Slashdot Mirror
NY Attorney General Subpoenas Craigslist For Post-Sandy Price Gougers
TheSync writes "In the wake of Hurricane Sandy, the New York State Attorney General has subpoenaed Craigslist, demanding that the site identify more than 100 sellers whose prices on post-Sandy gas, generators and other supplies were of an 'unconscionably excessive price' during an emergency. AG Eric Schneiderman said: 'Our office has zero tolerance for price gouging [and] will do everything we can to stop unscrupulous individuals from taking advantage of New Yorkers trying to rebuild their lives.'"
Price controls have exactly the same effect in an emergency that they have at any other time. If you prohibit higher gas prices, you guarantee shortages.
A private seller should be able to put any price they want on something. $100000 for a bubble gum wrapper if they want.
Looking for gasoline, post-refinery-fire that is excessively expensive, and consists of price gouging....
90% of the people in CA would loveit.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
How horrible that all those people were forced to buy from Craigslist sellers at excessively high prices...
"Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
Buying up stuff at retail after a disaster and reselling it at huge markups is not free enterprise
Slow news day.
Doesn't anybody check the articles for grammar anymore?
the New York State Attorney General has subpoenaed Craigslist, demanding that the site identify more than 100 sellers
Rather appropriate for the YRO section that has been on Slashdot as long as I've been a reader
Does Craigslist hold a monopoly on advertising emergency supplies for consumers? The last I heard, sellers can charge whatever price they want to, so long as (1) they're not preventing their competitors from selling in the same market and (2) they're not colluding with their competitors to raise the price.
The N.Y. AG knows this. This is nothing but a political stunt.
So when at what point are the supply and demand curves "illegal"?
If I remember the first thing we learned in Macro 101 correctly, if supply goes down, price remains the same and demand remains the same or increases, you run out of supply pretty quickly.
If you increase prices, you can afford to resell more expensive gas, trucking it in from further out of state.
What would you rather have: expensive gas, or cheap but non-existent gas?
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
What part of it do you think isn't compatible with the government placing few restrictions on the activities and ownership of businesses?
How is it not exactly? It really is kind of text book free enterprise. That is taking advantage of the market when it benefits you most and guarantees the highest rate of return on your investment.
I got here through a series of tubes
What about the media, that had the equipment, know-how, and generators to help people? Instead they just stood there and talked to a camera.
What about Ebay auctions? Are they going to come after me when buyers overpay for the stuff I'm selling?
Perhaps the government should set prices on everything to keep things simple.
This sounds like pharmaceutical companies in the USA.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Why aren't they subpoena'ing Bloomberg, who set up much-needed generators for a marathon rather than to help the people who needed it?
-- Ethanol-fueled
Actually, I think it was the private race organizers that had the generators.
But even if they turned the generators over to the city, what would the city do with them? Just parking a generator in front of an apartment building does nothing to help the residents. Do you just let residents run extension cords out their windows?
Was there an actual shortage of mid-range generators that could be used safely? (I'm not talking about a 1KW generator that someone may put on his balcony, fueled by carrying cans of gasoline through the livingroom, no city emergency services agency would condone a setup like that). Possibly some multi-megawatt generators could have been used to light entire buildings, as long as electricians could provide adequate connectivity, but there's still a safety issue, temporary power is hard to do right, especially in a disaster when you don't have access to all of the electrical supplies you may need.
If this is a private transaction between two individuals, how is the government even involved? I can see if it is a regulated or licensed company like a hotel, but just 2 people on Craigslist?
Wow, a 7 digit ID - let that be a lesson in the perils of procrastination.
I guess most of free enterprise isn't free enterprise then.
"How *dare* you buy up food from farms on the cheap just to sell at a fat retail markup, just to profit off of people who can't make it out to the farms to buy their food!"
Information theory is life. The rest is just the KL divergence.
Allowing price gouging post disaster can be very dangerous because it exacerbates any shortages. No only are people in need vying for scare resources but price gougers who buy and hold much more than they individually need in an effort to reap a profit on resale. This causes more gouging and hoarding as people become scared that prices will increase. The ultimate result is that people will go without and possibly die while resources go unused.
