Current Events > Dumbass Forbes writer says price gouging during events like Harvey is actually

Topic List
Page List: 1, 2
Paper_Okami
08/27/17 7:54:09 PM
#1:


good and not very bad.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/08/27/hurricane-harvey-is-when-we-need-price-gouging-not-laws-against-it/#2c4a4213fa9f
---
"Conceit, arrogance and egotism are the essentials of patriotism"- Emma Goldman
"Wimmy Wham Wham Wozzle!" -Slurms MacKenzie
... Copied to Clipboard!
Nomadic View
08/27/17 7:56:08 PM
#2:


It's forbes, so I can't check the article without turning off Adblock. What is the general principle of his argument? What is his reasoning why price gouging during a crisis is a good thing?
---
{}\\{}(o){}\\//{}//=\\{})){}(< \\//{}{{-{}//\\{}
{}xxxxxxxx{};;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>
... Copied to Clipboard!
IdiotMachine
08/27/17 7:56:50 PM
#3:


His point is that there's less supply, and it's more dangerous to bring supply to the disaster area, so there should be some price gouging allowed.

Not that I agree with that, but I can see where he's coming from.
... Copied to Clipboard!
Manocheese
08/27/17 7:57:05 PM
#4:


I can't read it, but I'm guessing the tl;dr version is "supply and demand".
---
()_() Hardcore - We'll probably be modded for this...
(o.o) http://manocheese.googlepages.com/manocheesery
... Copied to Clipboard!
DifferentialEquation
08/27/17 7:57:19 PM
#5:


If I were in that situation, I'd rather be able to go into the store and pay $50 for a case of water rather than not be able to find them at all because everyone bought them up for $3 per case since the price didn't change.
---
"If the day does not require an AK, it is good." The Great Warrior Poet, Ice Cube
... Copied to Clipboard!
WilliamPorygon
08/27/17 7:57:42 PM
#6:


expected Kevin O'Leary
---
Love dolphins and whales? Come hang out at Cetacea Cove!
https://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/1404-cetacea-cove
... Copied to Clipboard!
RebelElite791
08/27/17 7:57:42 PM
#7:


DifferentialEquation posted...
If I were in that situation, I'd rather be able to go into the store and pay $50 for a case of water rather than not be able to find them at all because everyone bought them up for $3 per case since the price didn't change.

So let all the poor people who can't afford it fuck off and die yeah?
---
... Copied to Clipboard!
The Admiral
08/27/17 7:58:04 PM
#8:


Nomadic View posted...
It's forbes, so I can't check the article without turning off Adblock. What is the general principle of his argument? What is his reasoning why price gouging during a crisis is a good thing?


Just change the http to "cache" and bypass their idiotic Adblock redirect.

cache://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/08/27/hurricane-harvey-is-when-we-need-price-gouging-not-laws-against-it/#2c4a4213fa9f
---
- The Admiral
... Copied to Clipboard!
treewojima
08/27/17 7:59:32 PM
#9:


econ 101 stuff, basically. he argues that higher prices will draw in more suppliers, and that if someone spends $50 for a case of water, then they don't find the price to be so egregious as to not buy it

all of which counts for shit during a natural disaster
... Copied to Clipboard!
The Admiral
08/27/17 8:00:25 PM
#10:


RebelElite791 posted...
DifferentialEquation posted...
If I were in that situation, I'd rather be able to go into the store and pay $50 for a case of water rather than not be able to find them at all because everyone bought them up for $3 per case since the price didn't change.

So let all the poor people who can't afford it fuck off and die yeah?


Actually, let the market price adjust so that more people are encouraged to bring in supply and save even more lives. Only regressives like yourself think there is some moral virtue in saving 100 poor lives vs. 500 lives of wealthier people who can pay more.
---
- The Admiral
... Copied to Clipboard!
Sativa_Rose
08/27/17 8:00:39 PM
#11:


I didn't read the article, but I'm guessing he's simply explaining that price controls are a terrible idea because they don't allow prices to fluctuate with supply and demand. When price floors or price ceilings interfere with a market, they create either a surplus or a shortage. In this case, having anti-price gouging laws, or price ceilings, would create shortages.

