One more thing. The current down economy will be wiping out a lot of mom and pop businesses that can’t absorb the downturn in spending. That will leave the larger companies standing, concentrating the markets even further. I hope people realize that the Wal Marts of the world won’t always have low prices, or be forced to compete. We are already seeing low wage laborers demanding more money in India and China. Labor standards, product testing and consumerism will force our cheap products to increase in price in the U.S. forcing now stretched citizens to cut back on purchases.

If our wages continue to plummet due to the global economy, and we no longer make anything in this country, were in for some real trouble. Be warned.

Here’s an interesting comment from windhoek7on another blog on the subject:

“If the markup law was repealed, I can see the big retailers temporarily slashing the price of gas, and consumers benefiting as a result. The big boys can afford to undercut the little guys for a substantial period of time. But as soon as the mom and pops are ran out of the market, the big gas retailers will soon again jack-up their prices, and the smaller communities will suffer the most as a result of the large conglomerates offering higher prices. This story is not new. It has happened over and over again including in my hometown of Barstow, California where Wal-Mart, with their cheap prices, undercut and ran most of the small retailers out of the city. Wally World then gradually raised their prices past the level of what the small retailers use to charge! I still have mixed feelings on the mark-up issue, but people are fools who say the government has no right to control prices of monopolistic industries.”
Source: http://www.madison.com/wsj/topstories/297623

I can’t say that I blame them for not trusting politicians, they are bought and paid for by the very corporations they do trust.

The U.S. Supreme Court recentling did away with a 90 plus law prohibiting price fixing. Now auto makers, software companies…etc. are preventing retailers from selling products below cost. This contradicts the free market ideals Publius wants to put in place when it only applies to government regulations. No such rule applies to the moneyed private interests that lobby our politicians, and now our conservative court systems.

This whole issue is just another solution to a non-existant problem, like voter fraud. We cannot let these sneaking conservatives lead us away from the real problems we’re facing, with imagined ones.

The simple answer to all of this is: have our gas prices been any different from those in other cities? No. So where’s the problem?

I worry most about what it could do to the community gas retailers that can’t deal with zero profit should it go that way. How many jobs would be lost just to put more profits into Wal-mart’s pockets?

Or is it a dodge to keep our attention away from the real villains, Big Oil? Any strategy which fails to include disincentives for Big Oil’s gouging isn’t going to do a goddamned bit of good, or reduce gas prices at all.

First, you are comparing primary industries (gas) with secondary products (hammers and nails). The price of the latter cannot make or break community businesses, whereas in the wrong hands the price of gas can.

I cannot honestly tell you that once the floor is removed that the Wal-marts of the world will try to drive the price down to get more people in their stores, but the fact that they are funding policy change makes me wonder what their motives are. Removing the minimum markups has not disrupted the prices in other states, but this is a new day.

My gut tells me that eventually you will win this, because the big stores have the money to spend on the politicians. That’s too bad in its own right, but that’s the way it is.

But like the saying goes, be careful of what you ask for ’cause you just may get it. I don’t think our communities are ready for the kind of change this could bring.

Moreover, when advocates speak of repeal, they mean the whole law; those provisions that prevent prescription drugs, computers, clothing, food, and furniture from being sold below cost.

This law was originally meant to protect competitors, not competition. It encourages inefficiency and creates government sanctioned barriers to entry (monopolies).

I didn’t say it was. Ever!!! Not here, not even on the other blog.

Selling below cost may violate antitrust laws, except in certain close-out situations. But to my knowledge, antitrust laws do not require a minimum markup profit… they only prohibit a negative profit for purposes of controlling the market. Selling at no markup or small markup is not illegal.

This whole issue turns on whether we want to further allow the Wal-marts of the world to control our communities. That they are hiring consultants and lobbyists to get laws passed or repealed is troublesome. That they or anyone would buy off politicians is even worse. That the politicians take their money is unconscionable.

Wrong.

Do I have to follow you around the entire Intertubes explaining why you are wrong? What is it about this law don’t you understand? You continue to conflate antitrust laws with this one. This is not an antitrust statute.