atlashead Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 At some points in time, it may have been that some resources have not been in the hands of the most efficient producer. I'm talking raw materials. Thus comes the question, is whoever gets there first the owner? I would say "no". The owner SHOULD be who can extract the most value most quickly. So who is the judge? That would be the person with the most knowledge and impeccable morality. How is this decided? In the free market strikes against a producer can be used to make their business fail. It is in the interest of all to have the most efficient producer run the most large and important resource extractions. This is not to say they HAVE to, each man is entitled to whatever amount of achievement they decide, as long as they take the EXACT consequences of their EXACT achievement. Is there any real-world case of a sub-par producer sitting on a resource? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 At some points in time, it may have been that some resources have not been in the hands of the most efficient producer. I'm talking raw materials. Thus comes the question, is whoever gets there first the owner? I would say "no". The owner SHOULD be who can extract the most value most quickly. So who is the judge? That would be the person with the most knowledge and impeccable morality. How is this decided? In the free market strikes against a producer can be used to make their business fail. It is in the interest of all to have the most efficient producer run the most large and important resource extractions. This is not to say they HAVE to, each man is entitled to whatever amount of achievement they decide, as long as they take the EXACT consequences of their EXACT achievement. Is there any real-world case of a sub-par producer sitting on a resource?Welcome to OL:You may want put that paragraph in outline form, or, be much more clear in what you are asking.I hope I am not responding to a Troll, however with the other thread started with basically the same paragraph structure, I am not so sure.A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolf DeVoon Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 Is there any real-world case of a sub-par producer sitting on a resource?Every one is sub-par in varying degrees. National oil companies (PBR, Pemex) are the worst. National champions (Sinopec, Eni) are dopes. The majors (XOM, RDS, CVN, BP) do a good job with an occasional disaster. Mini-majors -- Anadarko is one of the best; pre-merger Amoco and ARCO were excellent -- are in constant danger of being financially squished. Shale players are financially hilarious. Service companies (HAL, SLB, CGG) are competent, but they don't own any wells. Contractors (Saipen, GE, Technip, etc) build stuff to oil company engineering specs.The entire oil patch is in a world of hurt, globally, because demand crashed. Wells are shut in, projects shelved.Did I mention pipelines? More financial hilarity and 70% of their buried iron is over 50 years old and rusting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jts Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 At some points in time, it may have been that some resources have not been in the hands of the most efficient producer. I'm talking raw materials. Thus comes the question, is whoever gets there first the owner? I would say "no". The owner SHOULD be who can extract the most value most quickly. So who is the judge? That would be the person with the most knowledge and impeccable morality. How is this decided? In the free market strikes against a producer can be used to make their business fail. It is in the interest of all to have the most efficient producer run the most large and important resource extractions. This is not to say they HAVE to, each man is entitled to whatever amount of achievement they decide, as long as they take the EXACT consequences of their EXACT achievement. Is there any real-world case of a sub-par producer sitting on a resource?Person A is the first to find the resource and claims ownership of it.Person B comes along and can use the resource more efficiently and offers a high price for the resource. Person A sells, because the price he gets is more than he could get by owning the resource.Person C comes along and happens to be a supergenius who knows how to use the resource super productively and offers a price so high that person B can't refuse it.In a free market, by this process of ownership going from person to person, the resource eventually ends up being owned by the person who can make the most use of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolf DeVoon Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 Person A is the first to find the resource and claims ownership of it.Person B comes along and can use the resource more efficiently and offers a high price for the resource. Person A sells, because the price he gets is more than he could get by owning the resource.Person C comes along and happens to be a supergenius who knows how to use the resource super productively and offers a price so high that person B can't refuse it.In a free market, by this process of ownership going from person to person, the resource eventually ends up being owned by the person who can make the most use of it.Never saw that happen in the oil business, or banking, or telecom, or farming. Maybe it happens in books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 At some points in time, it may have been that some resources have not been in the hands of the most efficient producer. I'm talking raw materials. Thus comes the question, is whoever gets there first the owner? I would say "no". The owner SHOULD be who can extract the most value most quickly. So who is the judge? That would be the person with the most knowledge and impeccable morality. How is this decided? In the free market strikes against a producer can be used to make their business fail. It is in the interest of all to have the most efficient producer run the most large and important resource extractions. This is not to say they HAVE to, each man is entitled to whatever amount of achievement they decide, as long as they take the EXACT consequences of their EXACT achievement. Is there any real-world case of a sub-par producer sitting on a resource?Person A is the first to find the resource and claims ownership of it.Person B comes along and can use the resource more efficiently and offers a high price for the resource. Person A sells, because the price he gets is more than he could get by owning the resource.Person C comes along and happens to be a supergenius who knows how to use the resource super productively and offers a price so high that person B can't refuse it.In a free market, by this process of ownership going from person to person, the resource eventually ends up being owned by the person who can make the most use of it.This is an ideological statement.--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now