NOT PRICE GOUGING
Someone needs a medical service and is charged $20,000/day from the local tax payer subsidized hospital which has the protection of the local criminal syndicate (city/county/state) that passes 'regulations' allowing them to sustain this exponentially inflated non-market price by operating without competition.
PRICE GOUGING
A private individual sets a price to sell his own goods or services that will only be paid by people willing to freely pay it, (a/k/a fair market value) but the local criminal syndicate (city/county/state) decide they don't like this price, probably because they are not getting a big enough cut.
This is exactly what was wrong with Romney et al's stance on FEMA. If there's a profit motive, then you're going to get the highest possible cost for the least possible value of goods and services. Where there's reasonable infrastructure, competition can reduce that, but a post-hurricane disaster zone is more likely to resemble turf-based economies (drugs, prostitution) than it is to resemble truly competitive markets (e.g. bazaars).
If your kid is at home coughing up a lung due to a flu and there's no heat in the house, and if phone lines and emergency services are basically unavailable because of the greater circumstance, you're going to buy that last can of chicken soup from your corner market rather than shopping around for a better deal further away. Call it supply and demand if you will, but shopkeepers who engaged in price gouging are profiteering off of others' misery, plain and simple, and there should be consequences.
On the other hand, there are stories of great generosity, like the pizzeria that kept making pies throughout the peak of the crisis, and gave away something on the order of 1000 pizzas to hungry families and emergency workers. That business deserves to prosper. I hope that some anonymous millionaire hands them an envelope containing ten times the profit they would have made had they sold all those pizzas. Hell, maybe FEMA should cut them a check for helping out. At the very least, they should be able to write those costs off for tax purposes.
The CB App. What's your 20?
Because that isn't selling something at an excessive price. Just because I'm not allowed to sell you something at an excessive price doesn't mean i have to give it to you.
Or is that asking too much? I'm sure it's a lot easier to crack down on a few dozen individuals looking to gouge a quick buck than well-connected corporations scamming billions.
The net been up but no gas, people using tech to seek/buy/trade/the comments about what the 'gas' can be traded for .... the type of person and picture needed to even be considered in some listings.
People boasting they have deep supply lines and saved up supply (not a person with a few cans at home ie commercial ownership with clear local/federal laws in time of need). They kept gas back for 'special' deals for a subset of woman and not for "cash".
So you have the net been used, images having to be sent up a powered telco network in a zone with not much power and then the 'price' or 'act' needed to ensure you get a can of gas.
The legal, moral, networking and 'alternative' payments just after a few days of power/gas shortages are very telling. US law enforcement is still working in the areas, ip's been collected and tracked. Yet the ads read like a few months have gone by and its a legal free for all.
US infrastructure is unable to cope or help? Just in time computer controlled supply lines have been pushed to their limits with no local supply even with days of storm warnings...
Local gas stations in a storm/flood zone where not required to be fitted with backup on site wired in power?
Lots of news for nerds and the US press I would say.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
As a criminal offense, Florida's law is typical. Price gouging may be charged when a supplier of essential goods or services sharply raises the prices asked in anticipation of or during a civil emergency, or when it cancels or dishonors contracts in order to take advantage of an increase in prices related to such an emergency. The model case is a retailer who increases the price of existing stocks of milk and bread when a hurricane is imminent. It is a defense to show that the price increase mostly reflects increased costs, such as running an emergency generator, or hazard pay for workers.
If your not young, female, pretty, of the correct race, able to send a photo and willing to engage in a list of 'acts' .... NO gas for you.
Most parts of the world would offer gas to *anyone* who waits in line - with a police office keeping order until the tanks are empty for a fair cash payment.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Evidently, in New York, when they involve:
a) hurricanes
b) large sodas
c) trans fats
d) taxicabs
but not when they involve:
a) Facebook IPO valuations
b) High frequency Trading
c) Fake watches, purses, etc. south of Houston St.
Everything else is determined by a thumb war between Mayor Bloomberg and an 19 year old russian model from Brighton Beach
who is 6'2" and weighs 2.35lbs, Referreed by Bill Clinton and an overweight Jewish Malcom X impersonator named Herschel.
