6 ms·

Yeah, it's kind of impossible to argue that production costs haven't gone up for manufacturers. I have an employee who we need to still go into the office for

Yeah, it's kind of impossible to argue that production costs haven't gone up for manufacturers. I have an employee who we need to still go into the office for some manual work 2x a week - he asked that we pay for an Uber for him because he doesn't want to ride public transport. That's just one of many additional costs companies that struggle to continue working are paying. Some degree (within reason) of increased prices for an high-in-demand product is a necessary if you want to convince employees to work longer hours and through tough conditions. ...not to mention many of their underlying fabric costs are probably higher as well.

XorNot 7y ago
There's a difference between price gouging and covering expenses. The guy buying up all the masks and reselling them for 10x the price is price gouging. He doesn't make anything. If a manufacturer ramped production and billed the current inventory to cover costs, then that's a very different thing. Of course all of this is why the Defense Production Act even exists. A perfect use of the DPA would be a mask manufacturer ramping up local production - if they had predictability of pricing beyond the current crisis, then it would let them forecast what they could and could not make, or get subsidized at the higher rate to ensure their business could ramp down gradually (or be retained at the subsidy price to ensure local availability for the next time).
- Consultant32452 7y ago
  >The guy buying up all the masks and reselling them for 10x the price is price gouging. He doesn't make anything. The guy buying up all the masks and reselling them for 10x the price is making availability, which is highly important in a crisis.
  - treden 7y ago
    He's capturing availability, the manufacturer made the availability. There is no value-adding middle man role with a 10x value here (well value to anyone other than the middle man).
    - Consultant32452 7y ago
      There's none available to purchase at the old, lower price. So he's providing value to me, someone who wishes to buy one.
      - MisterBastahrd 7y ago
        Because he bought them all. This is why, in states where disasters are probable due to natural issues (hurricanes, earthquakes), price gouging is a crime. Not only is it a crime, but it is one where there is full bi-partisan support for the continuance of the law. If you want to put a smile on the face on someone suffering from calamity, first help them, and then arrest the bastard who tried to profit off of it. The first smile will be gentle and gracious, and the second will be of pure glee.
        Consultant32452 7y ago
        If the gouger actually bought them all then you have a monopoly, which is a different problem. The gauger, instead, bought some. So did many other people. The difference is he's willing to sell his. That's the value to me he's providing. Could you retry your analysis with this corrected information?
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
        MisterBastahrd 7y ago
        Doesn't matter if he bought all or some. If he is attempting to profit off of a disaster, he will be seeing a fine or jail time in plenty of states.
        Chris2048 7y ago
        Should for-profit grave-digging be illegal too?
  - jcranmer 7y ago
    The guy buying up all the masks and reselling them is likely buying them in similar markets to the people who he will be selling them to eventually. His net effect is likely going to be doing diddly squat to the availability.
    - Consultant32452 7y ago
      None are available to purchase at the old, lower price, because demand at the old price outpaced production. The higher price drives some consumers out of the market, meaning there are still some for sale.
      - jbay 7y ago
        Demand at the old price from people who bought them to resell at the new price?
        tristor 7y ago
        Mostly, because the guy buying them all up to resell at 10x the price is a scumbag just like ticket scalpers, except worse because whether you pay $500 or $200 to get a ticket to a rock concert won't potentially kill you. The availability is primarily negatively impacted because of hoarders and gougers.
        Consultant32452 7y ago
        Do you believe that, absent price gougers, I would be able to walk into Home Depot, CVS, Walmart, etc. and buy some N95 masks for my personal use? I don't think that's likely, so wherever you were heading with that is irrelevant. I want to be clear I'm intentionally separating two things. The gouger is making product available on the market where otherwise there would be none. The higher price discourages hoarders or others with lower needs. This is clearly a valuable service that some, perhaps many, are willing to pay for. I feel like these are indisputable facts. There is a separate topic of moralizing about the issue, whether or not you think the gouger is a bad actor or whatever. You can keep going on about that, but I won't address it because I don't care about your feelings regarding my personal health.
- downerending 7y ago
  This posits a simplistic economy where everyone can predict the future. The real world has risk and unknown effects. If someone stockpiles a lot of masks on the chance that they'll be needed, hoping to thereby profit, they're taking significant risk, and reward for that is not unreasonable. This is essentially how finance, banking, markets, and pretty much our whole economy work. The idea that producers should only be able to charge a modest margin over their "costs" is pernicious nonsense. Furthermore, if you punish this sort of risk-taking intensely enough, producers will just shut down during unusual times (the exact opposite of what is needed).

