The State of NJ charges mercants with gouging for $5.50 gas after Sandy

[sigurros81]

Originally Posted by DrPizza

You're forgetting the other half. You were allowed to set up a business in the first place. At that time, you agreed to abide by the rules and regulations affecting your business. Don't like that? Then go open your business some place else instead where they don't have such rules. How about, oh, Somalia? Don't even try to pretend that you don't think there should be some rules controlling businesses. You'd certainly mind if someone purchased your neighbor's house, tore it down, and opened up some soft of very loud business with a lot of traffic.

If only Romney would have won. Business savvy men like him would understand the need to capitalize on disasters and the importance of making an extra buck on the plight of the willing victims.

[DrPizza]

Originally Posted by sigurros81

If only Romney would have won. Business savvy men like him would understand the need to capitalize on disasters and the importance of making an extra buck on the plight of the willing victims.

I'm seeing a pattern - at first, I thought you were just an idiot. Now, I realize you're just trolling.

[Jaskalas]

Originally Posted by DrPizza

Heyyyyyy, I have an idea (for the gas station owners) - During the year, when possible, keep a cone up in front of one pump - reserve it for people willing to pay $50 to cut to the front of the line. This seems allowed at theme parks; why not gas stations. Then, instead of waiting in line for 45 minutes for gas, people can pay $50 and cut to the front of the line. No gouging involved.

Does that idea pass the written rule of law??

That's actually quite funny, because it'd work.

[Doppel]

I am torn on the whole thing because it is major ahole move but on the on the ore hand the product still reaches people, just not ncssarily the first in line.

[Londo_Jowo]

I'm sure Dave would have been all over this one.

I see on the alienbabeltech forum he's turned in AT P&N forums and other select member to the national cyberbullying police.

[OutHouse]

Originally Posted by Anarchist420

That would not be seeing the whole picture. Would you rather pay $10/gal and have a one minute wait or would you rather pay the normal price and wait 10 hours?

Depending upon your car, how you drive and other factors, a full tank of gas can go a long way.

Also, don't forget that the State of NJ gets revenue from gas sales without full consent of the people paying it while those who were "gouged" had other options or at least weren't forced to pay something they may not have wanted to under threat of violence being committed against them.

Anyway, the aforementioned is still just part of the whole.

The gas the station is selling has already been paid for. the next gas delivery is not going cost the store owner 5.50 so yes this is gouging and good for NJ for bitch slapping the stations who did this.

[buckshot24]

Originally Posted by CharlesKozierok

Yes, it's supply and demand. And it's also gouging.

I have a problem with gouging laws in that they reduce the supply of important commodities when they are needed. But it's hard to argue in favor of jacking up prices on something that was already there when the crisis happened.

I'm totally against price gouging laws. As a business owner I should have 100% freedom in what I charge for my product or service. The customer has 100% freedom to not buy the product or service. Producing shortages is all these price gouging policies accomplish.

[techs]

I just ran down to the pharmacy and bought all the flu shots.

When the elderly come in I am going to gouge them.

Basically my sales pitch is going to be "how much is your life worth?"

[DrPizza]

Originally Posted by buckshot24

I'm totally against price gouging laws. As a business owner I should have 100% freedom in what I charge for my product or service. The customer has 100% freedom to not buy the product or service. Producing shortages is all these price gouging policies accomplish.

As I said to the other idiot in the thread: when you opened your business, you agreed to follow the rules that all the businesses follow. Don't like it? Open your business somewhere else, e.g., Somalia.

[Charles Kozierok]

Originally Posted by DrPizza

As I said to the other idiot in the thread: when you opened your business, you agreed to follow the rules that all the businesses follow. Don't like it? Open your business somewhere else, e.g., Somalia.

The problem is that the same people who support anti-gouging laws also complain about shortages, as if the two aren't directly linked.

[buckshot24]

Originally Posted by techs

I just ran down to the pharmacy and bought all the flu shots.

When the elderly come in I am going to gouge them.

Basically my sales pitch is going to be "how much is your life worth?"

Good luck with that.

Let's look at it another way. Let's say I am a business man who sees an event coming and I invest money in creating a stockpile of widgets that would be in super high demand if my prediction is correct. Shouldn't I be able to make an appropriate profit if I'm right?

