Every organization is, to some extent, rent-seeking. NAR is evil because they’re good at it.
I don’t agree with your labor theory of value—there are many complex and individual valuations that are quite valid. One can easily argue that the limited resource of buyer attention is worth a fair bit of money to secure, and the percentage-of-sale is just a nice way of charging more to people with more money.
The evil part is they’ve managed to enforce a monopoly on some kinds of advertising (MLS and collusion among realtors). This gets them the ability to charge more than they could if there weren’t a network effect that they take advantage of.
I don’t agree with your labor theory of value—there are many complex and individual valuations that are quite valid. One can easily argue that the limited resource of buyer attention is worth a fair bit of money to secure, and the percentage-of-sale is just a nice way of charging more to people with more money.
I could be convinced to have a more nuanced understanding. I’m confident I have not read enough of the writing on the topic. What would you recommend?
Every organization is, to some extent, rent-seeking. NAR is evil because they’re good at it.
I don’t agree with your labor theory of value—there are many complex and individual valuations that are quite valid. One can easily argue that the limited resource of buyer attention is worth a fair bit of money to secure, and the percentage-of-sale is just a nice way of charging more to people with more money.
The evil part is they’ve managed to enforce a monopoly on some kinds of advertising (MLS and collusion among realtors). This gets them the ability to charge more than they could if there weren’t a network effect that they take advantage of.
I could be convinced to have a more nuanced understanding. I’m confident I have not read enough of the writing on the topic. What would you recommend?