- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Coronavirus price gouger stuck with 18,000 bottles of sanitizers after Amazon bans him
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:24 pm to Tigerfan56
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:24 pm to Tigerfan56
quote:
Should we all be prepared for every outlandish and unlikely scenario that could happen?
Why should the government be the arbiter of what is and isn't a fair price for something?
1
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:27 pm to Tigerfan56
quote:
So a company figures out how to produce the cure for cancer to an individual at a cost of $100 and they charge $100,000 for it - that isn’t evil?
Terrible comparison and the fact that you think it is valid is laughable.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:29 pm to Tigerfan56
quote:
So a company figures out how to produce the cure for cancer to an individual at a cost of $100 and they charge $100,000 for it - that isn’t evil?
That company wouldn't exist for long. The latter price removes the overwhelming majority of potential customers from the market. So while a very small percentage may pay the $100,000, the lost profits from those who can't pay are greater than the one's you're making, which causes an adjustment to the price more in line with the former.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:29 pm to Stagg8
quote:
and this is a textbook definition of it
No one s swindling or overcharging here. This is basic Econ.
When the price is too low do you know what happens? Hoarding which s an inefficient allocation of resources.
Selling a product for its perceived value is not gouging. Your idea of gouging is pop economics
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:30 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
That company wouldn't exist for long.
They'd still hold the patent. Or are you arguing against those, as well?
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:31 pm to Tigerfan56
quote:
This is such a dumb thing to say.
Says the economically illiterate.
quote:
Prepare in advance for something that no one saw coming . Should we all be prepared for every outlandish and unlikely scenario that could happen?
Having a few weeks worth of basic supplies is applicable in any disaster
Only truly stupid people sit around and wait for the gubment to declare emergency.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:33 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
Why should the government be the arbiter of what is and isn't a fair price for something?
Well for situations like these, among other reasons. Unpredictable and extraordinary conditions that drastically effect the market at the detriment of health.
Let’s play this scenario out. We’re in a 100% capitalist economy, no government intervention. The market price of cleaning and sanitary products jumps through the roof. No problem because 80% of the country can suck it up and bite the bullet but the low income families can’t. With a virus like this where the best defense is personal hygiene, that’s devastating. The spread of this is uncontrollable and won’t slow down. Hospitals and the healthcare system get overwhelmed. All in all, I’d argue the economy is much worse off in this scenario and government intervention (in this scenario) is a small, small price to pay.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:33 pm to rickgrimes
I’m sorry I thought this was America
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:33 pm to Tigerfan56
quote:
So a company figures out how to produce the cure for cancer to an individual at a cost of $100 and they charge $100,000 for it - that isn’t evil?
No.
Blame your sacred gubment for granting privilege and limiting supply
Open the matket to competition, prices fall.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:33 pm to rickgrimes
quote:
brothers Matt and Noah Colvin
People like this should be stripped naked, tied to a pole, and publicly beaten with a cat-o’-nine-tails.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:34 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
The idea behind gouging is that it goes beyond what's reasonable or fair. If you're agreeing to a price, it's not unreasonable or unfair.
That's just poor logic.
What we have here is a guy that's driving through multiple counties and clearing out everyone's stock of a few key items specifically so that he can create a false demand and profiteer off of a shortage he created.
That's not capitalism. That's profiteering.
This post was edited on 3/14/20 at 1:43 pm
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:34 pm to LegendInMyMind
quote:
The thing is, he could have just sold it at a modest markup and done quite well. The greedy frick cost himself in multiple ways.
Now he has to go set up at a flea market for the next five years trying to unload all that shite.
This. Selling for 70 dollars is ridiculous. Buy a 4 dollar bottle, sell for 6-7 and nobody will care much
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:36 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
That company wouldn't exist for long. The latter price removes the overwhelming majority of potential customers from the market. So while a very small percentage may pay the $100,000, the lost profits from those who can't pay are greater than the one's you're making, which causes an adjustment to the price more in line with the former.
You sure? How many people own homes in this country. How many people have loved ones who own homes? Everyone who does is taking out a second mortgage to cure their cancer or a loved ones. They wouldn’t be short of customers at all, and at those margins it wouldn’t make sense from a purely capitalist standpoint to lower prices just to reach a broader audience.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:37 pm to rickgrimes
Whyd he sell them for $70. He got way too greedy.
If he just would've slightly marked the price up he would still be in business while also making a nicr profit
If he just would've slightly marked the price up he would still be in business while also making a nicr profit
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:38 pm to wadewilson
quote:
That's not capitalism. That's profiteering.
So bill gates and Elon musk are profiteers? Wall Street?
If he sells for a profit he's a smart man.
I'll bet a hundred bucks if this guy bought from warehouses with a legal business license you would call him a respected businessman.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:38 pm to Nobelium
quote:
-Jackass buys 18,000 bottles of hand sanitizer to sell them for $70 a bottle during a shortage. Is banned from Amazon so now nobody can buy any of it
-Handful of retards hoard all the toilet paper, so now nobody can find any
What's the difference? If stores had adjusted prices appropriately neither of those things would have happened.
No.
If stores had restricted quantities that can be purchased by a single customer, this wouldn't be a problem.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:39 pm to Unknown_Poster
quote:
That 'quality' UT education is failing you. And I'll go ahead and elaborate assuming you are the most ardent of backwoods anti-government hillbillies
this isn’t anti-government. You simply don’t understand economics, which isnt surprising. Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:39 pm to BHM
quote:
If you need the hand sanitizer and are willing to pay for it, then do it. If not, there are many other cheap and available alternatives.
There are simple and cheap alternatives. People won’t think and panic. So many lemmings should be separated from their money.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:40 pm to QJenk
quote:
Whyd he sell them for $70. He got way too greedy.
If he just would've slightly marked the price up he would still be in business while also making a nicr profit
If $70 is too high, he will be stuck with a surplus.
If people will pay $70, they're getting a fair deal.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 1:42 pm to wadewilson
Yep, also you do want to sell out of items to end users when those items are beneficial in a public health emergency.
You absolutely dont want to limit access to an item which may help mitigate the spread of the disease to the people who are likely to spread it.
I dont understand how someone can think this way.
You absolutely dont want to limit access to an item which may help mitigate the spread of the disease to the people who are likely to spread it.
I dont understand how someone can think this way.
Page 5 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News