well, nevertheless everything i said was correct and true. mock it if you must. i hope no old people die of heat exhaustion due to scarcity of generators, electricity and window AC units. i know how to solve supply problems, but people cant really understand supply and demand.
as opposed to the old ones who die of heat exhaustion because they can’t afford to pay $9,500 for a generator that should only cost $1,100?
if generators were selling for that much, the supply would replenish more or less immediately. thats the whole point. everyone with a generator within 500 miles would bring it to town. when the generators are scarce and unavailable, its because people that dont need them have them. those folks would sell them if the price were double what they paid and they didnt really need them. again, this is a concept that is fairly counter-intuitive. i am gonna insult you here. you might not be able to understand it.
i know. abolishing anti-gouging is not feasible because it would be political suicide, because people cant understand the economics of it.
the wise man knows that simply being right about this doesnt mean you are, or should be, an economist, it just means you agree with them.
again i’m not debating the laws or if they are good bad otherwise. i’m saying the number of lives saved/lost do not change based on those laws. don’t flatter yourself. your opinion carries zero weight with me.
thats incorrect, scarcity kills, whether its an old person dying of heat exhaustion for lack of AC, or an argument over gas getting someone shot. scarcity kills less in america where we are so rich we almost never lack for anything. but it still can and does kill. and scarcity results from price controls.
