediate productivity.

Microsoft actively employed bullying, plagirism, and anti-trust policies to eliminate competition.

Fraudulent practices like lying and decieving people are wrong, but bundling is perfectly legitimate. Linux OS providers bundle lots of software with their OS, but no one accuses them of "antitrust" practices.

Microsoft was a company that was always on its toes. They weren't settling down to enjoy their "monopoly", but they were sitting tight trying to avoid being "destroyed" by the next Microsoft. By working hard to useful stuff at low prices, bundling new products with existing ones for much the same price, offering free security upgrades, etc. hard work deserves reward.

Case in point: Netscape failed because their profitability relied on server software sales, which in turn relied on the sidespread adoption of their browser. When Microsoft released a browser that was better than Netscape's browser, they lost the browser war, which meant they couldn't sell overpriced server software anymore. Look at firefox: it has succeeded where Netscape did not, despite having to face the same Microsoft!

So this is not a case of a coercive monopoly. Microsoft was mostly just a market leader. It is definitely beatable.

Update: http://www.capitalismcenter.org/Advocacy/Antitrust/Microsoft/Antitrust_FAQ/default.htm

ToyM28: very sweet and loyal to her boo boo.

RnB

'Versus' versus 'Game of Choices'?

Good prisons, clean ones where evil people and politicans could go to and have time to repent.

That is the government's primary responsibility. Security, maintenance of law and order. nothing more.

Wquipped schools where people take their education seriously, mobile phones networks that work

Private enterprises have already provided these. We have good private schools and private networks. The rest we can do also, but the government should focus on police, legal system, prisons, army, etc. law and order, nothing more.

Here's the gist of the story. It's a very week story, actually.

An insider who craves anonymity proudly announced at a gathering last Sunday to a small group of friends "I really do admire my pastor's courage and enterprise. He has told us in church several times that it isn't enough for Christins to focus only on attaining spiritual power. he says we must also strive to attain economic and political power.

"And lately, he's been spearheading major business investments for Christ Embassy. We have just bought MBI, registered a new airline called Skypower and we are about to start the latest food chain this country has ever witnessed. It is called dickson's" the young man spoke with passion - straight from the heart. But he was flouiting Oykhilome's orders by talking.

A few days later, another Christ Embassy insider corroborated the story - well, most of it - on telephone. She said, "I really don't know about the TV and airline acquisitions, but that of dickson's is quite true. But please don't mention my name. Pastor (Chris Oyakhilome) has warned all of us including all pastors not to discuss this issue with anybody"

Our website www.nairaland.com was mentioned in the story!! Page 76 of Thisday Gliterrati on June 4, 2006!!!

Somehow I forgot all about the beast. Happy Beast day 2006 everyone!

Is it still available?

Someone posts:
    Adam versus Eve?

Someone replies:
    Eve.

    Babangida versus OBJ?

Another person replies
    OBJ.

    Economics versus History?

And so on!

---

Ok, let me start:
   Economics versus History?

I don't have the energy to give a point by point response to nferyn's posts today. Sorry.

As a wife(submissive one) she should be ready to follow the faith of her husband

You are forgetting that atheists generally do not believe in "submission". It would be intolerably difficult for a Nigerian woman who no longer believes in God to live with a male chauvinist pig who is also a religious bigot.

Agriculture in those countries are highly subsidized by their government?

Yes, I am aware of this abomination. This is why the US destroys food that exceeds the farmers' production quotas while at the same time giving "food aid" to starving African nations. Isn't that retarded? Why can't American farmers think of exporting their plentious food to starving African countries instead of relying on government protection? If we are going to copy the Americans, we must avoid copying their mistakes too!

An airline, a TV station and a Fast Food Outlet, may provide employment opportunities but in the long term how does it benefit the average Nigerian ?

Inasmuch as I am jealous of pastors for their ability to collect so much money, it's still better for them to build businesses with the money than to just waste it on gigantic auditoriums that are not really needed.  It is just not fair on other companies that churches don't have to pay tax despite making so much profits. I support this.

"lieleta":
when u talk about free market i hope u mean commodity market or goods and services market, because a free labour market is not optimal in terms of the society's welfare! free market and competition forces prices down and a free labour market means workers will not be paid according to what they contribute as value but in terms of the market price (wage)!!!

This is wrong. The market price or wage in a free market is the most objective measure of "what they contribute as value". Would diamonds be valuable if people weren't willing to buy them at exorbitant prices? Would if be fair to force people to buy "bottled sand" at the same price as bottled water to support the "sand bottlers"? No, it wouldn't, because the low price of bottled sand signals to its producers that they should try something else. If you sell "bottled sand" and you're not making a profit, why not try bottled water?