So "price gouging", which is really just allowing prices to fluctuate with supply and demand as they always do, is not a bad thing. Natural disasters often cause very rapid fluctuations in supply and demand, much more so than your average ordinary day, hence prices are usually more stable.
---
I may not go down in history, but I will go down on your sister.
... Copied to Clipboard!
Complete_Idi0t
08/27/17 8:00:44 PM
#12:


If only there was some sort of government agency that didn't have to worry about profits for this sort of thing
... Copied to Clipboard!
RebelElite791
08/27/17 8:07:14 PM
#13:


The Admiral posted...
RebelElite791 posted...
DifferentialEquation posted...
If I were in that situation, I'd rather be able to go into the store and pay $50 for a case of water rather than not be able to find them at all because everyone bought them up for $3 per case since the price didn't change.

So let all the poor people who can't afford it fuck off and die yeah?


Actually, let the market price adjust so that more people are encouraged to bring in supply and save even more lives. Only regressives like yourself think there is some moral virtue in saving 100 poor lives vs. 500 lives of wealthier people who can pay more.

No, we think everyone should have equal access to life's necessities. Crazy yeah? Fuck right off.
---
... Copied to Clipboard!
IdiotMachine
08/27/17 8:08:18 PM
#14:


RebelElite791 posted...
No, we think everyone should have equal access to life's necessities. Crazy yeah? Fuck right off.

In an ideal world and society, yes. In a disaster, it's basically the strongest, fastest, richest, etc. that'll survive.
... Copied to Clipboard!
The Admiral
08/27/17 8:10:03 PM
#15:


RebelElite791 posted...
The Admiral posted...
RebelElite791 posted...
DifferentialEquation posted...
If I were in that situation, I'd rather be able to go into the store and pay $50 for a case of water rather than not be able to find them at all because everyone bought them up for $3 per case since the price didn't change.

So let all the poor people who can't afford it fuck off and die yeah?


Actually, let the market price adjust so that more people are encouraged to bring in supply and save even more lives. Only regressives like yourself think there is some moral virtue in saving 100 poor lives vs. 500 lives of wealthier people who can pay more.

No, we think everyone should have equal access to life's necessities. Crazy yeah? Fuck right off.


Everyone does have equal "access." You think there should be artificial price ceilings that prevent a greater number of people from potentially getting supplies. This is because you have a delusional mindset that helping a smaller number of poor people is more noble than helping a greater number of wealthier people. And yes, that is crazy.
---
- The Admiral
... Copied to Clipboard!
RebelElite791
08/27/17 8:12:50 PM
#16:


The Admiral posted...
Everyone does have equal "access."

People who can't afford $50 for a $2 case of water do not have access to it.

And no, there is no reason or logic to your "smaller number of poor people" bullshit. You just think they're not deserving of life because you're the most ridiculous fucking caricature of the "temporarily embarrassed millionaire" conservative stereotype.
---
... Copied to Clipboard!
The Admiral
08/27/17 8:13:58 PM
#17:


RebelElite791 posted...
The Admiral posted...
Everyone does have equal "access."

And no, there is no reason or logic to your "smaller number of poor people" bullshit.


So you didn't read the article.
---
- The Admiral
... Copied to Clipboard!
Antifar
08/27/17 8:14:25 PM
#18:


The Admiral posted...
This is because you have a delusional mindset that helping a smaller number of poor people is more noble than helping a greater number of wealthier people.

This math doesn't mesh with the reality that the poor are
A) More numerous than the rich to begin with
B) Less likely to be able to evacuate
---
kin to all that throbs
... Copied to Clipboard!
ItsYourFault
08/27/17 8:14:58 PM
#19:


Admiral in full shitpost mode today
... Copied to Clipboard!
RebelElite791
08/27/17 8:15:52 PM
#20:


The Admiral posted...
RebelElite791 posted...
The Admiral posted...
Everyone does have equal "access."

And no, there is no reason or logic to your "smaller number of poor people" bullshit.


So you didn't read the article.

The logic isn't any better coming from him. You just parroting what he says doesn't make it true or humane.
---
... Copied to Clipboard!
The Admiral
08/27/17 8:17:19 PM
#21:


Antifar posted...
The Admiral posted...
This is because you have a delusional mindset that helping a smaller number of poor people is more noble than helping a greater number of wealthier people.

