6 ms·

I disagree with the notion that things should be as expensive as (some) people are willing to pay. The argument seems skewed towards the interests of wealthy. W

I disagree with the notion that things should be as expensive as (some) people are willing to pay. The argument seems skewed towards the interests of wealthy. What if all food was priced "optimally" in terms of foodmakers' profit, making it so expensive that half of society starves to death? Would that be just "liquidity in the market"? If so, then honestly fuck the liquidity in the market. The market is supposed to serve the people, not the other way around.

ravenstine 4y ago
I disagree! Why should tickets to a Rammstein concert sell for any price but what people are willing to pay for? This isn't exactly food or healthcare we're talking about.
- bheadmaster 4y ago
  Because, apparently, Rammstein doesn't like the concept of only the wealthiest being able to afford their tickets.
  - ravenstine 4y ago
    Sure, but I was commenting on your argument in particular, not Rammstein, which is a more general philosophical argument than them not wanting their fans in particular to get outpriced.
    - bheadmaster 4y ago
      I was using food as a hyperbole, the same argument can be applied to anything. Should X be priced in such a way to extract the most money possible from a certain top of the wealthiest, leaving effectively everyone else without it? Substitute X for whatever you want, and any affirmative response would be equivalent to saying "nobody should have X except the rich". If you agree with that sentence, then that's no other argument I can bring to the table.
      - j-bos 4y ago
        A bit disingenuous, no? "The rich" aren't infinite, so market price can only be so high. And, perhaps we can agree that some things like food, should be available to everyone, other things aren't so important.
        bocytron 4y ago
        Let say there's 100 tickets available but 200 people wanting to go. You are saying the right price is the price that only the richer half can afford right?
        j-bos 4y ago
        Sort of, I'm saying that if the price becomes that, it's ok as a concert is not essential for life, it's not even essential for a good life. Of course that's simply my opinion.
        bheadmaster 4y ago
        Your opinion implies that money is more important than anything else. If it makes most money, then it's the right thing to do. I disagree with your opinion. Money is just a middleman - and a mathematical device used by the cunning to take everything away from everyone else and essencially enslave the world.
        j-bos 4y ago
        That's one way to read it. I personally imply no such thing. My opinion is that if something is neither essential for life, nor for a good life, it is unimportant. Any other lines someons draws are their opinion, which they are most free to have.
        bheadmaster 4y ago
        I see. I disagree with that opinion, too. Where would you draw the line between "unimportant" and "important" - therefore, between prices that should and should not be (allowed to be) maximized for the sake of profit? Food, water and shelter is obvious. Is there anything else you consider important except those three? If not, would you be willing to live a life where the only things available to you are food, water and shelter - i.e. a life of a prison inmate, or a labour slave?
  - ryandrake 4y ago
    So they'd rather have the luckiest people rather than the wealthiest people? Neither seems fair.
    - Thiez 4y ago
      The system where each fan that can afford the ticket price set by the band/venue has the same chance to get a ticket seems pretty fair to me. If you are one of the wealthiest people perhaps you should consider the fact that you have been pretty lucky in life already, even if you sometimes can't attend a concert you really wanted to.
- lo_zamoyski 4y ago
  Precisely. We're not talking about essential goods or services here, so protesting the injustice of crazy concert tickets is a bit comical and whiny. It makes more sense to ask why there is a market for such insane prices in the first place. Why are people crazy enough to pay that much for concert tickets? It's their fault, not the scalpers. No one needs to buy concert tickets. No one is being forced to pay for them.
  - ravenstine 4y ago
    Rammstein really doesn't do shows in North America very often, so that motivates people (such as myself) to pay extra for the best tickets, even if it means getting those tickets from somewhere else when Ticketmaster is sold out. The last time they toured here was over a decade ago, with maybe a few shows here and there that weren't part of a tour. Given that some of the members are pushing their 60s, I'm not sure I care where my ticket comes from as long as I can see them before they retire.
    - tedunangst 4y ago
      What? Rammstein was in philadelphia a month ago. There were hundreds of tickets available for around $25 the day of the concert.
      - ravenstine 4y ago
        Yes, they were there a month ago as part of their North America tour because hauling their stage with them is a humongous effort. They weren't there a month ago casually. > There were hundreds of tickets available for around $25 the day of the concert. This was not the case in Los Angeles even for general admission or the nosebleeds, and especially not if you want to be at the very front. Why you saw $25 tickets in Philly, I have no idea. I don't think I've ever been to one of their shows in the United States where tickets were as cheap as $25 for presale.
        ipaddr 4y ago