In the labor market, for various reasons, some skills might be more abundant than others. Those who possess such skills will earn better salaries than those who do not. In a free market, people will rush to acquire the skills that are commanding better salaries, and eventually the salaries would fall to a lower, stable level that reflects the amount of time and money it takes to acquire that skill. If the wages in a profession are falling, this is also a signal to encourage those in that profession to go and acquire skills in a more lucrative one. When demand and supply for labor is well matched, there will be an abundance of goods and services available for purchase at the lowest possible prices. That is efficiency. In an efficient market, even the lowest class can afford luxuries.

market autoregulation means u are paid as much as other labourers in your category irregardless of how much work u contribute. but still that is not the problem

That's not true. If you are contributing a lot to the company, they will be reluctant to let you go when you ask for a raise. If you say you want to leave, they'll try to bribe you with a raise.

the problem is people with very little skills and aptitude will be marginalized and will not be able to survive. now if u don't see a problem in that i don't know what else to say.

Actually, I see a problem with that. The government should provide the basic services - food (synthetic balanced diet), shelter (bed space in a hostel), and health (free treatment from killer diseases) - to those who are incapable of making enough money to survive. But only as a last, last resort.

The government should not subsidize laziness. I know from personal experience that when people are poor but well fed and healthy, they will be forced to look for ways to make themselves assets to society. That's good!

----
The Case Of Employer Collusion:
For a short period of time, it is indeed possible for employers to collude to pay their workers lower wages than they are worth. However, such an arrangement cannot last because
1) The employees can simply drop their jobs, start their own companies and pay themselves their full value!
2) An industry that underpays its employees will be extremely profitable, which will attract new entrepreneurs into industry. Those entrepreneurs will entice the previously underpaid employees by offering better wages. As the entrepreneurs move into the market, the competition for employees will intensify and drive up wages!
3) If an industry underpays its workers, their best employees will go for retraining and end up working in a different industry. To prevent this from happening, they will have to offer more money.

----
The Case Of Discrimination Against Minorities:
In a free market, employers are free to hire only whites or hire only men. Assuming that women and blacks are as productive as white males, this simply means that employers who are no discriminatory will have access to cheap, high quality labor. They will be able to hire women and blakcks that are as productive as white men and pay less because there will be many women and black men in the labor pool. All other things being equal, such companies will make more money than the discriminatory companies, and expand faster. On the long run, the discriminatory companies will realise how stupid they have been and will start hiring the best candidates regardless of race. if not, they will grow out of business or become less relevant relative to the more progressive employers.

But that's not all. In an unregulated market, employees that are being discriminated against would be able to start their own companies and apply reverse discrimination in their own employee selection process. In heaviliy regulated economies, it is extremely hard for minorities who are capable but not rich to start their own companies.

---
So as you can see, there is a strong case for allowing labour markets to be as free as possible.

Mariory: In a free market system without regulation, you would have these same big corporations bribing their way to favourable deals and employing anti-trust policies anyways.

I challenge you to give me an example of a coercive monopoly or oligopoly that was established without the help of the government. Sometimes people make the mistake of classifying excellent companies who are extremely good at serving their customers as monopolies. That is not fair at all. In a free market, a competitor can jump in anytime and innovate your cash cow into obsolescence. In the real world, government regulations will force the small guy to sell his startup to a larger company. Example: Paypal having to sell their company to Ebay.

IBM was not able to prevent the rise of Microsoft, which couldn't prevent the rise of Yahoo, which couldn't prevent the rise of Google. Auction houses were not able to prevent the rise of Ebay, which couldn't compete effectively with Paypal in e-payments. Anti-trust laws are over-rated. Politicians always feel the need to flex their muscles.

2. There are other needs to ascertain the continuance of business and engender trust in the parties involved. Capitalisation requirements for banks ensure that, when the markets get a little volatile, the banks don't go bankrupt.

I have studied the way banks work extensively, and you are absolutely wrong. Perhaps sincerely wrong.

Yes, there are day-to-day variations in volume of bank deposits vs withdrawals, but a larger bank will have larger customers and therefore experience a proportionally more volatility in that demand for cash.

Central banks all over the world deal with this problem by
1) Asking banks to keep a certain percentage of their deposits in reserve at all times, and
2) Facilitating inter-bank lending markets.

If, on a particular day, a small bank experiences a random increase in demand for cash, it can simply borrow from a larger bank that has excess deposits on that day. If a large bank experiences the same, it can borrow money overnight from several small banks. This system works very well against volatility. Nothing more is required.

