Started By
Message

re: $99 for a case of water: Texas officials report price gouging post-Harvey

Posted on 9/1/17 at 10:04 am to
Posted by 50_Tiger
Dallas TX
Member since Jan 2016
40299 posts
Posted on 9/1/17 at 10:04 am to
quote:

The goods will disappear either way. Many people will not get access to them.

Solution 1) Price controls allow anyone and everyone to have access for a short period of time. Then the goods are gone and very few goods enter the market because there is no incentive to flood the market with goods.

Solution 2) People can charge whatever they want. Those that can afford it, buy the goods. The goods disappear in the short term but the market is flooded with more goods because there is an enormous incentive to enter the market as a seller. The price of the goods drops due to the influx of supply and the market reaches a new equilibrium with affordable goods.

Donated goods are entering the market under both solutions.


Under solution 2, what do we do about the time in between goods being affordable and available opposed to not?

Would you not agree that in a disaster area the most valuable resource is time?
Posted by Pecker
Rocky Top
Member since May 2015
16674 posts
Posted on 9/1/17 at 10:12 am to
quote:

Under solution 2, what do we do about the time in between goods being affordable and available opposed to not?

Would you not agree that in a disaster area the most valuable resource is time?




The time for availability of goods is no different in either scenario. The goods will disappear.

The question is: to what extent with the goods enter the market after they are initially depleted?
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram