If it takes 100 tourists to pay his bills, taxes, staffing, and other expenses for the day, the next 5 tourists represent the profit. A tourism decline of 10% doesn’t mean 10% less profit, it means the catastrophic inviability of the whole business as it’s currently structured.
In reality most business can do things like cut hours for staff, postpone upgrades or long term maintenance, cut amenities, raise prices etc…
If most businesses were structured in a way that a small decline in customers immediately puts them out of business, any minor economic downturn would be an unrecoverable positive feedback loop for the economy.
I’m not saying a 10% drop won’t put a lot people out of business, but it’s not as much of an existential crisis for the economy as a whole as that story makes it seem.
Keyterms: "marginal cost", "merit order", "market-clearing price".
Or, did they improve their efficiency.
Or, have they closed.
https://ourworldindata.org/profile/energy/australia#what-sou...
Good to see now a working example that capitalism is an excellent system of rewarding those who solve inefficiencies in markets
And now it's complicated because the ideal move would just be to say "thank you" and buy all the cheap panels and batteries, but that hollows out your own industry.
Time was, mercantilist countries would use foreign colonies for resource extraction; and sell the goods manufactured with these resources back to them.
It was great for everyone!
Or, not quite: the workers are being exploited just like they were during the colonial period. But at least now their rulers have power over our rulers that they didn't have before. So they get to be happy about that as they make novelty items out of toxic plastic for Temu.
Anyway, the answer is both. They were being exploited 60+ years ago, and they're still being exploited now, regardless of if they can take the train away from the factory that they work at to visit their relatives over the holidays.