> God no please stop with getting the government involved God no please stop with the anti-regulation BS. > The answer is don't buy the damn house it's that s

> God no please stop with getting the government involved God no please stop with the anti-regulation BS. > The answer is don't buy the damn house it's that simple. If you're already several months into building, with partial payments having been made, when the builder tells you that this is the only option allowed, they have you over the barrel. They've violated the social contract of providing options, and expect you to pay the cost of it. That cost is either a reduction of your choices, or needing to forgo incremental design altogether while maintaining an antagonistic relationship with your builder. > Pay more build what you want and be happy. The parent post already tried to pay more to build what you want. The general contractor did not allow for any other options. The free market does not work with this sort of bundling. > People want cheap houses and this is that. First, nowhere did the poster state that they were unwilling to pay a higher price for a functional oven. They stated that there was no other option available. Second, the term you're alluding to is "revealed preference" [0], which is a load of economic bollocks. It implies that you can entirely ignore what people state they want, the circumstances in which choices have been made, or forms of market failure (e.g. [1]). Overall, the appropriate response to market failure, including anti-competitive deals between builders and appliance manufacturers, is to change the environment in which that market exists. Introducing regulation in order to avoid unfavorable Nash Equilibria is the role of government, in order to fix these market failures. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revealed_preference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revealed_preference [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_small_decisions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_small_decisions