[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by Heyitsrick

People here (and elsewhere) that have a problem with so-called "price gouging" are trying to have it both ways, in my opinion. Price gouging occurs in a supply and demand situation. Let's look locally - if there's a hurricane on the way that's likely to disrupt the supply chain (among other things), do you want some schmoe going into the local establishment and buying up 30 cases of bottled water at the normal price? How does that help others who have every bit of a fresh water need than this guy who's massively depleting the inventory? Now, adjust that price so that 30 cases is going to be cost-prohibitive, and you've got an effective way of limiting mass purchases. That also leaves supplies for others who need them.

Now, some might say "how about just putting up a sign that limits the amount that can be bought and keep the price the same!!!???" That sign's not going to prevent someone or their family, etc., from coming in repeatedly. That sign's just going to spur arguments with customers pleading why they "need" 30 cases, etc. The price increase avoids that.

Consumers are hoarders in situations like this. And hoarders create problems for everyone else who has a need for a product. They, themselves, create scarcity.

Higher prices do two things: they limit over-purchasing by consumers, and they encourage sellers, themselves, to try and increase their supply of such products given the ability to charge more for them. That's the free-market economy at work.

One article I read said it bluntly - but correctly: If the price of bottled water goes up to $10 a bottle, are you better of with a $10 bottle of water, or are you better of with $10 in your pocket and no water, going thirsty?

Make no mistake about it - I don't like paying higher prices in situations that create supply problems. But if it means I have access to what I need at that higher price, I'll take it.

It isn't "so-called price gouging"...it IS price gouging.

The huge hole in your argument, is the fact that you're basically saying that price-gouging during emergencies is OK because it will discourage everyone from making large purchases...which is completely false.

This warped logic totally fails to understand that I (and MANY other) folks CAN afford to pay the higher prices and it is the average person (who also need water/gas/food)...who will suffer the most.

Why not do the simple and smart thing of not gouging on price because of the situation...and simply limit the quantities able to be purchased?

And yes, there may be cases where some try the "split the family and buy more" system, but there are ways to watch out for that scheme and try to limit it (observers in parking lots, watching for one vehicle being loaded with more than the maximum quantities...for one) and even if it occasionally occurs, it's still preferable to the alternative of..."the more wealthy should be given preference."

It is exactly this type of thinking, that necessitates why laws were/are needed, so as to avoid those who can afford the price-gouging...from hogging all of the resources.