If these were ads from storefront businesses then the AG should get involved, but if it was private individuals reselling items at a market price then I don't see a real case here for prosecution. I own a hardware store and we have been crazy busy these past two weeks trying to keep up with demand for batteries, gas cans, generators, extension cords, and other storm goods. Our prices are the same today as they were a month ago, and in fact some of our batteries are on sale and we kept them on sale. I know of a few stores that did raise their prices on generators and some other goods, seems like a poor decision as the customer will likely find out later (or already knew) and will remember that price gouge when choosing where to shop during "normal" times.
"We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers." Carl Sagan
It also preserves the supply.
Oh wait... Never mind.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
That makes no sense. Raising the prices actually preserves the supply. In either situation, a lot of people won't be getting gas. But with gouging, you at least have the option.
Also, with high prices, it makes it more profitable to redirect supplies to the disaster area. If you have price controls, the incentive to bring supply in is not there. You may actually lose money because of the risk of driving into a disaster area.
Under your scenario, a lot of people bought the gas on the cheap and hoarded it anyway. So it still went unused. And when a true emergency happens and they need gas, the retail store won't have any to sell.
And how about pharmaceutical companies that charge $1000s for pills that cost less than the plastic bottle they come in? Want real price gauging?
* Carthago Delenda Est *
Actually, I think it was the private race organizers that had the generators.
Yes it was, until they were shamed by the New York Post. They suggested that they be donated or at least lent to the recovery effort in some way. Even though the race was cancelled, the generators still just sat there in the park. Bloomberg, as a mayor and billionaire, is the kind of person who probably could have arranged for the generators to be commandeered, but he didn't, and neither did anyone else. (I'm not judging, especially because there's probably more to the story.)
Do you just let residents run extension cords out their windows?
Sure, why not? They would also be handy for running elevators, powering the pumps for the plumbing in buildings big enough that higher floors have no water pressure, lighting and heating for the lobby at least...
Gouging is not 100% efficient- gouger's will inevitably buy and store more than they sell and still make a profit. Furthermore gouging causes people to hoard. If I know that gas will remain a roughly the same price it is now and likely return to normal in a week or so, I am probably just going to fill the tanks in all my cars and maybe get a small jerrycan before the storm. If I think gas will rocket to $20/gallon after the storm I am going to buy a 500 gallon tank rush to the pumps and suck them dry before everybody else does.
Our behavior will create massive shortages, nothing like what we currently see. Creating an incentive to direct supplies to a disaster area is something that government can do far more efficiently than price gouging.
Also, we haven't even talked about those people who can't afford increased prices. Those people would certainly go without in a gouging scenario. In a large disaster I would imagine that would result in civil unrest, increase crime and violence.
If you sell cheaper than everyone else, you're accused of dumping.
If you sell at the same price as everyone else, you're accused of price fixing.
If you sell more expensively than everyone else, you're price gouging.
It's how the Socialists condemn Capitalism no matter what Capitalists do.
Now I understand. Those $1000s for pills that cost less than the plastic bottle isn't price gouging, even if people die because they can't afford them. If they had been selling for "only" $500s for those pills, then double after a disaster, then that's price gouging...even though there is no difference in the end price or profit.
Actually, I think it was the private race organizers that had the generators.
Yes it was, until they were shamed by the New York Post.
Actually, I think it was the Mayor who wanted the race to go on, they just went ahead with his wishes
Do you just let residents run extension cords out their windows?
Sure, why not? They would also be handy for running elevators, powering the pumps for the plumbing in buildings big enough that higher floors have no water pressure, lighting and heating for the lobby at least...
Why not? Because having 100 residents run 100 extension cords out their windows to the streetside generator is street is unsafe. Even ignoring the overloading "Look mom, we can plug in the refrigerator, this space heater *and* my hair dryer" issues, the generator is not on the same ground plane as the building so there's an additional shock hazard unless you get an electrician to ground the generator to the building ground (and possibly installing a local grounding rod at the generator, depending on local regulations)
But if they wanted to power the elevators, it's not as simple as just buying a long extension cord at Home Depot. The elevators in my building run on 480V 3 Phase power and are on a 150A breaker, so they may need a few hundred feet of 00 or 000 gauge cable just to hook into the electrical panel. I don't know if it's even legal to run unprotected 480V cables on the floor, or to run an energized panel with the covers off if there's no cable inlet to hook up the cables.
