3 ms·
Short answer: It is always acceptable to provide goods and services to those who are willing to buy it at a price that they are willing to pay for it. There's
by LostInTheWoods 18y ago
Short answer: It is always acceptable to provide goods and services to those who are willing to buy it at a price that they are willing to pay for it.
There's been alot of anti-capitalist sentiment lately in the media, from stories about overpaid CEOs to record oil company profits. Simply put, if a person can not get fair market value for their good or service, they have no incentive to provide it. What is better: that which is expensive, or that which is not available?
- turkishrevenge 18y agoFor some, the question of "that which is expensive, or that which is not available" is irrelevant. If a good is priced such that it's out of reach, it may as well not exist.
- stcredzero 18y agoI would agree, for all values of "willing" that don't involve some sort of coercion. For example, if someone is "willing" to pay $100 for a loaf of bread if you have a gun to their head, then I would question the use of the word "willing." Likewise, if a group of people controlled the food market in a region and used that power to force the people to hand over their life savings in order to buy food and avoid death by starvation, I would question the use of the word "willing." As always the question is -- can those involved opt out of the transaction? If the answer is yes, then there is probably no evil involved.