To what extent is a seller duty-bound to offer products and services to all customers at the same price and to what extent is the buyer responsible for negotiating the best price possible? Is it "price gouging" if pink razors marketed to women have a higher price than blue razors that are marketed to men? Is it "price gouging" if a car dealer offers a car at a higher price to one customer than he or she does to the next? Is there anything wrong with raising the price of hotel reservations, water bottles or gas in the aftermath of a tornado, say, when demand is higher?
When, if ever, should the government attempt to rein in a free market in which the law of supply and demand is dominant?
As long as the seller is not falsely advertising their commodities no restrictions should be imposed upon their attempts to retrieve the highest price. They may be looked upon negatively in the eyes of the public but their only duty lies to the profit margin in a capitalist economy. In turn, the buyer is only duty bound to their own want and the ability to retrieve the lowest price possible for the goods or services they require. That being said, exceptions should be made for local areas surrounding the events of natural disasters, or other states of crisis, to prevent price gouging. Government intervention should only be allowed in these circumstances due to the fact that once the businesses in the immediate area are the only source of food, water, and/or shelter, etc., they technically fit the definition of a monopoly, which we already have legislation against. The actions of the undertakers toward the Osage were reprehensible but stemmed from the larger issues of not allowing them access to their own money or to the knowledge concerning the western economy, which was new and foreign to the Osage. Legislation was the source of this problem that plagued the Osage, so further legislation wouldn’t be the answer. Educated buyers and sellers, in my opinion, will correct and stabilize a free market far better than any legislation.
ReplyDeleteMitchell Potts
When it comes to price gouging, some states do have certain criteria that prohibit producers from exploiting consumers who may potentially buy their goods/service. Oklahoma, for example, has laws against price gouging especially when a natural disaster occurs, so that stores and retailers do not raise the charge of bottled water or canned foods when people need it the most, however not all states have this protection. As far as having an upcharge on women's products, it has been a known fact that most female products are at a slightly higher price than men's. In fact, it is so common that it has its own name: Pink Tax. I personally do believe that this "tax" isn't price gouging, but I do believe that it comes close to it. The Pink Tax is charging a higher price to certain consumers at a higher price with profit in mind, which could be considered exploitative. When it came to the Osages and their higher priced coffins and funeral services, I would definitely consider that price gouging based on its exploitative intent and discrimination. Unfortunately, at the time, this novel takes place, there were not many options or regulations that the Osages could rely upon. Because of this, free-market economies have a downside that could use a little governmental input in order to protect consumers.
ReplyDeleteSabrina Arredondo
Restrictions must be put in place when sellers begin to take advantage of the consumers. If a company has a monopoly on a product, or during crisis, and it is impossible for a consumer to go elsewhere for an essential product, that company holds all power over the consumer. The government should step in then, as consumers may not have the power to change the situations they are in. That can be said about the undertakers and the Osages. If all undertakers in the area raise their prices for them, then the Osages do not have many options and caskets and funeral services are essential. I do think that it is wrong to raise prices after a natural disaster. Many people may have been displaced and lost everything, and to prey upon them while they have to rebuild their lives is terrible. Luckily we do have legislation against monopolies, but when it comes to price gouging, it becomes more of a gray area and harder to fix. The Pink Tax is pretty widely debated, some disagreeing that it exists while others see it as a very real problem in our society. I personally do think that it is price gouging, especially for those women who are poor and do not have access to feminine products because they cannot afford them. Feminine products should not have raised prices, simply because they are marketed at women. It is unfairly targeting a demographic. When a demographic is being preyed upon, and do not have the option or resources to chose another option, then the Government should step in.
ReplyDeleteDestiny Rowell
In a true free market economy any seller can charge whatever they want to whomever they want. If the demand is higher you can charge more. If its low you can still charge more. If you own a product and you want to sell it for an outrageously high amount that's your decision. It's also the costumers decision on whether or not to accept that price. However America is not a true free market economy. We have laws and safe guards in place to where things such as what happened to the osage does not happen. Where you can not freely raise the prices depending on the color of someone's skin or their religion or sexual preference. Which I am in total agreement with i believe its morally wrong to charge someone a higher price just becuase you dont agree with them.