And, of course, you need electricians to do all of this work - electricians that could be working on repairing damage that's preventing entire buildings from being energized instead of hooking up temporary power for an elevator that might be used for 24 hours before power comes back up.
Price controls have exactly the same effect in an emergency that they have at any other time. If you prohibit higher gas prices, you guarantee shortages.
The NY AG is a politician. He just wants to be on record, and in the news, as "doing something" about price gouging. Whether that "something" is helpful, useless or counter productive does not really matter to voters. Politicians in the US seem to be graded on their stated intentions not their actual results.
> If someone earns $1M a year and wants to pay $100 a gallon for gas for his sports car, is his need greater than the guy who earns $30k a year and wants to drive his family to work?
Yes, it is. He's willing to pay more, so his need must, by definition, be greater.
The $1M / year guy must be producing a lot more goods and services to justify that salary level. So from a standpoint of total economic productivity, it's simply more important for him to be able to go places than the middle-class guy.
I think all of you are missing the point.
This is not an economics issue. When a natural disaster is killing people and leaving others stranded from the basic necessities of life, that is not the time to make a quick buck and in turn screw over the poor. Heaven forbid the working class guy left without a home be able to afford gas to get his family to a relative's house with heat, food, and shelter. I would hate for you junior economists to have to suspend your theories on how the markets work so as many people as possible can be given a chance to survive another day.
Is it all that shocking to see us get fucked over by corporations when people seem to value being a good business man over being a good person.
"essential", "sharply", "emergency"
Yea, nothing vague there.
It's the masses voting to take what isn't theirs, plain and simple.
t
A wiiU isn't exactly an emergency need.
Is selling an iPhone lightning cable for double the price on CL considered illegal and gouging? Where is that line? Do these people need gas to survive this disaster? I don't think so.
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
So your take is its better for no one to have generators than to have people who value the generator pay more for it?
All you do with this kind of rational is ensure there is a generator shortage.
I live far away from the carnage, but I have a Honda portable generator.
I'm willing to sell it for $2,000 to anyone who wants it. For $3,000 I'll deliver.
Am I now a scumbag?
Or consider:
I have a generator, but its not worth my while to sell it to you at what you consider a fair price.
Now I'm a good guy, right?
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
"Allowing price gouging post disaster can be very dangerous because it exacerbates any shortages."
No, it will eventually alleviate the shortage.
If you don't understand why, then you have no concept of supply & demand.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Because that isn't selling something at an excessive price. Just because I'm not allowed to sell you something at an excessive price doesn't mean i have to give it to you.
While technically correct, you miss the entire point. Doing that does seem popular around here. It's like the average Slashdotter thinks that missing the point entirely is the most effective way to disagree with it. Well, that's not so. Moving on ...
The point is, great concern about whether two adults should be engaged in a voluntary market transaction is not so different from concern about whether two adults should be engaged in a charitable donation.
Both involve an active micromanagement of the financial affairs of people who are not using force and not using fraud. The principles which justify one could easily be used to justify the other. If you believe those principles are valid, then the news crew should have been forced to yield their generators to people who needed it. If you believe those principles are invalid, then the government has no business concerning itself with what the price of a market should be.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
But the alternative is long lines and most people not getting it anyway.
The net result is the same: Most people won't get the scarce resource anyway.
Your method ensure the distribution is essentially random, allowing price rises to what the market will bear has two advantages:
1) The people who most highly value (or can afford) that resource will get it
2) It will encourage other suppliers to step in to fill the void.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
... then sell the same stuff that people are being gouged on at a lower price.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Assume I live in western PA where generators and gas are plentiful. I load 10 of them in my truck, fill them up with gas and drive to NJ and try to sell them. What if I want $1000 a piece for them even though I only paid $500 for them. What if I live in NJ and made a round trip to western PA instead to get them. Am I gouging or am I helping someone out? What if I try to sell them for $2000? If I get arrested for selling them for anything over $500, where is my incentive to attempt to bring supplies in?
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
You know what I believe? I believe it would be a damn shame if a person who is willing to buy gas at say $150 per gallon, couldn't buy gas at any price.
The 9th Rule of Acquisition says "Opportunity plus instinct equals profit."
Your moogie obviously hasn't taught you in between chewing your toothgrubs. You definitely don't have the lobes. You have been corrupted by those humon concepts like decency. The FCA liquidators are on their way to bankrupt you.
20 minutes into the future
posted before I was done..
Let's assume Joe sees me making $500 profit and he goes to western PA and does the same thing. Now there are 20 of them, not as many people want to pay $1000 so we lower out price to $800. Jim wants in on the deal, he brings some in and now we are selling them for $650. Home depot gets wind of this, loads up a truck load of them from Arkansas and sells them for $625. They wouldn't make money selling them at $500 for the trip. At $625, they are willing to give it a try. In the end EVERYONE wins. Obviously there some more details here but there has to be an incentive for businesses and regular Joes to bring in the supplies. Without that incentive, no one gets anything. The answer? Take some personal responsibility and do some basic preparing for a disaster yourself when the prices are low. If everyone did that, there would be less shortages and panics and those that got completely wiped out and lost everything can be helped first.
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
The law says one thing is illegal and the other things is legal. The morality is irrelevant.
If they are artificially high, then no trade takes place, as there are other offers available. If they are artificially low (ie free gas from FEMA), then the supply rapidly runs out, then no-one has any gas, no matter how much they need it.
Which was this guy doing? The one that hurts no-one, or the one who hurts everyone?
You would prefer for them to have nothing, and for no-one to bring it to them. Very compassionate.
Everybody who solves a problem takes advantage of the fact that the problem exists. If the private merchants solved the problem that NY state could not, the state owes them a thank you -- not a subpoena. Oh, and what an ass hole.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
The AG knows full well he is morally wrong to charge people who provided solutions which the state could not provide. Otherwise, he would have subpoenaed these records before the election.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
But they don't do that, you fucking retard. You think people get rich by pissing away their money?
Katrina? You mean the one where government troops kept people from leaving New Orleans at gunpoint? That wasn't we the people doing that. It was dumbshit government officials. Also funny that you talk about Katrina, with it's death toll of 1833, while a few years ago France allowed 3000 old people to die from a fucking heat wave. Just because you see what America does more often doesn't make it worse than anyone else, even Western European countries.
So your take is its better for no one to have generators than to have people who value the generator pay more for it?
All you do with this kind of rational is ensure there is a generator shortage.
I live far away from the carnage, but I have a Honda portable generator.
I'm willing to sell it for $2,000 to anyone who wants it. For $3,000 I'll deliver.
Am I now a scumbag?
Or consider:
I have a generator, but its not worth my while to sell it to you at what you consider a fair price.
Now I'm a good guy, right?
There is the same number of generators regardless.
Is it smart ensure only the wealthy can afford provisions in an emergency?
That's not the time or place for a free market.
You sure told him, Anonymous Coward! ...
And in many cases that is correct. It's the good old American tradition of hitting people when they are desperate and will pay anything, right up there with claim salting and medicine shows.
That free fuel would be in limited amounts per person if the disaster workers had the common sense to survive to adulthood. Assuming that they do not is a pointless distraction and really tells us more about yourself than anything to do with the discussion.
Or, you could, you know, not be a dick and sell it for what you paid for it when someone is dealing with an emergency. This argument doesn't hold water unless people act like the emergency is some opportunity for profit. Emergencies are opportunities to help out your fellow humans, not act like selfish pricks and take advantage of the misfortune of others.
Your anecdotal example is also nonsense because if this kind of price gouging were allowed to occur "gougers" would buy up all the generators locally and just drive the price higher and scarcity even further causing even more harm to people in immediate need.
Finally the shortage was not created because of some lack of a few people on Craigslist not being able to price-gouge, the shortages were caused by supply line problems. You being allowed to sell a generator for $2000 doesn't open the highways or remove downed trees.
Bob Murphy does a good job in this video explaining how the market would work better than the price controls the AG is enforcing.
I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.
And focus on this all is good. Now's a good time for Mayor Bloomberg to enact a new law restricting something. Like the amount of caffeine in coffee or the calories of muffins. But whatever you do DON'T fix anything.
Allowing price gouging post disaster can be very dangerous because it exacerbates any shortages.