This math doesn't mesh with the reality that the poor are
A) More numerous than the rich to begin with
B) Less likely to be able to evacuate


The math works fine. People who are able to evacuate aren't buying local supplies. At that point, the market is everyone who is still in the danger zone and needs the supplies for survival. If the price gouging brings in, let's say, double the supply (which in turn eventually lowers the prices), it saves more people. Unlike Rebel, and possibly you, I don't place additional value on saving poor lives than any other lives.
---
- The Admiral
... Copied to Clipboard!
RebelElite791
08/27/17 8:18:13 PM
#22:


The Admiral posted...
Unlike Rebel, and possibly you, I don't place additional value on saving poor lives than any other lives.

No, you very clearly place much higher value on saving rich lives. Unlike me, who thinks both should have the same access to essential products.
---
... Copied to Clipboard!
The Admiral
08/27/17 8:19:52 PM
#23:


RebelElite791 posted...
The Admiral posted...
Unlike Rebel, and possibly you, I don't place additional value on saving poor lives than any other lives.

No, you very clearly place much higher value on saving rich lives. Unlike me, who thinks both should have the same access to essential products.


You mean unlike you, who thinks saving a fewer number of lives (who happen to be poor) is superior to saving a greater number of lives. Yes, please lecture me again on logic and reasonability.
---
- The Admiral
... Copied to Clipboard!
Sativa_Rose
08/27/17 8:20:47 PM
#24:


RebelElite791 posted...
The Admiral posted...
RebelElite791 posted...
DifferentialEquation posted...
If I were in that situation, I'd rather be able to go into the store and pay $50 for a case of water rather than not be able to find them at all because everyone bought them up for $3 per case since the price didn't change.

So let all the poor people who can't afford it fuck off and die yeah?


Actually, let the market price adjust so that more people are encouraged to bring in supply and save even more lives. Only regressives like yourself think there is some moral virtue in saving 100 poor lives vs. 500 lives of wealthier people who can pay more.

No, we think everyone should have equal access to life's necessities. Crazy yeah? Fuck right off.


Why are businesses allowed to charge for these necessities at all? That's clearly not equal access.
---
I may not go down in history, but I will go down on your sister.
... Copied to Clipboard!
IfGodCouldDie
08/27/17 8:21:56 PM
#25:


The Admiral posted...
RebelElite791 posted...
DifferentialEquation posted...
If I were in that situation, I'd rather be able to go into the store and pay $50 for a case of water rather than not be able to find them at all because everyone bought them up for $3 per case since the price didn't change.

So let all the poor people who can't afford it fuck off and die yeah?


Actually, let the market price adjust so that more people are encouraged to bring in supply and save even more lives. Only regressives like yourself think there is some moral virtue in saving 100 poor lives vs. 500 lives of wealthier people who can pay more.

Why not save all 600 lives?
---
Mind post. XBL:Cyanide Sucker PSN:Paters1 IGN:SuperPattyCakes
... Copied to Clipboard!
The Admiral
08/27/17 8:22:18 PM
#26:


Sativa_Rose posted...
RebelElite791 posted...
The Admiral posted...
RebelElite791 posted...
DifferentialEquation posted...
If I were in that situation, I'd rather be able to go into the store and pay $50 for a case of water rather than not be able to find them at all because everyone bought them up for $3 per case since the price didn't change.

So let all the poor people who can't afford it fuck off and die yeah?


Actually, let the market price adjust so that more people are encouraged to bring in supply and save even more lives. Only regressives like yourself think there is some moral virtue in saving 100 poor lives vs. 500 lives of wealthier people who can pay more.

No, we think everyone should have equal access to life's necessities. Crazy yeah? Fuck right off.


Why are businesses allowed to charge for these necessities at all? That's clearly not equal access.


He won't answer that directly. Rebel has the typical regressive mindset that wealth disparities are inherently unfair. He thinks simply having a need creates an entitlement. One of which he conveniently never has to pay for, of course.
---
- The Admiral
... Copied to Clipboard!
MutantJohn
08/27/17 8:22:31 PM
#27:


Get triggered, liberals.
---
"Oh, my mother; oh, my friends, ask the angels, will I ever see heaven again?" - Laura Marling
... Copied to Clipboard!
The Admiral
08/27/17 8:23:00 PM
#28:


IfGodCouldDie posted...
The Admiral posted...
RebelElite791 posted...
DifferentialEquation posted...
If I were in that situation, I'd rather be able to go into the store and pay $50 for a case of water rather than not be able to find them at all because everyone bought them up for $3 per case since the price didn't change.

