06-07-2018, 12:31 PM
(06-06-2018, 11:42 AM)Dill Wrote: The other side of "capitalsim" in this case might be that more people from the 90% decide to support the baker, as happened with Chick-fil-a.
Capitalism never sorted out segregated lunch counters. Owners were happy to lose black business when they knew it would cost them more white business. Seems like capitalism depends a whole lot on the temper of business clientele in a given time and place. In NYC the baker's move would have likely killed his business; it might have helped it in Utah or Alabama.
But times have changed and many more people understand and abhor the practice of discrimination. A far more likely scenario is that more of the 90% side with the people discriminated against, and the business loses more than 10%. Beyond that, 10% is not an insignificant number. If your competitors increase their business by 10% over you, they can use the additional profit to grab further market share through things like advertising, hiring additional help, etc. So in the end, you end up getting out competed by more than just 10%. Its not a static number.