Don't you think that the people waiting in line for 4-8 hours to get gas would rather pay 7-8 dollars per gallon rather than wait in line all that time? I bet there are people paying others to wait in line for them.

[buckshot24]

Originally Posted by DrPizza

As I said to the other idiot in the thread: when you opened your business, you agreed to follow the rules that all the businesses follow. Don't like it? Open your business somewhere else, e.g., Somalia.

So what? I'm talking about what is right not what is legal. I'm arguing against the law, genius.

[DucatiMonster696]

Originally Posted by CharlesKozierok

Yes, it's supply and demand. And it's also gouging.

I have a problem with gouging laws in that they reduce the supply of important commodities when they are needed. But it's hard to argue in favor of jacking up prices on something that was already there when the crisis happened.

It hard to argue that one should be allowed to poke a child with a needle but when that needle contains a much needed cure or vaccine one has to understand that allowing the inflicting of a small amount of pain is well needed if you are to protect or help that child in the long term.



"Is Price Gouging Immoral? Should It Be Illegal?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9QEkw6_O6w

[DucatiMonster696]

Originally Posted by techs

I just ran down to the pharmacy and bought all the flu shots.

When the elderly come in I am going to gouge them.

Basically my sales pitch is going to be "how much is your life worth?"

And now they will have to decide if they need it or not which encourages conversations so that all those who needed will have to make a conscious decision to think through their action. In addition your price hike has the unintended consequences of raising prices in the area and thus encouraging suppliers to rush in with supplies to capitalize on the price hikes but which inevitably leads to supply increasing in the long term.

Thus Absent any profit motivation to rush to an area or region were goods and services in demand producers and retailers will not move to sate the lack of supply because there is no profit incentive to induce them to over produce or over supply. The result of which we are witnessing occurring in areas like New York and other areas affected by hurricane Sandy.

[techs]

FDR was full of shit. If my neighbors house is on fire I am going to charge him 50 percent of what his house is worth to use my hose.

[Fanatical Meat]

Originally Posted by buckshot24

Good luck with that.

Let's look at it another way. Let's say I am a business man who sees an event coming and I invest money in creating a stockpile of widgets that would be in super high demand if my prediction is correct. Shouldn't I be able to make an appropriate profit if I'm right?

Don't you think that the people waiting in line for 4-8 hours to get gas would rather pay 7-8 dollars per gallon rather than wait in line all that time? I bet there are people paying others to wait in line for them.

Above would be fine because you planned on the upcoming event, I would have a problem if you had the only bandages around town (essentially by luck) and you were willing to sell them to the guy who needed them urgently for an enormus mark up. You're not investing or planning on anything but simply taking advantage of someone who needs help.
Another way to look at this is it ok for roofing companies to target old people that have trouble understanding them and selling extremely over priced emergency roof services?
Would you do something similar to a neighbor that needed some milk? Ask them for $7 to cover the cup of milk because you need to be compensated for your lost oppertunitry of 8oz's of milk?

[DucatiMonster696]

Originally Posted by sigurros81

If only Romney would have won. Business savvy men like him would understand the need to capitalize on disasters and the importance of making an extra buck on the plight of the willing victims.

And what occurs when they do genius? Oh that's right they inevitably and unintended create a incentive in the marketplace which others will rush to join and capitalize on and thus they hasten the increase of supplies rushing to the region.

This has been proven true through out the course of history. From natural disasters all the way to city sieges during times of war. If you remove the profit motive and attempt to implement price ceilings in order to cap prices you inevitably create shortages in goods and services because this is a axiomatic economic fact and thus you prolong the pain and recovery.

[techs]

I'm thinking I should buy an ambulance. Imagine how much people will pay when they are bleeding out for first aid!

[DucatiMonster696]

Originally Posted by techs

FDR was full of shit. If my neighbors house is on fire I am going to charge him 50 percent of what his house is worth to use my hose.

No, you're just to stupid or to naive to understand the economic realities at play when anti-gouging laws are enacted and there is no incentive for producers of goods and services to rush to supply a region. The evidence is as clear as day light because we are witnessing it occurring in the North East of this nation after a major hurricane has diminished the supply of goods such as gasoline. Basically you're like the retarded kid who doesn't understand that the behavior they cling to is in fact hurting them in the long term.

