Mr. Bojangles
Member
It's a ripoff if I'm buying, but a tidy profit if I'm selling 
Nothing but Gouging
- Thread starter Doc Hollowpoint
- Start date
- Status
The point i was trying to make isn't that ALL transactions that occur at a profit to one party are "ripoffs". It is that SOME can be. The previous post "It's not a ripoff if the buyer gets what he pays for." is just silly because it is a blanket statement. Each situation has to be evaluated considering its own circumstances.
Now, concerning your example, it appears to be two individuals participating in a "market" transaction. Don't see anything wrong there, at least on the surface. But, what if you put an ad in the paper that said something like "Get your AK before Obama rapes your wife and sells your kids for slavery, this is your LAST chance." {I am not trying to say you did that, it is a hypothetical example.} If you had done that, i would call it market manipulation, and say that you had "ripped off" the other person because you were intentionally trying to mislead them, and thus take advantage of irrational fears.
Again, i don't see anything wrong with your example.
Much of what I was trying to say involves morals and critical thinking. Jefferson said that the democracy would not survive without well educated citizens who are vigilant and constantly using their critical thinking skills. I can't remember an exact quote, but i am pretty sure he would have included something about high moral values too (including concern for your fellow citizens). I just think that we should ALL use critical thinking skills and not buy into "panic" scenarios, especially ones that are at least partially generated by market manipulation by those who will profit from the "panic".
Last edited by a moderator:
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
This presumes that the potential buyers who look at the ad are incapable of critical thinking.
Are there people who might take such ridiculous ad copy at face value? Yes. But frankly, if a person isn't willing to avail themselves of a recent copy of the Blue Book of Gun Values, or run a cursory Google search, I don't see how it's anyone's fault but their own for failing to engage their brain before opening their wallet.
Hungry Seagull
member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2009
- Messages
- 2,167
I used to work a Auction for Autos and there are very large numbers of good cars we cannot keep on the lot more than several days without seeing them sold and gone at whatever price.
Then there are the bombs, wore outs and plain repos that wont sell at any price because they cost too much to make presentable for sale to a regular customer.
I almost bought a brand new Toyota Corolla a few years ago in our area off a retail lot. Salesman was asking 16K, interest of about... 8% on a 6 year loan.
We happened to discover a used car slightly older for less than half that and out the door cash with more interior room, a V6 and 30 miles to gallon to boot.
It would take a month for that other sales man to understand that we are not in the car market anymore. Cannot blame them for trying. One thing that got me was I spotted another corolla on Salesman's LOT with a distinctive colored chalk writing on a side window being driven through the sale barn a week prior at our auction house and knew exactly where THAT corolla came from.
Gouging? Certainly. They have no problems getting you to feel good, warm and fuzzy while you sign papers amounting to highway theivery.
I recall a lady years ago in poverty, a single mom with a son. She paid all of 1200 dollars for a 4 door POS Nova from chevy that had like 200,000 miles on it. That dealership assigned me to take it down to gas it up and present it to the lady customer.
I was very angry with that POS car for being difficult to drive due to engine issues and returned to the dealer. I then opened my big mouth and blasted the service manager for allowing such a sad used car to be sold with a POS engine that needs fixing. The lady customer burst into tears saying I KNEW I should not have bought it, three salesmen hustle me off property and I was dismissed very quickly from my job.
for telling the truth? Over a 1200 sale? On principle?
Sure.
As far as I could tell, it cost the dealer ship just about all of that 1200 to fix the engine and present the car to the lady customer.
I feel good.
Then there are the bombs, wore outs and plain repos that wont sell at any price because they cost too much to make presentable for sale to a regular customer.
I almost bought a brand new Toyota Corolla a few years ago in our area off a retail lot. Salesman was asking 16K, interest of about... 8% on a 6 year loan.
We happened to discover a used car slightly older for less than half that and out the door cash with more interior room, a V6 and 30 miles to gallon to boot.
It would take a month for that other sales man to understand that we are not in the car market anymore. Cannot blame them for trying. One thing that got me was I spotted another corolla on Salesman's LOT with a distinctive colored chalk writing on a side window being driven through the sale barn a week prior at our auction house and knew exactly where THAT corolla came from.
Gouging? Certainly. They have no problems getting you to feel good, warm and fuzzy while you sign papers amounting to highway theivery.
I recall a lady years ago in poverty, a single mom with a son. She paid all of 1200 dollars for a 4 door POS Nova from chevy that had like 200,000 miles on it. That dealership assigned me to take it down to gas it up and present it to the lady customer.
I was very angry with that POS car for being difficult to drive due to engine issues and returned to the dealer. I then opened my big mouth and blasted the service manager for allowing such a sad used car to be sold with a POS engine that needs fixing. The lady customer burst into tears saying I KNEW I should not have bought it, three salesmen hustle me off property and I was dismissed very quickly from my job.
for telling the truth? Over a 1200 sale? On principle?
