heman

"Any goods that commands a price must be scarce.
However, it should be reminded that 'scarcity does NOT imply the existence of a price' ”.

第一句指： 凡物品有價格的， 都必定是貨源緊絀； 第二句說， 具稀少性的貨品， 並不意味着一定會有市價存在。

我覺得似乎是：因為貨品有稀少性而出現緊絀現象，才會有市價產生的（因為大家都想以出價方式去爭取貨品）。

所以，原文第二句不應有個 NOT 字才對。
到底我錯在什麼地方呢？　 　　請高手指教。　 　

sigh

In my opinion, the first statement is wrong, It is becasue whether a good is scarce or not, it can only be identify when the Qd>Qs at zero price. Therefore, we can elimate the price effect when we are measure people's wants.
For the second statement, i think you are correct.

black105531352

第一句我就吾係幾肯定, 因為同一件野係吾同suituation下可能會係free good /scare good  好似空氣 係高山上有價值, 但係我都覺得第一句係岩, 因為有price指有個cost買(competition) 係scarcity 既結果
第二句係岩既. eg:12年free education  急症室服務.....  而且有d物品係用non-price competition 得到既 吾一定要用price

whooammii

Any goods that commands a price must be scarce.
- free good: no one is willing to pay a price (since Qs>Qd at $0). So, all goods with a price must be scarce

However, it should be reminded that 'scarcity does NOT imply the existence of a price'
- there can be other rules to solve the competition. (e.g. 武力)

abcismeisme

第一句岩. 有price 就代表果件係有稀有性(scarcity),
                   但注意既係:冇price唔代表果樣野係冇scarcity.eg.12年免費教育
第二句錯.件貨可以唔洗錢.例如前面提過既12年免費教育