So let all the poor people who can't afford it fuck off and die yeah?


Actually, let the market price adjust so that more people are encouraged to bring in supply and save even more lives. Only regressives like yourself think there is some moral virtue in saving 100 poor lives vs. 500 lives of wealthier people who can pay more.

Why not save all 600 lives?


Because supplies are not infinite, otherwise there would be no shortages.
---
- The Admiral
... Copied to Clipboard!
RebelElite791
08/27/17 8:23:45 PM
#29:


The Admiral posted...
He thinks simply having a need creates an entitlement

For the most basic necessities required to sustain human life? Yeah. Horrible right?

The Admiral posted...
One of which he conveniently never has to pay for, of course.

No? I'm also, unlike you, willing to pay more taxes to ensure everyone has access to those necessities because I'm not a narcissistic sociopath.
---
... Copied to Clipboard!
IfGodCouldDie
08/27/17 8:23:47 PM
#30:


The Admiral posted...
IfGodCouldDie posted...
The Admiral posted...
RebelElite791 posted...
DifferentialEquation posted...
If I were in that situation, I'd rather be able to go into the store and pay $50 for a case of water rather than not be able to find them at all because everyone bought them up for $3 per case since the price didn't change.

So let all the poor people who can't afford it fuck off and die yeah?


Actually, let the market price adjust so that more people are encouraged to bring in supply and save even more lives. Only regressives like yourself think there is some moral virtue in saving 100 poor lives vs. 500 lives of wealthier people who can pay more.

Why not save all 600 lives?


Because supplies are not infinite, otherwise there would be no shortages.

But you could regulate the amount of supplies each person can get, keep it at a reasonable price and save everyone.
---
Mind post. XBL:Cyanide Sucker PSN:Paters1 IGN:SuperPattyCakes
... Copied to Clipboard!
Paper_Okami
08/27/17 8:24:59 PM
#31:


Guys, stop fighting his last name is literally WORST ALL
---
"Conceit, arrogance and egotism are the essentials of patriotism"- Emma Goldman
"Wimmy Wham Wham Wozzle!" -Slurms MacKenzie
... Copied to Clipboard!
mattnd2007
08/27/17 8:25:30 PM
#32:


i get the idea behind gouging. but thinking about it makes my soul hurt. like you shouldn't charge someone 100 dollars for some fucking water. that's disgusting.
---
go join the "expletive not allowed" nazis then. you "expletive not allowed" psycho- Spudger 01/15/17
... Copied to Clipboard!
The Admiral
08/27/17 8:25:47 PM
#33:


IfGodCouldDie posted...
But you could regulate the amount of supplies each person can get, keep it at a reasonable price and save everyone.


You're missing the point or didn't read the article either.

Disasters create a supply shortage. If the price of a bottle of water is capped at $2, vendors will quickly run out and no new supply will enter the area given the danger. However, if the price can go up to $15, now vendors from outside the danger zone will have an incentive to enter it and sell the water at the premium. This increases the supply and saves additional lives. Those vendors are not taking on the additional risk for just $2 a bottle under the price caps.
---
- The Admiral
... Copied to Clipboard!
SageHarpuia
08/27/17 8:26:52 PM
#34:


Jesus this topic is a mess. I can understand where both sides are coming from, but there's really no ideal answer to this because a disaster is by definition a bad thing.
---
My name is Harpuia, one of the four Guardians of Master X and General of the Strong Air Battalion, The Rekku Army.
... Copied to Clipboard!
FLUFFYGERM
08/27/17 8:27:28 PM
#35:


if stuff was priced normally, the rich would just buy it all up anyway because it's only $2 for water. people would stockpile beyond what they need for the storm.

not saying the gouging is okay. just saying that it makes no difference to the rich what the price is. if they wanna buy it all, they will.
... Copied to Clipboard!
#36
Post #36 was unavailable or deleted.
IfGodCouldDie
08/27/17 8:28:12 PM
#37:


The Admiral posted...
IfGodCouldDie posted...
But you could regulate the amount of supplies each person can get, keep it at a reasonable price and save everyone.


You're missing the point or didn't read the article either.