This is absolute nonsense. Rising prices will increase the supply. If the price of gas is $4/gal in Texas and $4/gal in NJ, then there is little incentive to drive a truck of gas from TX to NJ. But if the price is allowed to go to $8/gal, then a truck driver with a 10000 gal tanker truck can make $40,000 for a single drive. Plenty of people would jump at an opportunity like that. If there was no electricity, then flatbed trucks full of diesel generators would arriving too, as generator dealers and flatbed drivers tried to cash in on the bonanza. But this won't happen if it is illegal because the "central planners" don't approve.
Maybe he inherited that $1M salary and is completely farking useless, snorts coke and is a blight on society. Income is no guarantee of productivity or value.
My opinions of Amercians has gone sharply downhill since reading this thread.
Way too much Oo-mox
Someone can inherit a salary where you live? Neat! I'm leaving my current job to my 6 year old nephew.
If the grid had been designed for it, it'd not be difficult to stick a big 'emergency power' socket at substations so a generator truck can just patch in safely. But that would require planning for disasters years in advance, and someone would have to pay for it.
Really, if it was so cheap to have essential goods or services available during a time of emergency why doesn't the state try doing it themselves, ans providing such goods throughout any such disaster at regular costs.
Oh, that's right... they can't. Because IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE.
The defense rests.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
A guy willing to buy gas at $150/gallon would be a massive boon to the poor.
Did you even read his post? There aren't the same number of generators in NYC. He said he lives far away, and is willing to bring his to NYC if paid for it. That makes there be one more generator in New York.
He never mentioned monopolies or vandalism.
So you've doomed yourself to long lines and most people not getting the scare resource anyway.
Enjoy.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
" not be a dick and sell it for what you paid for it when someone is dealing with an emergency."
Its my property, and I don't really want to sell it, but if you offer me enough profit on anything I own, I will sell it.
If you allow me to make $2K profit on the generator, it will go from sitting in my basement to keeping some house heated.
So if you want to prosecute me or insult me because my stuff is for sale, go ahead. But I still have the generator and you don't.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
The race organizers (and the people talking to them) are idiots. They should have realized that they'd not be running another race in NY for a while and didn't really need the generators, and sold them at a 20% (or 50%, or whatever) markup to someone who wanted them, confident in their ability to buy more once stuff got back to normal. More people have generators, and the guys running the race make a profit off of their extra stuff that someone else wanted.
I think the idea that the GP had in mind is that a major problem in many disaster situations is that market liquidity (haha) breaks down, and so there's a huge incentive to hoard, and then use the relative paucity of suppliers to massively increase profit margins. Since illiquid markets are inefficient markets, the usual rules of supply and demand fail to hold -- the problem in the north east is that Sandy knocked out much of the oil importation infrastructure (as well as causing local refineries to shut down), which combined with fairly low inventory levels to pad the shock, means there isn't enough infrastructure for vendors to divert sufficient oil through at any price.
To mitigate this type of supply shock and restore liquidity, you need to ration (to reduce hoarding, and increase the cost of driving, thereby lowering demand), discourage gouging by introducing price controls (also mitigates hoarding.. but requires rationing) and temporarily subsidize supply both directly (ie. put it on national guard fuel trucks and sell it to the gas stations under cost), and indirectly (say by suspending regulations that might limit supply like the Jones Act, or low-sulfur fuel oil requirements.. to name two examples of what's been done). Letting the prices spike is only going to increase misery and give people incentives to do really stupid things, like the idiot who got caught with 120 gallons of fuel in home depot buckets (great, until his SUV explodes and closes a route for the real fuel trucks).
Prices aren't just made up. Prices are important market signals reflecting the relative scarcity conditions of any good. Rising prices imply an increase in the scarcity, or expected scarcity, of a good. In other words, if a good becomes scarcer or is expected to become scarcer, it's price will rise. The opposite is true when a good becomes abundant or is expected to become abundant.
When a good becomes scarce, there are several socially optimal responses: consumers should economize on its usage and search for cheaper substitutes. Producers should increase production of the good and search for substitutes. Rising prices provide both consumers and producers with incentives to behave in socially optimal ways. Plus, they do so voluntarily
http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/articles/03/wonders.html
As a criminal offense, Florida's law is typical. Price gouging may be charged when a supplier of essential goods or services sharply raises the prices asked in anticipation of or during a civil emergency, or when it cancels or dishonors contracts in order to take advantage of an increase in prices related to such an emergency. The model case is a retailer who increases the price of existing stocks of milk and bread when a hurricane is imminent. It is a defense to show that the price increase mostly reflects increased costs, such as running an emergency generator, or hazard pay for workers.
