4 ms·

The most reliable indicator of a shortage is abandonment of a price-based mechanism in favour of something else, like a lottery or needs-based selection. If pri

The most reliable indicator of a shortage is abandonment of a price-based mechanism in favour of something else, like a lottery or needs-based selection. If price is able to select the buyer, then you can't possibly have a shortage.

chii 3y ago
> If price is able to select the buyer, then you can't possibly have a shortage. unless you cannot produce regardless of the price. This is sometimes called a market failure. And it recently did happen, during covid. A lot of goods went up in price - and even then unable to procure it regardless.
- randomdata 3y ago
  What do you mean unless? If no amount of money can produce something then you cannot select a buyer based on price. You have not found an exception. You're parroting the rule.
TulliusCicero 3y ago
That simply isn't the colloquial definition of a shortage. If rent is $20,000/month for a studio, going "well technically you can always get one if you can pay $20,000 a month so there's no shortage" is kind of a uselessly pedantic comment.
- randomdata 3y ago
  I agree, in the case of "rent is $20,000/month" calling that a "shortage" doesn't say anything. It is no different than a case where "rent is $200/month". There is nothing the reader/listener can learn by adding shortage into the mix in either case. Pointless, yes, but I'm not sure pedantic is the right term for describing using a word in a way that does not communicate anything. But, to each their own.
  - Dylan16807 3y ago
    You can set reasonable price benchmarks to define "shortage" by. Your definition of shortage is too narrow. Price is always able to select a buyer. People will skip eating if you give them enough money. But if that only supplies a couple percent of buyers, that's not going to disprove a shortage.
    - randomdata 3y ago
      > You can set reasonable price benchmarks to define "shortage" by. If there is some kind of useful benchmark, exclaiming "shortage" doesn't tell you anything about that benchmark. Again, nothing is communicated. Pointless, indeed. > Price is always able to select a buyer. Always, except for when there is a shortage. There are all kinds of examples of where price cannot select a buyer, most commonly as a result of government intervention making it illegal to pay more than a certain price, leaving many buyers all willing to pay the maximum allowable price for a given good or service, thereby requiring some other kind of mechanism, such as a lottery, to determine the 'winner'.
      - Dylan16807 3y ago
        Do you think there can only be shortages if there's price fixing? If not, please give an example that doesn't involve price fixing. I'll give an example for my argument: If there's only enough food for 90 people out of 100 today, it's easy for anyone with enough money to get fed, but it is also a shortage of food.
        randomdata 3y ago
        > Do you think there can only be shortages if there's price fixing? Clearly not. I just got finished pointing to government intervention as the most likely reason for a shortage. How did you manage to not finish reading the comment before replying? Price fixing can also theoretically lead to a shortage, but this is the least likely case. Usually price fixers want to push the price higher than buyers are looking to spend, not the other way around. > If there's only enough food for 90 people out of 100 today, it's easy for anyone with enough money to get fed, but it is also a shortage of food. Agreed, in two ways: 1. It is apt to end up a shortage as many governments have 'price gouging' laws that would prevent the vendor of that food from charging the fair market value in this type of event. 2. In this scenario, eventually no amount of money can buy food. You could be the richest person on earth, willing to spend every last cent you have, but you're still not eating if you happen to come late to the party. Price is unable to select a buyer, relying on a first-come, first-served mechanism instead. That doesn't match the housing situation, though. The richest person in the world isn't going to find himself unable to buy a home, even if he takes his sweet time deciding whether he wants one or not. Even at the peak of housing insanity, there were still many houses available for purchase by anyone in the market.

chii 3y ago

> If price is able to select the buyer, then you can't possibly have a shortage. unless you cannot produce regardless of the price. This is sometimes called a market failure. And it recently did happen, during covid. A lot of goods went up in price - and even then unable to procure it regardless.

randomdata 3y ago
What do you mean unless? If no amount of money can produce something then you cannot select a buyer based on price. You have not found an exception. You're parroting the rule.

TulliusCicero 3y ago

That simply isn't the colloquial definition of a shortage. If rent is $20,000/month for a studio, going "well technically you can always get one if you can pay $20,000 a month so there's no shortage" is kind of a uselessly pedantic comment.

randomdata 3y ago
I agree, in the case of "rent is $20,000/month" calling that a "shortage" doesn't say anything. It is no different than a case where "rent is $200/month". There is nothing the reader/listener can learn by adding shortage into the mix in either case. Pointless, yes, but I'm not sure pedantic is the right term for describing using a word in a way that does not communicate anything. But, to each their own.
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  You can set reasonable price benchmarks to define "shortage" by. Your definition of shortage is too narrow. Price is always able to select a buyer. People will skip eating if you give them enough money. But if that only supplies a couple percent of buyers, that's not going to disprove a shortage.
  - randomdata 3y ago
    > You can set reasonable price benchmarks to define "shortage" by. If there is some kind of useful benchmark, exclaiming "shortage" doesn't tell you anything about that benchmark. Again, nothing is communicated. Pointless, indeed. > Price is always able to select a buyer. Always, except for when there is a shortage. There are all kinds of examples of where price cannot select a buyer, most commonly as a result of government intervention making it illegal to pay more than a certain price, leaving many buyers all willing to pay the maximum allowable price for a given good or service, thereby requiring some other kind of mechanism, such as a lottery, to determine the 'winner'.
    - Dylan16807 3y ago
      Do you think there can only be shortages if there's price fixing? If not, please give an example that doesn't involve price fixing. I'll give an example for my argument: If there's only enough food for 90 people out of 100 today, it's easy for anyone with enough money to get fed, but it is also a shortage of food.
      - randomdata 3y ago
        > Do you think there can only be shortages if there's price fixing? Clearly not. I just got finished pointing to government intervention as the most likely reason for a shortage. How did you manage to not finish reading the comment before replying? Price fixing can also theoretically lead to a shortage, but this is the least likely case. Usually price fixers want to push the price higher than buyers are looking to spend, not the other way around. > If there's only enough food for 90 people out of 100 today, it's easy for anyone with enough money to get fed, but it is also a shortage of food. Agreed, in two ways: 1. It is apt to end up a shortage as many governments have 'price gouging' laws that would prevent the vendor of that food from charging the fair market value in this type of event. 2. In this scenario, eventually no amount of money can buy food. You could be the richest person on earth, willing to spend every last cent you have, but you're still not eating if you happen to come late to the party. Price is unable to select a buyer, relying on a first-come, first-served mechanism instead. That doesn't match the housing situation, though. The richest person in the world isn't going to find himself unable to buy a home, even if he takes his sweet time deciding whether he wants one or not. Even at the peak of housing insanity, there were still many houses available for purchase by anyone in the market.