Sure.
As far as I could tell, it cost the dealer ship just about all of that 1200 to fix the engine and present the car to the lady customer.
I feel good.
"HURRY! HURRY! BUY YOUR AK HERE! BEFORE OBAMA SENDS THE ATF TO KILL YOUR WIFE, RAPE YOUR DOG AND TAKE YOUR GUNS!
Seriously, I am not making light of the possibility of an AWB. But even if ti comes, I believe there are plenty of AWs around to place one in the hands ov everyone who wants one. Its not like they will physically disappear"
I agree 110%.
There seem to be around a third or more of the Democrats in congress saying they don't support new legislation (AWB). So there is very little chance of anything getting passed. If anything did get passed, it would probably be even weaker than the past Clinton AWB. Remember the recent Supreme Court ruling on DC guns. Seems to be very little justification for "panic buying". So what if there was an AWB? Let's remember what happened under the last "horrible" AWB.
New large cap (over 10 rounds) magazines weren't included with new guns, and could no longer be imported or manufactured in the US. All older new stock (anything in warehouses) and previously purchase items were fine. They did not go around taking away peoples stuff. My recollection is that i could buy (after the ban) hi cap magazines for any pistol/rifle i wanted, just that the prices were higher than they had been (but frankly not that ridiculously high if you were a good consumer and looked around). And while i am not an AR kind of person (more of a hunting rifle/revolver/shotgun type), my impression was that you could get just about whatever you wanted except maybe really short barrels. My Mossy HD shotgun with an 18" barrel is 38.5" long. So people were really saying that 16" AR type weapons that were around 36" long just weren't short enough? The AWB really hurt their lifestyle because their AR had to be 36" long? ( If i have gotten my facts wrong about the old AWB please correct me, this is all from memory). Couldn't you pretty much buy any large cap mag you wanted at a gun show for just about any firearm you wanted? Didn't people just buy their new Glock with the 10 rounder mags then go buy the hi cap ones at a gun show?
Was there any point while the 10 year ban was in effect that you couldn't go to a gun show and get pretty much whatever you wanted/needed? Of course the discussion of whether individuals should be allowed to have bazookas, grenade launchers, hand grenades, tactical nuclear weapons, etc is another discussion.
So what are my main points? AWB is unlikely. Even if passed, it would probably be weak and not much more than a mild irritant. You would probably still be able to get just about anything you want. Because of this (my opinion of course), the "panic buying" is silly and the result of people not using their critical thinking skills and acquiring enough knowledge to get to the bottom of the situation. Those who participate in the panic are actually harming themselves and others in the long run. They give the gun owning community a bad reputation by looking kind of ignorant/uninformed/kooky. More citizens who are not presently gun owners need to be brought into the community. That will help protect everyone's rights in the long run. The kookier the larger group of gun owners appears to be, the less the general public will want to join your group.
Seriously, I am not making light of the possibility of an AWB. But even if ti comes, I believe there are plenty of AWs around to place one in the hands ov everyone who wants one. Its not like they will physically disappear"
I agree 110%.
There seem to be around a third or more of the Democrats in congress saying they don't support new legislation (AWB). So there is very little chance of anything getting passed. If anything did get passed, it would probably be even weaker than the past Clinton AWB. Remember the recent Supreme Court ruling on DC guns. Seems to be very little justification for "panic buying". So what if there was an AWB? Let's remember what happened under the last "horrible" AWB.
New large cap (over 10 rounds) magazines weren't included with new guns, and could no longer be imported or manufactured in the US. All older new stock (anything in warehouses) and previously purchase items were fine. They did not go around taking away peoples stuff. My recollection is that i could buy (after the ban) hi cap magazines for any pistol/rifle i wanted, just that the prices were higher than they had been (but frankly not that ridiculously high if you were a good consumer and looked around). And while i am not an AR kind of person (more of a hunting rifle/revolver/shotgun type), my impression was that you could get just about whatever you wanted except maybe really short barrels. My Mossy HD shotgun with an 18" barrel is 38.5" long. So people were really saying that 16" AR type weapons that were around 36" long just weren't short enough? The AWB really hurt their lifestyle because their AR had to be 36" long? ( If i have gotten my facts wrong about the old AWB please correct me, this is all from memory). Couldn't you pretty much buy any large cap mag you wanted at a gun show for just about any firearm you wanted? Didn't people just buy their new Glock with the 10 rounder mags then go buy the hi cap ones at a gun show?
Was there any point while the 10 year ban was in effect that you couldn't go to a gun show and get pretty much whatever you wanted/needed? Of course the discussion of whether individuals should be allowed to have bazookas, grenade launchers, hand grenades, tactical nuclear weapons, etc is another discussion.