        In the northeast there are many sizable cities close together that can host bands with older venues that can be rented cheaper. In LA you have a large mass of people all wanting to see your show in one location so you charge more but transportation costs to and from the next venue and venue costs are more. I've never paid more than $40 for a show in the east.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  I don't understand this argument at all. You think only essentials should attempt to have "fair" pricing? Luxury shouldn't ever try to be "fair"? Why?
  - cbozeman 4y ago
    No, because it is, by definition, no longer "luxury". Something everyone can afford isn't a luxury. Food is a luxury in certain nations. Food is just another everyday regular bullshit item here in America, or in Sweden, or Denmark. Not everyone can afford a Rolls-Royce Cullinan. That's why it's a luxury SUV. Ticket prices aren't really any different. First off, these tickets do have "fair" pricing, but what they don't have are protections. If I want to buy 153 tickets for $40 each so I can bring my entire extended family to an event, should I have the right to do that? I don't know. Obviously in America, I tend to lean more towards "yes" than "no". I do agree with one of the posters above who said, "If someone really wants to go see a show, they'll pay whatever they have to pay." I do tend to agree with that. I don't even remember the last concert I've been to because, based on my experience, it's going to be hot, entirely too loud, entirely too distorted, and I could have a way better time in my home theater cranking a recording of a previous concert up to 50% volume and rocking out. Frankly I don't even understand how someone could pay $50 to see a show, much less $250, but each to their own I guess.
    - ravenstine 4y ago
      > I don't even remember the last concert I've been to because, based on my experience, it's going to be hot, entirely too loud, entirely too distorted Out of curiosity, do you wear concert earplugs? I get that some people prefer a controlled sound experience, but maybe your experience was subpar because of the loudness? I wore some concert earplugs from Amazon last weekend, everything sounded clear, and no ringing afterwards.
  - nradov 4y ago
    There's no such thing as a "fair" price. That's a totally subjective and meaningless concept which has been discredited since the Middle Ages. I think a fair price for flawless 2 carat diamonds is $100. Why won't anyone sell them to me at that price?
gruez 4y ago
>What if all food was priced "optimally" in terms of foodmakers' profit, making it so expensive that half of society starves to death? That already happens today. It's just that competition provides a counterbalance to foodmakers raising their price to infinity.
j-bos 4y ago
My rule of thumb is, if it's entertainment, sky's the limit on price. Nobody loses anything of value when luxuries are are markert priced.
unpopular42 4y ago
There is no "market" serving people, only other people do. Are you proposing to force them to serve cheaper or perhaps for free?
- bheadmaster 4y ago
  > There is no "market" serving people, only other people do. People follow rules of the market. Market is those rules. "The market isn't real" isn't really an argument here, when you're using the mechanisms of the market itself as an argument. > Are you proposing to force them to serve cheaper or perhaps for free? No, I'm proposing we stop people from opportunistically extracting value without bringing any. If you're an artist, and want to price your tickets at 1000$, and people still buy it - more power to you. If I want a cheaper show, I'll wait for another band I like to make a cheaper show. But if you're a scalper who buys all the 10$ tickets to a show, then resells them at 100$ - effectively removing the choice of even attending a 10$ show - then you should be stopped, and, if possible, punished by law, as you're only extracting value without providing any. The businessman philosophy of "let's price things as much as we can get away with" inevitably leads to standards of living getting shittier and shittier. Isn't the whole argument of capitalism that "competition will create abundance"? Add scalpers to the equation, and the whole argument goes down the drain. Scalping is philosophically inconsistent with capitalism.
cortesoft 4y ago
> What if all food was priced "optimally" in terms of foodmakers' profit, making it so expensive that half of society starves to death? Umm, that is literally how the food market works. The people selling food, including all the middle men, are selling it for as much as they can. A sold out concert is like high end truffle... yes, they are crazy expensive, because they are rare and and in high demand. Most people can't afford to eat truffle often. Most people have to eat cheaper food and don't get to eat truffles all the time. Because market sellers can sell their food at as high a price as they can get, more people are incentivized to produce food, and there ends up being enough food for most people to eat. Of course the market isn't perfect, and we have to do things to make sure poor people don't starve, but that doesn't mean we stop using a market economy to allocate scarce resources.
FerociousTimes 4y ago
> What if all food was priced "optimally" in terms of foodmakers' profit, making it so expensive that half of society starves to death? Not to nitpick or take away from your point but this strategy is extremely myopic and counter-productive even from a maximum financial utility for the food producers as it eliminates the consumers gradually for their products destroying the demand side and the market altogether in the process.

