Main Page Contact Register Log In


Perfect competition only exists on a drawing board. It's useful because it closely enough mirrors the real world that it often produces the same effects as semi-perfect competition, but it often fails when looking at labor issues. I think that's probably why labor economists tend to have many radical beliefs.

Most big companies got where they are by doing one or two things really well. Google designed a really popular search engine. Starbucks created a streamlined system for selling gourmet style coffee. They aren't going to lose to Microsoft Bing or Costa Coffee just because one company has a slightly better HR manager. This leaves a lot of room for errors to creep into businesses that are very hard to remove. The nature of the market can change faster than the market can resolve these issues.






By that logic Apple shouldn't have lost to Microsoft and the fast food business should still be dominated by McDonald's.
54%
VoiceOfRa
stars0
Replies (1)


It would still be useful to argue what are the deviations from the simple model. That is a more rich model might result in a near perfect competition where the difference between it and perfect competetion would become intelligeble.
55%
Fwiffo
stars0
Replies (1)