Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

$5000 per violation of price-gouging in CA

caloes.ca.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 450 posts

Re: $5000 per violation of price-gouging in CA

#351

Post by dsfyu404ed »

pascalxus wrote: post #265

The crazy thing here is that they go after these gougers so aggressively for just selling a 20$ bottle of soap. And yet, predatory hospitals in the US can do x1000 times worse and not even get a slap on the hand. Hospitals are the #1 cause of bankrupcy in the US.

Big predators almost always prefer many soft targets to one big meal that can put up a fight.

The hospital has a legal team. Some jerk who's re-selling hand sanitizer at 5000% markup does not. They both deserve to be gone after but it should be obvious why the state prefers the latter.

Re: $5000 per violation of price-gouging in CA

#352

Post by lonelappde »

bgorman wrote: post #206
forkexec wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Increasing retail prices doesn't do any good, especially normal people who need one package of TP, limiting quantities does. That's a fairer way to solve it than treat TP like some damn Bitcoin.

As someone who isn't hoarding TP, I would much rather be able to buy one package of toilet paper for 50 dollars versus being able to buy zero for 5 dollars. If people don't have access to toilet paper they will become hysterical. Raising prices is the obvious way to fix this. Less people will be willing to buy excess tp rolls if it costs 50 dollars a roll.

Eat less carbs, eat more fiber, don't overeat, and you'll have nicely firm occasional feces and you can rinse in the shower.

Re: $5000 per violation of price-gouging in CA

#353

Post by anigbrowl »

hansvm wrote: post #312
jbay808 wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another example: https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2020/03/13/amazon-blocks... > Ranga said that a six-pack of wipes, which might sell for $20 at Costco, could fetch four times that online, representing a “big opportunity.” He said the couple had spent about $70,000 on Lysol wipes and liquid cleaners over the past few weeks I don't think someone buying $70k of Lysol is doing it because they're worried they'll run o…

I think the argument being made is that these individuals are creating scarcity as a byproduct of their intended goal, not as a goal in itself. If they wanted to profit from the scarcity they induced, they would attempt to resell the items they bought in the original locales rather than at online venues.

They can't realize their goal of profit if the scarcity doesn't exist, now can they?

Re: $5000 per violation of price-gouging in CA

#354

Post by waterhouse »

hodgesrm wrote: post #45
logicchains wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>solipsistic pseudo-liberation reasoning Basic economics is solipsistic pseudo-liberation reasoning now?

The argument that the threat of gouging increases the motivation to hoard is basic economics. For analogous reasons there is FDIC insurance on bank accounts because the alternative is runs on banks that can lead to system collapse. Not every point on the supply/demand curve is a good place to be.

Are people hoarding because they're worried about being gouged on the price, or because they're worried about being unable to buy at all? Are the viral social media posts "OMG look at these high prices", or "OMG look at these empty shelves"? From a hypothetical perspective, which scenario creates a stronger incentive to buy supplies now: "Prices might rise 10x in the next month, but buying will always be possible", or "The supply might run out completely in the next month"?

Re: $5000 per violation of price-gouging in CA

#355

Post by ggreer »

jamespollack wrote: post #252
ggreer wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have evidence that someone has bought 10,000 masks from every hardware store in a state? Otherwise you're arguing from fiction.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/14/technology/coronavirus-pu...

He bought most of the masks from a single liquidation company a month ago, and he bought the hand sanitizer from some stores in Kentucky & Tennessee, but not in large enough quantities to cause shortages there. He definitely didn't buy from every hardware store in the state. Not even close.

Re: $5000 per violation of price-gouging in CA

#356

Post by anigbrowl »

jbay808 wrote: post #290
koheripbal wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best solution is to increase production to the point where all those hoarders are left with tons of worthless inventory.

People are saying this like they just walked out of an econ 101 class. It's expensive to tool up your production line for extra production when you'll just have to shut it down again a few weeks later as the surplus makes its way through the system. Why would a toilet paper plant operator do that? They know that average consumption of toilet paper hasn't increased whatsoever.

I had this argument with a lot of people last week. People learn the basic concept of supply and demand and suddenly think they're economists, which is like learning to write a loop and thinking you're a developer.

Re: $5000 per violation of price-gouging in CA

#357

Post by magnusss »

grecy wrote: post #329
magnusss wrote: post #292

Come on, guys. Hoarding a commodity in order to corner a market and thereby profiteer is immoral, (often) illegal, and a distortion of the free market. It’s bad behavior. Please stop.

I agree that it's immoral, but I do have to wonder if there's much difference between what these people are doing vs Nike making a pair of shoes for $2 then selling them for $400, or hospitals in America marking stuff up 500 or 1000%. By definition capitalism is about making a profit. Sell things for as much as you can, and win. I find it fascinating how where there isn't a "crisis" then maximizing profit is just wha…

Or selling software with 0 marginal cost for $40k? :-)

As with all moral issues, it is difficult to come up with an objective distinction between wrong and right. I tend to rely on Kant’s categorical imperative: Would society be harmed if everyone behaved in this way? In our situation where hoarders are attempting to profit from a crisis, I believe the answer is clear: It’s immoral.

Re: $5000 per violation of price-gouging in CA

#358

Post by lonelappde »

bob33212 wrote: post #282
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is not a case of toilet paper suddenly costing more to produce Production and logistics have gotten more expensive. That has happened economy-wide, and will only get worse as the pandemic exponentiates. They’ve also become less reliable, which is why we have hoarding. The purpose of price spikes is to incentivise production, to create slack in the system. (It also reduces the quantity demanded. Toilet paper at…

The delivery guy I talked said his route was easier on Friday because of all the Work from home. What increases in logistics costs are you referring to?

His company is getting paid less for his route so they might need to cut/merge routes and slow deliver time.

In places more severely affected, delivery/handling workers may be unavailable to work.

Re: $5000 per violation of price-gouging in CA

#359

Post by dillondoyle »

EdgarVerona wrote: post #95

A lot of people in this thread are willfully ignoring some basic facts here. These products are being made in sufficient quantity for everyone. There is not a significant decrease in production. There is a significant increase in hoarding, and in many cases it is for the explicit purpose of creating artificial scarcity to increase the price of a product. This is not a case of toilet paper suddenly costing more to pro…

are you sure? reporting say 3M can only ramp up another 35MM per month. Im not sure what the baseline production /month is - but estimates for how many masks needed just for healthcare workers are 300MM. And I would guess takes a month or two ramp up production, machines are probably already running 24/7 need to build more.

So it seems from reporting that n95 masks are NOT being made in sufficient quantity for healthcare workers - let alone everyone.

http://www.startribune.com/3m-can-t-confirm-pence-comments-a...

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/28/us-mulls-using-sweeping-powe...

Re: $5000 per violation of price-gouging in CA

#360

Post by lonelappde »

smnrchrds wrote: post #276
yyy888sss wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This whole problem was solved in Australia by all supermarkets rationing fast selling goods (1 pack toilet paper, handwipes, pasta etc per day) but keeping prices low.

I agree with the approach but not the instances. 1 pack of toilet paper lasts a good while so that's OK. 1 pack of pasta per day means you have to go back to store every day and expose yourself and others to danger.

In a catastrophe, carbs are a terrible staple. High volume for low satiety. Fiber, fat, and protein are far more efficient.
Post reply on HN