ravenstine 4y ago

I disagree! Why should tickets to a Rammstein concert sell for any price but what people are willing to pay for? This isn't exactly food or healthcare we're talking about.

bheadmaster 4y ago
Because, apparently, Rammstein doesn't like the concept of only the wealthiest being able to afford their tickets.
- ravenstine 4y ago
  Sure, but I was commenting on your argument in particular, not Rammstein, which is a more general philosophical argument than them not wanting their fans in particular to get outpriced.
  - bheadmaster 4y ago
    I was using food as a hyperbole, the same argument can be applied to anything. Should X be priced in such a way to extract the most money possible from a certain top of the wealthiest, leaving effectively everyone else without it? Substitute X for whatever you want, and any affirmative response would be equivalent to saying "nobody should have X except the rich". If you agree with that sentence, then that's no other argument I can bring to the table.
    - j-bos 4y ago
      A bit disingenuous, no? "The rich" aren't infinite, so market price can only be so high. And, perhaps we can agree that some things like food, should be available to everyone, other things aren't so important.
      - bocytron 4y ago
        Let say there's 100 tickets available but 200 people wanting to go. You are saying the right price is the price that only the richer half can afford right?
        j-bos 4y ago
        Sort of, I'm saying that if the price becomes that, it's ok as a concert is not essential for life, it's not even essential for a good life. Of course that's simply my opinion.
        bheadmaster 4y ago
        Your opinion implies that money is more important than anything else. If it makes most money, then it's the right thing to do. I disagree with your opinion. Money is just a middleman - and a mathematical device used by the cunning to take everything away from everyone else and essencially enslave the world.
        j-bos 4y ago
        That's one way to read it. I personally imply no such thing. My opinion is that if something is neither essential for life, nor for a good life, it is unimportant. Any other lines someons draws are their opinion, which they are most free to have.
        bheadmaster 4y ago
        I see. I disagree with that opinion, too. Where would you draw the line between "unimportant" and "important" - therefore, between prices that should and should not be (allowed to be) maximized for the sake of profit? Food, water and shelter is obvious. Is there anything else you consider important except those three? If not, would you be willing to live a life where the only things available to you are food, water and shelter - i.e. a life of a prison inmate, or a labour slave?
- ryandrake 4y ago
  So they'd rather have the luckiest people rather than the wealthiest people? Neither seems fair.
  - Thiez 4y ago
    The system where each fan that can afford the ticket price set by the band/venue has the same chance to get a ticket seems pretty fair to me. If you are one of the wealthiest people perhaps you should consider the fact that you have been pretty lucky in life already, even if you sometimes can't attend a concert you really wanted to.
lo_zamoyski 4y ago
Precisely. We're not talking about essential goods or services here, so protesting the injustice of crazy concert tickets is a bit comical and whiny. It makes more sense to ask why there is a market for such insane prices in the first place. Why are people crazy enough to pay that much for concert tickets? It's their fault, not the scalpers. No one needs to buy concert tickets. No one is being forced to pay for them.
- ravenstine 4y ago
  Rammstein really doesn't do shows in North America very often, so that motivates people (such as myself) to pay extra for the best tickets, even if it means getting those tickets from somewhere else when Ticketmaster is sold out. The last time they toured here was over a decade ago, with maybe a few shows here and there that weren't part of a tour. Given that some of the members are pushing their 60s, I'm not sure I care where my ticket comes from as long as I can see them before they retire.
  - tedunangst 4y ago
    What? Rammstein was in philadelphia a month ago. There were hundreds of tickets available for around $25 the day of the concert.
    - ravenstine 4y ago
      Yes, they were there a month ago as part of their North America tour because hauling their stage with them is a humongous effort. They weren't there a month ago casually. > There were hundreds of tickets available for around $25 the day of the concert. This was not the case in Los Angeles even for general admission or the nosebleeds, and especially not if you want to be at the very front. Why you saw $25 tickets in Philly, I have no idea. I don't think I've ever been to one of their shows in the United States where tickets were as cheap as $25 for presale.
      - ipaddr 4y ago
        In the northeast there are many sizable cities close together that can host bands with older venues that can be rented cheaper. In LA you have a large mass of people all wanting to see your show in one location so you charge more but transportation costs to and from the next venue and venue costs are more. I've never paid more than $40 for a show in the east.
Dylan16807 4y ago
I don't understand this argument at all. You think only essentials should attempt to have "fair" pricing? Luxury shouldn't ever try to be "fair"? Why?
- cbozeman 4y ago
  No, because it is, by definition, no longer "luxury". Something everyone can afford isn't a luxury. Food is a luxury in certain nations. Food is just another everyday regular bullshit item here in America, or in Sweden, or Denmark. Not everyone can afford a Rolls-Royce Cullinan. That's why it's a luxury SUV. Ticket prices aren't really any different. First off, these tickets do have "fair" pricing, but what they don't have are protections. If I want to buy 153 tickets for $40 each so I can bring my entire extended family to an event, should I have the right to do that? I don't know. Obviously in America, I tend to lean more towards "yes" than "no". I do agree with one of the posters above who said, "If someone really wants to go see a show, they'll pay whatever they have to pay." I do tend to agree with that. I don't even remember the last concert I've been to because, based on my experience, it's going to be hot, entirely too loud, entirely too distorted, and I could have a way better time in my home theater cranking a recording of a previous concert up to 50% volume and rocking out. Frankly I don't even understand how someone could pay $50 to see a show, much less $250, but each to their own I guess.
  - ravenstine 4y ago
    > I don't even remember the last concert I've been to because, based on my experience, it's going to be hot, entirely too loud, entirely too distorted Out of curiosity, do you wear concert earplugs? I get that some people prefer a controlled sound experience, but maybe your experience was subpar because of the loudness? I wore some concert earplugs from Amazon last weekend, everything sounded clear, and no ringing afterwards.
- nradov 4y ago
  There's no such thing as a "fair" price. That's a totally subjective and meaningless concept which has been discredited since the Middle Ages. I think a fair price for flawless 2 carat diamonds is $100. Why won't anyone sell them to me at that price?

