[thorncorona]

Ah yes, the supply vs. demand argument. My favorite.

[x] only exists because it is underpriced relative to market demand.

A great question to ask after this is "would i be okay subjecting my child/mother/father to this experience?"

For example, there are 2 tennis courts available on a first come, first serve basis at a park in SF. Because they are free to reserve, and there's more demand than supply, people will bot all the courts at all given times during the day and scalp players for the free reservations.

Or, a car is available for [x] msrp price, plus a 25% "market adjustment" fee. Is this ethical for every dealer in the country to do the same?

[charcircuit]

>Is this ethical for every dealer in the country to do the same?

Yes, if it means that a car that I want is in stock as opposed to having to wait for 6 months I would consider it ethical.

[salawat]

It's in stock. You can't afford it though unless we're being charitable by assuming you're richer than the whales that such an economic practice being pervasive creates.

[isleyaardvark]

Modern laissez faire capitalists don't care ethics.

My memory of learning about "Wealth of Nations" style capitalism is there was an idea that people produce goods and services that other people find useful. So when they trade, both buyer and seller benefit. As opposed to scalpers, who interpose themselves between the two to the detriment of both the buyer and seller, and benefit only to the scalper.

Modern capitalist don't care if they make everything worse, only that someone is making money.