Disasters create a supply shortage. If the price of a bottle of water is capped at $2, vendors will quickly run out and no new supply will enter the area given the danger. However, if the price can go up to $15, now vendors from outside the danger zone will enter it and sell the water at the premium. This increases the supply and saves additional lives.

I didn't read the article, but the point is pretty clear. I am not against supplies being imported and vendors covering the cost of the importation, what I am against is blatantly exploting tragedy to pad your pockets.
---
Mind post. XBL:Cyanide Sucker PSN:Paters1 IGN:SuperPattyCakes
... Copied to Clipboard!
The Admiral
08/27/17 8:29:10 PM
#38:


RebelElite791 posted...
For the most basic necessities required to sustain human life? Yeah. Horrible right?


No, just completely unrealistic and childish. We live in a world with finite resources, not the fantasy one you'd like us to live in.

RebelElite791 posted...
unlike you, willing to pay more taxes to ensure everyone has access to those necessities because I'm not a narcissistic sociopath.


And because you likely don't make enough that you even have to pay federal income taxes. It's very noble of you to be generous with my money, though.
---
- The Admiral
... Copied to Clipboard!
RebelElite791
08/27/17 8:33:21 PM
#39:


The Admiral posted...
And because you likely don't make enough that you even have to pay federal income taxes. It's very noble of you to be generous with my money, though.

You try so hard don't you?
---
... Copied to Clipboard!
Bio1590
08/27/17 8:34:57 PM
#40:


Admiral's sure is hiding behind his ex-moderator privilege today phewwwww lad
---
... Copied to Clipboard!
#41
Post #41 was unavailable or deleted.
Antifar
08/27/17 8:36:37 PM
#42:


There is basically no situation which puts rich people at equal risk to the poor, this one included. This is simply a false dichotomy.
---
kin to all that throbs
... Copied to Clipboard!
DifferentialEquation
08/27/17 8:36:57 PM
#43:


RebelElite791 posted...
DifferentialEquation posted...
If I were in that situation, I'd rather be able to go into the store and pay $50 for a case of water rather than not be able to find them at all because everyone bought them up for $3 per case since the price didn't change.

So let all the poor people who can't afford it fuck off and die yeah?


As opposed to what? The people who weren't one of the first ones in line or who weren't close to an open store and missed out on the water because its price stayed at $3 can fuck off and die?
---
"If the day does not require an AK, it is good." The Great Warrior Poet, Ice Cube
... Copied to Clipboard!
#44
Post #44 was unavailable or deleted.
#45
Post #45 was unavailable or deleted.
Delirious_Beard
08/27/17 8:39:56 PM
#46:


The Admiral posted...
RebelElite791 posted...
For the most basic necessities required to sustain human life? Yeah. Horrible right?


No, just completely unrealistic and childish. We live in a world with finite resources, not the fantasy one you'd like us to live in.

RebelElite791 posted...
unlike you, willing to pay more taxes to ensure everyone has access to those necessities because I'm not a narcissistic sociopath.


And because you likely don't make enough that you even have to pay federal income taxes. It's very noble of you to be generous with my money, though.


what a likable person you are
---
http://i.imgur.com/5UL2v5u.gif
"Does our ruin benefit the earth? Does it help the grass to grow, the sun to shine? Is this darkness in you, too?"
... Copied to Clipboard!
#47
Post #47 was unavailable or deleted.
itachi15243
08/27/17 8:41:49 PM
#48:


The Admiral posted...
RebelElite791 posted...
DifferentialEquation posted...
If I were in that situation, I'd rather be able to go into the store and pay $50 for a case of water rather than not be able to find them at all because everyone bought them up for $3 per case since the price didn't change.

So let all the poor people who can't afford it fuck off and die yeah?


Actually, let the market price adjust so that more people are encouraged to bring in supply and save even more lives. Only regressives like yourself think there is some moral virtue in saving 100 poor lives vs. 500 lives of wealthier people who can pay more.


Am I tripping or did admiral really just fucking say it's okay for poor people to die if it saves the rich?

Wtf
---
I do drawings and stuff
https://www.fiverr.com/blueblitz
... Copied to Clipboard!
#49
Post #49 was unavailable or deleted.
Butterfiles
08/27/17 8:46:07 PM
#50:


Bravo to Admiral for doing the lord's work and carrying the banner for right wingers who are just complete scum.
---
... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List
Page List: 1, 2