So what are my main points? AWB is unlikely. Even if passed, it would probably be weak and not much more than a mild irritant. You would probably still be able to get just about anything you want. Because of this (my opinion of course), the "panic buying" is silly and the result of people not using their critical thinking skills and acquiring enough knowledge to get to the bottom of the situation. Those who participate in the panic are actually harming themselves and others in the long run. They give the gun owning community a bad reputation by looking kind of ignorant/uninformed/kooky. More citizens who are not presently gun owners need to be brought into the community. That will help protect everyone's rights in the long run. The kookier the larger group of gun owners appears to be, the less the general public will want to join your group.
"If you believe in anti-gouging laws, you do not understand capitalism and you need a reality check. PERIOD."
The work "capitalism" can mean many things to many people. There is not one form of capitalism. "PURE" capitalism would mean no governmental control/interference with the economic markets. In a relatively short period of time pure capitalism will always degenerate to a dog-eat-dog type of market that will eventually be completely controlled by a relatively small number of powerful/wealthy entities. Everyone else will become powerless serfs/slaves/peons in the long run. Guaranteed to happen, history teaches that.
The US economic system is a form of capitalism. There are many checks and balances to prevent powerful entities (individuals or corporations) from taking advantage of the less powerful. This has to be so because the founding fathers were wise enough to realize that loss of economic power by the general population would eventually lead to a loss of political power and thus the long term destruction of the democracy. And yes there are "anti-gouging" laws in effect in this country. There are plenty of laws that are in effect that are not enforced as much as they should be.
Does this mean that Best Buy charging 10% more that Walmart is "gouging"? Of course not. There is no black/white here, just a lot of shades of gray. It can be quite hard to determine what gouging is, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist, or that it should be allowed to take place. The US has a VERY complex capitalistic economic system. The notion that the less powerful entities in this system (basically the vast majority of the population) don't need some protection from the more powerful is well, just silly, simplistic, and shortsighted.
The work "capitalism" can mean many things to many people. There is not one form of capitalism. "PURE" capitalism would mean no governmental control/interference with the economic markets. In a relatively short period of time pure capitalism will always degenerate to a dog-eat-dog type of market that will eventually be completely controlled by a relatively small number of powerful/wealthy entities. Everyone else will become powerless serfs/slaves/peons in the long run. Guaranteed to happen, history teaches that.
The US economic system is a form of capitalism. There are many checks and balances to prevent powerful entities (individuals or corporations) from taking advantage of the less powerful. This has to be so because the founding fathers were wise enough to realize that loss of economic power by the general population would eventually lead to a loss of political power and thus the long term destruction of the democracy. And yes there are "anti-gouging" laws in effect in this country. There are plenty of laws that are in effect that are not enforced as much as they should be.
Does this mean that Best Buy charging 10% more that Walmart is "gouging"? Of course not. There is no black/white here, just a lot of shades of gray. It can be quite hard to determine what gouging is, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist, or that it should be allowed to take place. The US has a VERY complex capitalistic economic system. The notion that the less powerful entities in this system (basically the vast majority of the population) don't need some protection from the more powerful is well, just silly, simplistic, and shortsighted.
I don't want to derail the thread...aw, heck, what am I talking about. Your point about "capitalism" as a broad term is true, but perhaps it would make more sense if I said "...don't understand the market." While capitalism has shades, degrees, etc, the benefits - to corporations as well as individuals both consuming and profiting - stem from a few basic principles.
Further, the "checks and balances" that you speak of are often self-defeating. True, if we don't have transparency laws, etc, etc, etc, corporations that are dishonest thrive; however, if we "protect" corporations (farmers, US workers, etc, etc) and allow them to get their fingers into government (which they inevitably try to do; it's just a natural thing since doing so is profitable), we end up with a bunch of bloated, inefficient, and dishonest corporations that are called special interests. So capitalism here is...I mean, SHOULD BE, about treading the line to derive the benefits I referred to above.
Someone who believes strongly in anti-gouging laws lacks a basic understanding of the benefits of capitalism that make capitalism a worthwhile system in ANY form it may take.
Further, the "checks and balances" that you speak of are often self-defeating. True, if we don't have transparency laws, etc, etc, etc, corporations that are dishonest thrive; however, if we "protect" corporations (farmers, US workers, etc, etc) and allow them to get their fingers into government (which they inevitably try to do; it's just a natural thing since doing so is profitable), we end up with a bunch of bloated, inefficient, and dishonest corporations that are called special interests. So capitalism here is...I mean, SHOULD BE, about treading the line to derive the benefits I referred to above.
Someone who believes strongly in anti-gouging laws lacks a basic understanding of the benefits of capitalism that make capitalism a worthwhile system in ANY form it may take.
rbernie
Contributing Member
Econ Theory 101 is not a THR topic. It's time to put this to rest.
- Status