Well guess what? I'm not a "supplier" or "retailer" of any goods...hence why I'm selling it on craigslist!
(I didn't actually sell anything, but I don't quite like the idea of the state being able to come to my garage sale and arrest me for my prices being to high)
The race organizers (and the people talking to them) are idiots. They should have realized that they'd not be running another race in NY for a while and didn't really need the generators, and sold them at a 20% (or 50%, or whatever) markup to someone who wanted them, confident in their ability to buy more once stuff got back to normal. More people have generators, and the guys running the race make a profit off of their extra stuff that someone else wanted.
I think the generators in question were large rented generators, so the race organizers probably could not legally turn them over to someone else. The government could commandeer them, but most rental contracts won't allow you to sub-rent the equipment.
But even if they were owned generators, selling used generators for a 20% - 50% markup probably constitutes price gouging.
If you want to make money, fuck off - these people deserve better.
You know who's getting fucked here? The people who deserve better. It's interesting how people willing kill other people for their own petty moral arguments.
Totally off topic, but your last sentence just struck me as particularly hilarious: think about what you actually said. Would you actually wanted someone who routinely put human refuse into his mouth to go anywhere near your nether regions with that same mouth? I sure wouldn't.
Congratulations, you've just ensured that somebody is cold because of a misplaced sense of how to get a job done.
My generator is still in my basement.
You want it? $3,000.
That's just common sense.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Not when you're discussing the morality of the legal situation.
Wtf is "price gouging" and why do I need to stand 7 hours at the pump (not kidding, actual lines in New York City as of a few days ago stretched ~10 city blocks) when all that is needed is raise the price by a few bucks per gallon?
"Why aren't they subpoena'ing Bloomberg" is not a question of morals. You subpoena about things which are against the law, not about things which are immoral.
They're talking about $4/gallon gas. NJ's 'price gouging' laws stipulate a limit of 10% increases over 'normal' prices.
"New Jersey law prohibits excessive price increases during a declared state of emergency and for 30 days after the termination of the state of emergency. An excessive price increase is defined as more than 10% higher than the price at which merchandise was sold during the normal course of business prior to the state of emergency"
Or are you implying that hurricane conditions are unlikely to increase availability costs by more than 10%? This is a *stupid* law, which is unsurprising because generally politicians have no training in math or economics.
Construction workers use generators with long cords all the time, how would this be any worse?
I was speaking of the general case, but now that you mention it, that expensive gas was most likely drawn from existing stock already in a station's tank or a truck that was there before the storm, so the only additional cost would be using a hand pump rather than electric to fill a can (which was also likely there before the storm.
You can't issue subpoena for things you don't like that are legal. Why is this such a hard concept?
What's so interesting about it? No really, clue me in as I consider myself an amoral sociopath.
It's the inherent paradox and cognitive dissonance. Something beneficial is forbidden because it somehow seems unfair.
There's no rational reason to be against people killing each other, only moral. No, spare me the rationalizations on how civilization came to be because we build things instead of killing and destroying
So I'm supposed to argue this one with a hand tied behind my back? I'm not that dumb. Sounds like you've already argued the point for me. Sure, once you exclude rational reasons (such as societal prohibitions against killing helping keep societies together) to be against people killing each other, then you end up with the rest.
Sure, there are allowed means to kill. But why should I be allowed to kill when I have nothing at stake and am bothered just because something goes against my sense of fairness?
As to the original point, what is "petty"? I consider killing innocent people because you don't want icky price gouging to be petty. Killing people to survive (especially for your society to survive) is not petty.
In fact, killing each other is a defining trait of humanity. Animals usually only kill for survival. We humans are pretty much #1 in making up all sorts of reason to kill each other.
No, any aggressively territorial animal does that even if survival isn't at stake. For example, a lot of social birds can be pretty nasty with gang rapes, chick kidnappings, etc. Lots of animals will kill young that aren't related to them. It's just obvious with us, because survival is so easy.
You're correct. I missed that the thread had forked somehow.