ReplyDeleteI would agree with James when he says that America is not truly a free market economy, because we have laws in action that prevent us from discriminating against a person based on skin color, sexuality, etc. While I am a girl and I personally don't like the 'Pink Tax', I can see from a company's perspective that profiting off of a group of people based on gender is a good way to make money, since it's technically legal. While I'm sure the case could be made that the pink tax is a form of price gouging, I would argue that it's not significantly raising the price to an outrageous amount, and that while the Osage were forced to buy that particular coffin because back then you didn't have Amazon Prime, we as ladies can buy male or gender neutral razors. In fact, most companies separate products by gender to make higher profit, so in this capitalistic society, if it's legal and you can do it, why not?
DeleteI believe that in certain situations, people are taken for granted with price gouging. the best example I can think of at the moment is the one from the book about buying the casket. In a time of mourning, people are very emotional and sometimes may not think or make the best decisions. One should not use it for their benefit to "get rich quick" by charging much more for a wealthy family to bury their dead. Honestly, when I read this part, I was a tad bit upset, because I believe that it is a very wrong thing to do. Now there may be sometimes where price gouging is appropriate. an example is with my first car. I had a Honda, and I needed to replace the alternator so my car could run. On many vehicles, it would not be hard to replace it, costing about 70-80 dollars to fix. Mine costed over three hundred dollars. The reason being is because the alternator was built under the engine, so more labor had to be put into fixing it. I understand why I was charged more, but if I was charged more because of my ignorance about cars, that sounds very childish. Like taking candy from a baby, it should not happen.
ReplyDeleteThis comment above was by Sam Pratt
DeleteIn the free market competition from other sellers is what keeps prices low.I believe that the government should only get involve when people's choices are limited to one seller who is then raising and gouging prices. Forcing people to pay more when you are the only source of that particular product is wrong, especially if that product is essential to life. Objects such as fine silks and other items that are not needed to live shouldn't have any government involvement.
ReplyDeleteAll companies in America are worried about is making money, and while sometimes raising product prices is justifiable, other times it causes people that are already suffering to suffer more. After natural disasters, gas stations and stores would raise the price of necessities to outrageous numbers.In situations like this and selling caskets to the Osage, someone should step in and stop the seller from taking advantage of the weak.
ReplyDeleteIn America, we claim that we want to be free in every sense of the word; yet, free can be considered to be applicable to only one of the parties. In the free market, the sellers are 'free' to charge however much they would like, but one could argue that that infringes on the buyers right to a fair price. I believe that the government should intervene in the free market only when the principal of supply and demand infringes on the fairness of one certain group (or groups) of people. Businesses should not be able to charge way over price to someone that they know is in need of the product; it is simply immoral. --Kelsey Mader
ReplyDeleteI believe that a seller should have to sell products to everyone for the same price. Charging people different prices based on income is discrimination. I believe that exceptions can be made to help the less fortune by giving them discounts, but not the other way around. People should not be gouged out of their money simply because they have been blessed to have more money. I don’t think that the buyer should have to try and negotiate for better prices. The buyer can try and negotiate if they want to, but I don’t think they should have to in order to get a fair price. I do not think it is price gouging to charge more for a pink razor than a blue one. If they are the same razor then the consumer should just buy the cheaper one, regardless of what color it is. When it comes to the price of cars that starts to incorporate credit and loans, this situation is a little different. I feel that raising prices after a disaster is fair because the demand is high, and that is just how business works. I believe that the government should promote a free market economy and allow for supply and demand to rule pricing. With this being said, the government should become involved when instances of discrimination arise such as they did with the Osage. The prices that the Osage had to pay were rip offs. The government should have the power to ensure that all citizens get a fair deal in the market place.
ReplyDelete-Gabe Wilmot