Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
12.14.2007 5:43 pm

Price gouging: Beware of politicians peddling bad economics

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Both Attorney General Jay Nixon  and Gov. Matt Blunt  are telling Missourians to watch out for price gouging in the wake of this week’s ice storms.

But Eric Dixon, an editor at the Show-Me Institute,  points out that the notion of price gouging  is nebulous and misleading. Dixon writes:

When a good becomes more scarce, or more difficult to provide, this constriction of supply naturally causes an increase in price. Similarly, if demand for a good suddenly outstrips its supply, this also causes an increase in price. Emergencies tend to produce both of these phenomena, causing market prices to jump as more people clamor to buy goods that are suddenly in short supply.

We should be happy when the price system works to prevent shortages, Dixon adds:

Laws outlawing gouging don’t actually prevent higher prices — they only alter the type of price customers have to pay. If sellers can’t adjust pricetags, increased demand leads to long lines and shortages, which are a form of price increase that people pay for through time and effort rather than with dollars.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...
2 comments

Comments are closed.

Yah…

Libertarian’s can always be counted on to get their panties in a bunch whenever anyone tries to put forth the notion that ripping people off is morally problematic.

Nicklaus shoves the Show-Me Institute in front of stupidity like this like superstitious midieval people used to fork the sign of the evil-eye to ward away evil spirits.

As if anyone lends any credibility what-so-ever to a libertarian think tank funded by a millionare with an axe to grind.

Any 12 year old with an internet connection and a rudimentary knowledge of how to use a search engine can write an essay in 500 words or less on why libertarianism has failed in the past, is failing today, and will continue to fail in the future.

And morality is the first point that little Johnny would cover.

Jeez.

Mac
http://www.brownsludge.com

— BrownSludge
6:08 pm December 14th, 2007

The points made in the quote by Eric Dixon could have come straight out of any of the textbooks on market economics that are used throughout the world other than in countries such as North Korea and perhaps Iran, which “compassionately” distribute poverty to all of their citizens.

Most people believe that the government should play a role BEYOND THAT PLAYED BY PRIVATE INSURANCE in compensating people for losses that they suffer during extraordinary natural events such as ice storms, or man-made events such as 9/11. That involves having publicly-provided emergency services, and perhaps even subsidies for re-building private property (although it’s questionable whether it’s “fair” to subsidize people who did not have private insurance by taxing those who did).

It’s also appropriate for government to perform its normal role in assuring that people affected by disasters get the services that they contract for — for example, that if they pay a contractor to repair their roof, he will actually do so for the price agreed upon.

But it’s not necessary or useful for government to attempt to repeal the laws of supply and demand for dealing with disasters. One doesn’t need to be a die-hard libertarian to recognize that that will only slow recovery efforts and cause people to suffer longer.

— Ted44
12:31 pm December 16th, 2007