Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieBird
If consumers truly valued eclectic local shops over chains, they would have paid the higher prices in aggregate. Because they didn't, we can surmise that a lower price point is more important to most consumers than supporting the local shop.
This in turn, leads them to having more money in their pocket which they can give to someone else for goods or services. Sounds like a win to me.
|
Which is why rural communities are now screaming about loss of amenities in their areas because all the shops are closed/closing since anyone with a car goes to a supermarket and anyone without has to beg help just to get their food, why the same people are trying to grab public (lottery and other grants) to subsidise their local volunteer run outlets. Consumers do not always win just because prices are cheaper... the affluent can easily benefit but those who are not so well off end up losing out but that doesn't matter because if you can't afford a 50" Plasma out of spare cash then you don't matter...