XorNot 7y ago

There's a difference between price gouging and covering expenses. The guy buying up all the masks and reselling them for 10x the price is price gouging. He doesn't make anything. If a manufacturer ramped production and billed the current inventory to cover costs, then that's a very different thing. Of course all of this is why the Defense Production Act even exists. A perfect use of the DPA would be a mask manufacturer ramping up local production - if they had predictability of pricing beyond the current crisis, then it would let them forecast what they could and could not make, or get subsidized at the higher rate to ensure their business could ramp down gradually (or be retained at the subsidy price to ensure local availability for the next time).

Consultant32452 7y ago
>The guy buying up all the masks and reselling them for 10x the price is price gouging. He doesn't make anything. The guy buying up all the masks and reselling them for 10x the price is making availability, which is highly important in a crisis.
- treden 7y ago
  He's capturing availability, the manufacturer made the availability. There is no value-adding middle man role with a 10x value here (well value to anyone other than the middle man).
  - Consultant32452 7y ago
    There's none available to purchase at the old, lower price. So he's providing value to me, someone who wishes to buy one.
    - MisterBastahrd 7y ago
      Because he bought them all. This is why, in states where disasters are probable due to natural issues (hurricanes, earthquakes), price gouging is a crime. Not only is it a crime, but it is one where there is full bi-partisan support for the continuance of the law. If you want to put a smile on the face on someone suffering from calamity, first help them, and then arrest the bastard who tried to profit off of it. The first smile will be gentle and gracious, and the second will be of pure glee.
      - Consultant32452 7y ago
        If the gouger actually bought them all then you have a monopoly, which is a different problem. The gauger, instead, bought some. So did many other people. The difference is he's willing to sell his. That's the value to me he's providing. Could you retry your analysis with this corrected information?
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
        MisterBastahrd 7y ago
        Doesn't matter if he bought all or some. If he is attempting to profit off of a disaster, he will be seeing a fine or jail time in plenty of states.
        Chris2048 7y ago
        Should for-profit grave-digging be illegal too?
- jcranmer 7y ago
  The guy buying up all the masks and reselling them is likely buying them in similar markets to the people who he will be selling them to eventually. His net effect is likely going to be doing diddly squat to the availability.
  - Consultant32452 7y ago
    None are available to purchase at the old, lower price, because demand at the old price outpaced production. The higher price drives some consumers out of the market, meaning there are still some for sale.
    - jbay 7y ago
      Demand at the old price from people who bought them to resell at the new price?
      - tristor 7y ago
        Mostly, because the guy buying them all up to resell at 10x the price is a scumbag just like ticket scalpers, except worse because whether you pay $500 or $200 to get a ticket to a rock concert won't potentially kill you. The availability is primarily negatively impacted because of hoarders and gougers.
      - Consultant32452 7y ago
        Do you believe that, absent price gougers, I would be able to walk into Home Depot, CVS, Walmart, etc. and buy some N95 masks for my personal use? I don't think that's likely, so wherever you were heading with that is irrelevant. I want to be clear I'm intentionally separating two things. The gouger is making product available on the market where otherwise there would be none. The higher price discourages hoarders or others with lower needs. This is clearly a valuable service that some, perhaps many, are willing to pay for. I feel like these are indisputable facts. There is a separate topic of moralizing about the issue, whether or not you think the gouger is a bad actor or whatever. You can keep going on about that, but I won't address it because I don't care about your feelings regarding my personal health.
downerending 7y ago
This posits a simplistic economy where everyone can predict the future. The real world has risk and unknown effects. If someone stockpiles a lot of masks on the chance that they'll be needed, hoping to thereby profit, they're taking significant risk, and reward for that is not unreasonable. This is essentially how finance, banking, markets, and pretty much our whole economy work. The idea that producers should only be able to charge a modest margin over their "costs" is pernicious nonsense. Furthermore, if you punish this sort of risk-taking intensely enough, producers will just shut down during unusual times (the exact opposite of what is needed).