|Perfect competition has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Society. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|WikiProject Business||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
|WikiProject Economics||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
I was hoping to find information on behavior of the firm in a perfectly competitive market, particularly w.r.t. costs and revenues. This is a topic I have had great difficulty integrating into my consciousness using standard textbooks on economics. I'm sure a Wikipedia article covering the same subject matter, if one were to exist, would be much more enlightening!
I have removed:
Large pension funds, mutual funds and banks are not small actors without market power.
However I agree that these markets are closer to perfect competition than most. mydogategodshat 17:55, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Hi Bluemoose, do you mean by "set by firms" that the firm's marginal cost will be the price? If so, I still think there is a better way to say it, becuase the monopolist "sets the price", not the small seller in a competitive market. Mgw 18:58, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC) ---
This article really needs a diagram to show perfect competition. I'll try and find one, but I'm not really sure what's copyright and whats not. It's possible to draw one, but you'd probably need a reasonably sophisticated program that wouldn't get scared when you tried to draw curves. Thanks Inebriatedonkey 28 June 2005 08:00 (UTC)
I've added a clarification concerning the necessary conditions for a Market that is not significantly different from a Competitive Market. This can be found in the Monopoly profit area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgmwki (talk • contribs) 03:07, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
World map of GDP?
What has the article's image about the distribution of the world's GDP to do with perfect competition? It's barely related at all. I suggest to remove or replace the map with something more fitting.
A Call for Clarity on the "Conditions"
I'm not an economist, I'm a lay reader, and I would like the article to elaborate on the conditions laid out in the first section. There are two questions I'd like the article to answer.
First, I'd like to know how the "No Externalities" condition excludes government intervention. Usually, when I read about perfect competition, "No externalities" and "No government regulations" are two separate conditions. It seems to me that externalities such as dumping toxic waste into a river would actually invite government intervention, to eliminate this externality.
Second, what does "no government intervention" really mean? In general, the role of government intervention is hotly debated, and I would appreciate a great deal more clarity on this. Usually, I hear that it means "no government regulation of any kind," when I suspect it really means "no government regulation of price or supply" or something more narrowly focussed like that. It's very clear how price or supply regulations would interfere with perfect competition, but it's not clear, for example, how or if worker safety regulations would violate the conditions of perfect competition. I would really appreciate some clarity on these questions. The old "Perfect Market" article has a better section on these conditions, but many questions like this remained unanswered. —MiguelMunoz (talk) 03:07, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
- Dumping toxic waste into a river is indeed an externality. But since those are prohibited by definition, there's no need for government intervention. The theory of perfect competition simply doesn't deal with externalities. FNAS (talk) 10:36, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
- The trouble with that explanation is that the "perfect competition" theory is often used to denounce government efforts to prohibit environmental protections, calling them "government interventions in the marketplace." Plus, the article's discussion of government intervention is all about cost (supply) and price regulations. It seems to me that a more narrowly focussed condition is called for. Isn't this condition really about price and supply? —MiguelMunoz (talk) 17:33, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
Macro vs. Micro discussion needed
As a professional engineer, I know a lot of engineers that are drawn to free-market theories without much actual knowledge of economics. When they discuss it, they seem to be treating the theory of perfect competition as if it were a description of the whole economy, rather than an individual market. So it seems to me that it would be helpful for this article to clarify that this is not a macro theory, and to explain what that means. (Since I don't have much training in economics, I'm not the one to write that section.) —MiguelMunoz (talk) 17:59, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
Free Software Can Be Bought and Sold At Market Price?
I inserted a "Contradictory" Tag at the end of this sentence: "Free software may be bought or sold at whatever price that the market may allow." The statement is not necessarily inaccurate but simply in need of elaboration - preferably with an example (accompanied by a reference) of how "free" software can have a non-zero market price such that it may be bought and sold. Without such elaboration - the sentence seems self-contradictory on its face. Hopefully someone with expertise on "Free Software" will add an example that explains and clarifies the matter so that the tag may be removed. Qdiderot (talk) 13:48, 15 September 2018 (UTC)