Feel good story(I do) about Profiteers

Status
Not open for further replies.
What did people do before hand sanitizers? I don't recall seeing them 10 or 20 years ago. Soap and water works better but you don't anyone profiting off that.
 
Not sure what to think--it's capitalism at it's best. Or worst. Or both at the same time.

They could just sell at decent profit margin, there's always that business model.

Got curious this morning and one of the links indicated that soap was better than alcohol. Few seconds of scrubbing really works on this virus--it's got a really whimpy "shell" that is easily broken by soap--but hand sanitizer has to be left on for a longer period of time. That plus how alcohol dries out the skin makes me think I'm not missing out on anything there (I avoid the stuff, and just use dish soap).
 
Pretty hard to use soap and water after you've used the gas pump or credit card keyboard or pulled a public door open or a dozen other things. We have a small squirt bottle in both vehicles along with some wipes to wipe down touch surfaces at the end of the day. Was using a paper towel from the windshield washer unit to handle the gas pump but they've been out the last 2 trips so the wipes are handy.
 
I believe in free enterprise. I dont see anything wrong and do not think peoples rights should be violated.
The bottom line is the stores where the sanitizers were bought COULD have had A LIMIT ON PURCHASERS.
BUT THE STORES DID NOT LIMIT THEM so they did what an entrepreneur did.

So as far as illegal, these people bought the product before the demand for it, they were speculating which is what free enterprise is about, just because they were right does not make them criminals.
They did not steal the product, they bought the product legally.

Its also easy for people who want it, to make their own VERY easily
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by atikovi
What did people do before hand sanitizers? I don't recall seeing them 10 or 20 years ago. Soap and water works better but you don't anyone profiting off that.

Hospitals find thru studies Sanitizer is more effective because majority of people don't do the 20 seconds of washing required. Also soap and water is hard on your hands. Wife works at hospital.
 
Originally Posted by madRiver
Hospitals find thru studies Sanitizer is more effective because majority of people don't do the 20 seconds of washing required. Also soap and water is hard on your hands. Wife works at hospital.

never mind that, we dont carry a sink around to wash our hands or in our cars and trucks however you can carry a sanitizer. its also easy to make your own.

Ps - see my post two up on this page :eek:)
 
You use a public toilet, wash at the sink then have to use the door handle to exit. Wash hands with sanitizer
 
Originally Posted by pkunk
You use a public toilet, wash at the sink then have to use the door handle to exit. Wash hands with sanitizer


That's why I carry paper napkins on me. Open the door the with the napkins, wipe down the handle and throw it out.

Basically the guy is a scalper. It's not illegal but it basically drives up the price for everyone else and the only one who benefits is the scalper. So while it might be legal and let's hope that the state finds out he violated some law, they're still considered to be the scum of the earth.
 
Many states have laws against scalping prices of essential goods during a disaster. They are geared mostly to hurricanes, floods, etc.

It is not a free market when one capitalist buys up all of a scarce commodity in order to sell it without competition. That defines a market that is not free.
 
I'd like to see stores disallow returns for this stuff, or charge a hefty restocking fee
16.gif


Originally Posted by mk378
Many states have laws against scalping prices of essential goods during a disaster. They are geared mostly to hurricanes, floods, etc.

It is not a free market when one capitalist buys up all of a scarce commodity in order to sell it without competition. That defines a market that is not free.


01.gif
 
He wasn't planning on returning it, just donating it. But as mentioned earlier, there should have been a limit by the stores. But can't blame the stores too much, there normally isn't a limit and most stores don't expect people to walk in off the street and wipe out their entire inventory so they're not really going to have a policy against that. It's good that the eBay and Amazon shut them down though, next time the scalpers will realize that there won't be a market so they won't begin their scalping.
 
Any government interference in price setting defeats a free market economy.

From the Huffpost:

So-called price gouging is a critical economic tool to ensure that supplies last and so can meet ongoing demand. Making it illegal is ridiculous, and here's why:

Without price increases, many people buy extra supplies "just in case", regardless of what they have tucked away at home already. If too many people do this, supplies run out and people who need them much more urgently miss out. With price increases, people who don't really need supplies will leave them on the shelf not out of the goodness of their heart, but out of concern for their wallet.
Price increases encourage conservation of resources people already have. Those who can most easily adjust their consumption will do so, leaving resources free for those who can't. People might, for example, use their cars more sparingly to avoid having to fill up while prices are inflated.
The ability to raise prices encourages businesses to stock excess reserves. Space in stores and warehouses is limited and products (even water) go off over time. If they're not allowed to raise prices on those items, they'll use that limited space for other products that have higher profit margins the rest of the time.
Allowing price gouging actually encourages citizens to be more prepared for disasters. Do you have enough food and water and other essentials stored at home for you and your family if disaster strikes your town? Or do you just assume you'll be able to go to the store and buy what you need when something goes wrong? Knowing that prices might double, triple, or more during a disaster is a pretty big incentive to go and stock up now instead of waiting -- even for that person who lives right next door to the store!
Finally, rising prices attract more resources from outside of the disaster area, where prices are lower. Nearby businesses, small or large, can easily profit by shipping essential supplies in and selling them at a premium. Without the ability to charge that premium, they would actually end up losing money through shipping costs, overtime wages, and inherent risks of operating is a disaster area. Without the profit motive, many don't take the risk.
Of course, people could do all of the above voluntarily and it would be nice if we could rely solely on the goodness of people's hearts. Plenty of this does happen in times of crisis -- people do drive supplies in from out of town at their own expense. But shortages still often happen in the real world regardless -- shortages that we could prevent.

In the United States, corporate giant Walmart -- a common target for anti-capitalist complaints -- actually hires a team of weather forecasters to predict extreme weather events, so they can ship extra goods to areas likely to be affected. Walmart does this to make a profit, but the end result is that they ensure critical supplies are available to the public when they're most needed.

In fact, the more people and businesses that attempt to "exploit" shortages, the less prices would actually increase as all the new suppliers compete against each other. One couldn't sell water for $5 a bottle, if Walmart was selling it for $3.
 
That's an interesting theory but that assumes markets are efficient at what they do and there's production to meet demand. Like there's no shortage of production of water bottles. But there does seem to be of masks and hand sanitizer. Even toilet paper. It's just too bulky to make a lot of to have in storage so it will take a little while to make more of it. Because it easily stores, TP makers don't want to increase production too much because sales will eventually crash because everyone won't be buying it later.

Still limiting amounts people can buy sounds like rationing.
 
Originally Posted by Mr Nice
Saw the story on NY post yesterday

Only dirtbags would try and do this.


It's funny how he had a change of heart at the end and said he was donating all of it. It was in the NY times and there were over 3k comments about it. He was probably getting death threats before he said he was donating it.
 
The guy is a scumwad without a doubt.
In reality he is only doing what Amazon did a more aggressively.
Check out this screenshot from the article from the NY times.

Amazon price for N95 masks goes from $20 to $70.....!! Wow. Price gouging ehh? Yeh but Amazon's computer system did it and not a single person.

While at the same time 3rd party sellers increased their cost from about $30 to $170....

Both illegal? Both morally wrong?
You think the guy is going to pay taxes on the money he makes off the increased price? Maybe.
Amazon isn't going to pay taxes on it.

Whats worse this guy hoarding sanitizer or some idiot hoarding 1000 rolls of TP?

Screenshot_20200315-132351.png
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top