John Stossel is seriously 1 brain dead fuck face - Defending price gougers

[MrScorpio]

From Stossel's September 7 column:

Consider this scenario: You are thirsty -- worried that your baby is going to become dehydrated. You find a store that's open, and the storeowner thinks it's immoral to take advantage of your distress, so he won't charge you a dime more than he charged last week. But you can't buy water from him. It's sold out.

You continue on your quest, and finally find that dreaded monster, the price gouger. He offers a bottle of water that cost $1 last week at an "outrageous" price -- say $20. You pay it to survive the disaster.

You resent the price gouger. But if he hadn't demanded $20, he'd have been out of water. It was the price gouger's "exploitation" that saved your child.

It saved her because people look out for their own interests. Before you got to the water seller, other people did. At $1 a bottle, they stocked up. At $20 a bottle, they bought more cautiously. By charging $20, the price gouger makes sure his water goes to those who really need it.

The people the softheaded politicians think are cruelest are doing the most to help. Assuming the demand for bottled water was going to go up, they bought a lot of it, planning to resell it at a steep profit. If they hadn't done that, that water would not have been available for the people who need it the most.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200509080021

That is probably one of the most egregious examples of fallacious logic I have ever read.

You can drive a Mack truck through that fucker and still have room for a freight train.

[underpants]

1. The mustache must be cutting of oxygen

price gougers are good?

[mainegreen]

2. Deleted - double post

[MrScorpio]

5. That statement is just plain EVIL.

Pure and simple

[mainegreen]

3. Indeed

Morality doesn't flow in a nice

B saved your baby
A resulted in B

Therefore all A is moral

????

How about

B owed C money

B bought water from A at inflated prices
therefore B was broke
therefore B couldn't pay C
therefore C killed B
therefore all A are murderers

My logic teacher would NOT approve!

[Jim__]

4. Ummm, suppose I don't have $20?

Does my baby deserve to die? Only the babies of people with $20 deserve to live?

[Bill McBlueState]

7. yeah, that's the gist of it

The whole argument just ignores the fact that lots of people -- especially in New Orleans -- don't *have* $20. Or, maybe they have $30, and blowing 2/3 of it on a sinlge bottle of water seems kinda ridiculous.

Someone needs to remind Stossel that money doesn't grow on trees. I thought everyone knew that old cliche, but maybe not.

[miss_kitty]

6. FAIR loves him

/sarcasm

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=19&media_outlet_id=19

[no name no slogan]

8. Yeah, they've been ripping him a new one for YEARS

Stossel's such an odd case, because he started out as a consumer rights crusader, and has done a complete 180 over the course of his career.

Nobody takes his sorry ass seriously these days. Not since he did those TV specials extolling the virtues of greed a few years back. What a tool.

[Left Is Write]

11. Well, that's what I thought...didn't he used to advocate for the little

guy? Wouldn't the old John Stossel have railed against price gouging?

[Rob H.]

9. He's a loudmouth blowhard who beats up on liberals and...

their "moral relativism" and then he writes something like this? :eyes: Hypocrite much, moustache-boy?

I especially like how he puts exploitation in quotation marks, like it isn't really exploitation, it's actually helping you out! What. A. Bastard.

[Beware the Beast Man]

10. I want to puch that stupid fucking moustache off his face.

[Hugin]

12. I can't believe it!

*shaking head*

My God... What a sick world we live in.

He's obviously ignoring the fact similar planning
by the * administration would've avoided anyone
being without clean water in the first place.

What a bastard! I will never read or listen to
anything he has to say again!

[LaPera]

13. Convoluted logic asshole, right-wing corporate fuck!