gruez 4y ago

>What if all food was priced "optimally" in terms of foodmakers' profit, making it so expensive that half of society starves to death? That already happens today. It's just that competition provides a counterbalance to foodmakers raising their price to infinity.

j-bos 4y ago

My rule of thumb is, if it's entertainment, sky's the limit on price. Nobody loses anything of value when luxuries are are markert priced.

unpopular42 4y ago

There is no "market" serving people, only other people do. Are you proposing to force them to serve cheaper or perhaps for free?

bheadmaster 4y ago
> There is no "market" serving people, only other people do. People follow rules of the market. Market is those rules. "The market isn't real" isn't really an argument here, when you're using the mechanisms of the market itself as an argument. > Are you proposing to force them to serve cheaper or perhaps for free? No, I'm proposing we stop people from opportunistically extracting value without bringing any. If you're an artist, and want to price your tickets at 1000$, and people still buy it - more power to you. If I want a cheaper show, I'll wait for another band I like to make a cheaper show. But if you're a scalper who buys all the 10$ tickets to a show, then resells them at 100$ - effectively removing the choice of even attending a 10$ show - then you should be stopped, and, if possible, punished by law, as you're only extracting value without providing any. The businessman philosophy of "let's price things as much as we can get away with" inevitably leads to standards of living getting shittier and shittier. Isn't the whole argument of capitalism that "competition will create abundance"? Add scalpers to the equation, and the whole argument goes down the drain. Scalping is philosophically inconsistent with capitalism.

cortesoft 4y ago

> What if all food was priced "optimally" in terms of foodmakers' profit, making it so expensive that half of society starves to death? Umm, that is literally how the food market works. The people selling food, including all the middle men, are selling it for as much as they can. A sold out concert is like high end truffle... yes, they are crazy expensive, because they are rare and and in high demand. Most people can't afford to eat truffle often. Most people have to eat cheaper food and don't get to eat truffles all the time. Because market sellers can sell their food at as high a price as they can get, more people are incentivized to produce food, and there ends up being enough food for most people to eat. Of course the market isn't perfect, and we have to do things to make sure poor people don't starve, but that doesn't mean we stop using a market economy to allocate scarce resources.

FerociousTimes 4y ago

> What if all food was priced "optimally" in terms of foodmakers' profit, making it so expensive that half of society starves to death? Not to nitpick or take away from your point but this strategy is extremely myopic and counter-productive even from a maximum financial utility for the food producers as it eliminates the consumers gradually for their products destroying the demand side and the market altogether in the process.