[jagec]

Boy, a lot of people here took Econ 101 and actually believed in rational markets. The belief is questionable in the best of times, but it's particularly laughable when applied to short-term and disaster scenarios.

[eskimospy]

Originally Posted by DucatiMonster696

No, you're just to stupid or to naive to understand the economic realities at play when anti-gouging laws are enacted and there is no incentive for producers of goods and services to rush to supply a region.

This is just hopelessly naive. Natural disasters destroy infrastructure and transportation networks. The lack of supply isn't there because no heroic John Galts are willing to build a gasoline spewing UFO to go fly over New Jersey, it's because it can't get there at all or if it can it can't be utilized effectively due to power outages, etc. The idea that a rush of entrepreneurs are going to fix it given a profit motive is laughable.

What really happens is that people who hoarded supplies before the disaster take advantage of those who were worst affected by the disaster. Anti-gouging laws are not only smart, but valuable.

[DucatiMonster696]

Originally Posted by eskimospy

This is just hopelessly naive. Natural disasters destroy infrastructure and transportation networks. The lack of supply isn't there because no heroic John Galts are willing to build a gasoline spewing UFO to go fly over New Jersey, it's because it can't get there at all or if it can it can't be utilized effectively due to power outages, etc. The idea that a rush of entrepreneurs are going to fix it given a profit motive is laughable.

What really happens is that people who hoarded supplies before the disaster take advantage of those who were worst affected by the disaster. Anti-gouging laws are not only smart, but valuable.

You ignoring the fundamental fact that you basically have disincentivized producers of goods and services from reaching those affected areas by removing the profit component and suppressing prices. All you are doing is prolonging the pain because there is no really motive for anyone to rush to the area with supplies of goods even with functioning infrastructure such as the roads in regions.

This is why New York and other areas are going to be facing long term gas shortages which are unrelated to actual condition of infrastructure which is for the most part still functioning well after Sandy hit.

[DrPizza]

Originally Posted by DucatiMonster696

No, you're just to stupid or to naive to understand the economic realities at play when anti-gouging laws are enacted and there is no incentive for producers of goods and services to rush to supply a region. The evidence is as clear as day light because we are witnessing it occurring in the North East of this nation after a major hurricane has diminished the supply of goods such as gasoline. Basically you're like the retarded kid who doesn't understand that the behavior they cling to is in fact hurting them in the long term.

You completely ignored a point I made earlier - the rules don't say you can't raise prices at all. The rules allow you to raise prices by 10%. If people are making an 8% profit (reasonable), that's a huge increase, though not gouging.

So, your argument holds no weight.

[Brainonska511]

Originally Posted by DucatiMonster696

And now they will have to decide if they need it or not which encourages conversations so that all those who needed will have to make a conscious decision to think through their action. In addition your price hike has the unintended consequences of raising prices in the area and thus encouraging suppliers to rush in with supplies to capitalize on the price hikes but which inevitably leads to supply increasing in the long term.

Thus Absent any profit motivation to rush to an area or region were goods and services in demand producers and retailers will not move to sate the lack of supply because there is no profit incentive to induce them to over produce or over supply. The result of which we are witnessing occurring in areas like New York and other areas affected by hurricane Sandy.

The suppliers and gas stations are not the ones that are capable of fixing infrastructure problems. If the gas stations have no power, then there is no point of supplying them with gasoline. There is no way to distribute those supplies even if the region was flooded with tankers - the limited availability of working gas stations also restricts the supply.

And since gasoline has a very inelastic demand, it would making gouging easy.

[Demo24]

Christ, this thread is like showcase one of why people tend to find some conservatives as self-rightous moronic asshats.

Most people "Oh shit..a natural disaster just went through my region and hurt a bunch of people, I know I'll do what I can to help us all through it and in the end we'll be ok. I may not make much if any profit, but that's ok"

Asshats " Oh score! A natural disaster just screwed everyone around me. I know! I'll jack all my prices up to stupid-lol-worthy levels so at least I'LL come through this with some extra money in my pockets...fuck you alllll!"