On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Bill Bartlett wrote:

> Wat Tyler wrote:
> >
> >I fail to see how corporations can be considered anything other than the
> >logical consequences of demand for products. It can't be the case that
> >supply creates demand. It must be the case that buyers consider certain
> >products will make life nicer.
>
> Earth to Wat... Earth to Wat...
>
> Corporations are the logical consequence of production for profit. Your
> silly assertion that corporations are set up to supply demand for products
> flies if the face of common sense. As a teenager I made a crust (pizza in
> those days) selling books door to door. I must say it never occurred to me
> to suppose that any of my customers actually wanted the books I sold, it
> was blindingly obvious to me even at that callow age that if they wanted
> them they would simply go down to the bookstore and buy them.
>
> That didn't stop me selling them these books, and it didn't stop them
> buying them. Conclusion: I wasn't fullfilling any DEMAND, let alone need
> (at least not for books, entertainment perhaps). I was simply SELLING
> books.
>
> The corporation I worked for profited and grew DESPITE obviously failing
> your theory that to do so they must be supplying a demand.
>
> Ergo: your justification for capitalism is flawed. Keep trying.
>
> Bill Bartlett
> Bracknell Tasmania
>

Well, this is a good, down to earth example of how demand can be
*manfactured*.

Harry Veeder