A very good friend of mine shared a video about mass production and said that mass production is a bad phenomenon. I told him that it's just basic economics. Just how things work. He replied with the things that are quoted. This is my full response to him.
"this is a system which empowers only the one's who are already empowered and JFYI there can't be a selection process if the lower prices are the only concern and the centralized economy gives you just enough wages that you can buy only their products"
We are not talking about THIS economy. THIS economy is a result of state intervention in the economy. When you give anyone the power to control the economy and hence the people. There will be people seeking an advantage that will exploit it. How do you solve this? More controls? No. No control whatsoever. Nobody should have the power to control the economy (Rich or otherwise).
Principles of capitalism oppose a centralized economy. The current system is not capitalism.
"please don't you tell me that big retailers do not compromise in quality, Walmart is infamous for that"
Retailers are not producers. They are just the middle men between consumers and producers.
"don't you tell me big companies face the same struggles as the smaller one's."
I'm not saying they face the same struggles. But they do have to struggle in the markets. Wealth is not a static factor. You have to keep producing it because the consumers never stop consuming it. And big companies have already discovered the mechanisms that allow greater production for lesser costs that is why they became big in the first place. You cannot complain that they do not struggle against competitors. When you expand beyond your locality, your competition increases too.
"When Morarji Desai government had prohibited liquor all around India late Mr. Vittal Mallya was buying small scales company and was integrating their breweries to United Breweries, small scale business-men were making just hand-to-the-mouth where big scale giants use money power to win in their game"
And who has the power to ban anything? The government. That is the cause of the problem. If Desai didn't have the power to ban liquor the small businesses would be free to produce and compete in the market. Just having too much money does not guarantee success. Plus if you take into account the ban and the losses that the small businesses were taking then you can see how the selling of the businesses was a better alternative for them than just sitting there waiting for things to change. Mallya took a huge risk by buying businesses that were banned by the big bully(government) and it payed off. You need to be an opportunist to be able to successfully compete in the market. Mallya saw an opportunity and grabbed it. The small business owners voluntarily gave their businesses up. The only force that they had to encounter was that of the government. You can't blame Mallya for them losing their business. Unless he had something to do with the banning of liquor. The game is open for all until the government steps in. THEN it becomes a power struggle. Take the forced regulations out and the rich don't have any more means to stifle their competitors.
"even take the whole banning the Maggie noodles thingy if it was any other company than Nestle' they would be forced to sell it off""Big industries make market tougher for every individual earner where merging with them becomes their last resort."
So what? They became big, they earned their way into wealth. They deserve to use it however they please. The lead incident was due to government regulation too. Nestle suffered a big loss in revenue and reputation. And BTW internationally Maggi got thumbs up everywhere. The government fucked up here too.
When you complain that someone is better than someone else and that it is unfair that they be better you are actually complaining about reality. That's just how things work. You cannot change natural laws.
"Plus they create unemployment in sectors like agriculture, even our most of the vegetables are brought from china"
And why do you think that is? The goventment has put up barriers on the amount of profit that farmers can make. There is a heavy price regulation in the agricultural industries. No sane person would want to go into agriculture knowing that they are not free to produce and sell their produce in the market at the prices they see fit. If you want to talk about subsidies (besides the fact that they're immoral) then most of the subsidies are absorbed by officials and cronies like reliance and adani. These are not your free market big businesses they rely on the government regulation to help them stay in business.
Unemployment in agriculture is due to the government, not due to heavy competition. In a free market people are free to start their own businesses without the added costs of regulation and bureaucratic hassle. More businesses just means more employment opportunities.
"You aren't just able to see the bigger picture and It's circumstances"
Bigger picture here is that the same regulations that you support are creating and worsening the problems that you want to solve.
Population will not be a problem when there are no hurdles in things and individual can do to earn a living. Labor laws, wage laws, minimum qualifications, government services, etc. all contribute to stifling opportunities not creating them.
But if you do want to look into the underlying reason the country is shit is because people think that other's owe them something that they don't have to earn. What I call entitlement whoring. It is utterly irrational and destructive. We do not have a culture of personal responsibility, we are a crowd with no individuals in it. Just a fog, a blob that any passerby can shape at will. It's a cultural problem. Heck, we don't even have a culture of our own.
The problem is not economical, it's philosophical. Economics will only tell you what works and what doesn't. It will not tell you what is right and what is wrong. Indian morals are authoritarian, they don't think for themselves.