Naive commentators might assume that larger banks are less likely to go bankrupt, but this is also false. No matter how large a bank is, it cannot survive the loss of public confidence without going bankrupt. All banks are bankrupt by nature. What matters is the confidence people have in the bank. That's all. Size doesn't matter.

Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_funds and related topics.

It is true that some (not all) small banks were corrupt, but one shouldn't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Banks executives that engaged in illegal practices, whether big or small, should simply have been prosecuted; their banks only be need to be liquidated or acquired if the public has absolutely lost confidence in them. Small banks which have been serving their customers well should have been left alone. A wise man knows how to weed his garden without destroying his own plants. Would you use a gun to kill a fly on your head?

The US banks do not have any minimum capitalization requirements (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_requirement). They only have capitalization ratios. Are we saying we are smarter? Very funny!

So you see, our Central Bank's decision to eliminate smaller commercial banks was not necessary, and hence can only be regarded as an abuse of power. To a hammer, everything is a nail. To a politician, every challenge is an opportunity to intervene. The exercise of the central bank's power has turned the Nigerian banking sector into a 25 member oligopoly, which is the very thing you are saying is caused by a free market!

Some of us are still in the 19th century. It's funny!

The problem with your proposal is that countries don't actually trade with each other. Businesses do.

For example, a palm oil farmer posts an advert on the Internet and a soap company in South Africa chooses to buy the palm oil for manufacturing. Of course they trade in dollars, because that's the currency they both know about. The Nigerian farmer can immediately convert his dollars to naira to spend at home, or use it to import farm equipment!

So the government is hardly involved in import/export and that's a [url=http://good thing]good thing[/url]. Barter won't work, because it requires double coincidence of wants. A farmer that wants to exchange her palm oil for tractors, would need to find a soap factory that also manufactures tractors, way of determining the number of gallons of palm oil that should be exchanged for one tractor. This complicated process is eliminated by using a trusted common currency - the dollar!

Thanks a million for sharing this information with us!

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as it suggests in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

Answer: That depends on her education. Renting is much more cost-effective nowadays. A fair price for an IT consultant is about $110/hr.

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. How should I deal with this?

Answer: You have not prepared the bull right. You must empty the bull of any internal organs and especially the digestion system. Cover the bull with a mixture of grease and the gut contents prior to the sacrifice. The smell should now be less disturbing. If the neighbours still complain about the odour, you can claim that it's bullshit.

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

Answer: Oh, no, not on the sabbath you won't. In the weeks, he's doing no harm, and on the sabbath you are not allowed to kill him, unless you enjoy it, then it doesn't classify as work. Thus, you have to hire a hitman who is willing to do the work. Just make sure this hitman is also eliminated for his sabbath-violation.

More 'questions':
- Lev. 25:44 states that I may buy slaves from the nations that are around us. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans but not Canadians. Can you clarify?

- Lev. 20:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

That's just because you think a job is something located inside air-conditioned offices in business districts.

I have no 'pali', I work from a room, and I have no A/C, but I am employed and make little money. Others sell recharge cards or act as mobile calling center for people. Others help out in family shops. Others run erands for stipends. Some are in Ikeja village selling pirated software. Some women are at home taking care of there children full time and selling soft drinks and bread part-time. And of course we have the students, who can't be counted.

All these people I have mentioned are employed and there is dignity in any form of labor!

All you need is Google Adsense.

Your opinion is that we need better governance. My opinion is that we need less governance.

You want the government to reform NEPA. I want the government to break it into little pieces and sell it!

You want government to provide infrastructure for business. I want government to privatize it all!

Even if people in government have good intentions, they won't achieve as much as private companies facing intense competition. This is because private sector competition helps to weed out poor performers. click here!

don't go into my cell phone
don't ask me why i'm taking my sistas to the movies

<sarcasm>
You forgot to mention this important one:
'don't be upset when I make love to your best friends'
</sarcasm>

Some Nigerian TV shows are really good, for example:
- Gulder Ultimate Search
- Super Story By Wale Adenuga Productions.

Many Nigerians actually prefer nollywood movies because they can identify with the storylines. It's funny how Nigerians find it easy to believe that Nollywood movies are based on real life. Some peoples' belief in the eficacy of juju can be traced to Nollywood films featuring juju that they watched when they were younger!

I use it. It's ok.

Nigerian movies are doing fine in the market. Nigerians love them, and that's all that matters!

Who is Olisa?

Are you still interested in chatting, or is your cup full already?