SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Societies for the History of Economics <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 21 Nov 2012 21:19:05 -0000
Reply-To:
Societies for the History of Economics <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
8bit
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
From:
Dr Robert Anthony Cord <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (34 lines)
Although we’ve had some interesting developments in the UK energy market
recently, whereby gas suppliers are supposed to have been competing
against each other but have, allegedly, been colluding – a different type
of co-operation, some might argue – thereby breaking the law.

Sorry to muddy the waters.

Bob


On Wed, November 21, 2012 20:37, Anthony Waterman wrote:
> The answer to the second question, I think, is easy. It is because
> 'competition' (under the rule of law) is one of the best ways human
> beings have hit upon for co-operating.
>
> Anthony Waterman
>
>
>
> On 21/11/2012 1:37 PM, Bruce Caldwell wrote:
>
>> Dear SHOE list:
>>
>>
>> I got the following 2 questions from Paul Rubin. Any takers?
>> Question:  When was "competition" first used in economics.  Harder
>> question: Why is the economy called "competitive" when it is actually
>> cooperative? Please answer to the list, and I'll forward the consensus
>> answers (if they emerge) to him. Bruce Caldwell
>>
>>
>>
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2