03-03-2021, 09:43 AM
(03-03-2021, 06:12 AM)innen_oda Wrote:(03-02-2021, 09:20 AM)monchevy Wrote: You gave your perspective on the price, and I gave mine. You said that where you live, that's expensive. I said where I live, that's cheap. We both offered an opinion of the price based on where we live. Why is it OK for you to do that, but not me?
And NOWHERE did I suggest that they not lower the price. You think I wouldn't be thrilled with even lower prices?? I'm working three side jobs on top of a FT job to pay for my degree (because my rent is $2k/month for a 1-room apartment). No financial aid, no loans... nothing. So don't read something into my situation that isn't there.
'Don't read something that isn't there. Also, why do you think it's not okay for me to share my perspective?'
Yeah, that is annoying. Good thing I haven't a problem with you sharing your view.
Originally, the whole point of market economics and market-driven economies is that the customer wants to drive prices lower, and the business wants to drive prices higher. The battle between the two, so the theory goes, is what brings the price to the fairest equilibrium.
Unfortunately, the theory failed to account for the impacts of 'training' an entire populace of customers to defend the businesses before themselves. Which brings us to the current situation in the US, where customers actually leap to the defense of the business. 'Temporarily embarrassed millionaires', rather than exploited workers.
People wonder why are prices for university so high, and why consumer rights are so dreadful in America.
Truly, it is a mystery.
Anyway, I recant my suggestion for an alternative pricing structure (seriously, did anyone read what I actually suggested?), and instead accept that since the cost isn't $900+ a credit, it must be a good deal.
Um... OK.
