Asklemmy

50675 readers

290 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

Question about price discovery and competition in american capitalism (feddit.dk)

submitted 2 days ago by Marand@feddit.dk to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

20 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I've been listening to Aquired recently (podcast about company origin stories) and when talking about privately owned companies (for instance, the recently Mars Inc. episode) they always do back of napkin estimated earnings because the company is private, which apparantly means they don't have to disclose earnings.

But in my country, Denmark, every company earning above 50.000 DKK (=7853 USD) has to disclose earnings. I believe this is for price discovery purposes, so that other entrepreneurs can see how much margin companies have and try to compete if they earn too much money, which is an important part of capitalism, right?

How come this is not required in USA, the "home" of capitalism? If I'm not mistaken of course, my apologies if so.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Wasn't that genuinely litigated in Dodge v. Ford? (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.) I've seen that decision cited countless times.

[–] pmtriste@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

It was argued, yes, but that is a state supreme court decision, not binding in any other state, and there is still no law that says this is true. Friedman wouldn't have bothered arguing about it in 1962 if it was unquestionably federal law or already settled by 1919. It is only convention.