Earlier quoted context omitted.
In which paragraph do you think that phrase belongs?
> That “equlibrium” is an assumption that there are forces in the market that will moderate excess - that the market is self-balancing. This is the argument against regulation or government intervention. > For example, it might be assumed that if supply shrinks, that prices will increase, which will reduce demand because fewer people can afford it, which will lead to a rebound in supply - which means prices will drop…
Inelastic items are:
- things that are dirt cheap, so nobody cares how much they exactly cost, like 5 cents versus 10 cents for a candy.
- things that people desperately need, and for which there is no alternative, so they fork up the money when the price is jacked up.
Poachers cannot do anything that will keep the demand the same while prices go up due to low supply due to ivory not being an inelastic good.