Date:         Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:21:55 -0400
Reply-To:     "Horace K. Sawyer" <hksawyer@CATT.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         "Horace K. Sawyer" <hksawyer@CATT.COM>
Subject:      Re: The Greedy Bastards (was ripples of disaster)
Comments: To: T Berk <tberk@MINDSPRING.COM>
In-Reply-To:  <3BA00485.6E029A6A@mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 05:57 PM 9/12/01 -0700, T Berk wrote:
>No.
>
>Keep the prices the same, close when you have no more and be a good neighbor.
>
>Those stations that raise prices based on what will be a TEMPORARY
>shortage should be boycotted, now and then.
>
>Criminal prosecution should be investigate.
>
>There is a difference in covering your cost vs making a profit off of
>the misery of others.
>
>TBerk

Totally unrealistic, and I completely disagree based on the previous
reasons.  No crime was committed.  Your view, while you believe to be in
furtherance of the common good, may actually aid its destruction.
I applaud you for altruistic goals, BUT
Man's inhumanity to man is a reality and so is the law of supply and demand.
Hypothetically, you and your family (as owners of the gas station in my
example)
would unwittingly help the greedy who would swarm the gas station to take
advantage of low prices.  The people who would suffer are those who had no
gas in their cars because you sold all of it.  You allowed it by low
prices.  People could die as a result.  (For example, by not being able to
drive away in an emergency).  My theory raises prices to an exorbitant
level and allows all a better chance to share in the supply.
Would be a good episode for the Outer Limits or the Twilight Zone.

Let's quit arguing about it.
Peace
horace