[kls]

Sorry I was not as clear as I could have been, most of my post was specific to the spying, with some latter cometary on the mindset of people that would do such a thing to that group of people. I agree that price is subjective and in the end it is the purchases responsibility to judge fair value. So long as nothing has been misrepresented, I think a person should be allowed to charge $50,000 for a 2 dollar item if they can get it and their is no duress to the situation (e.g gouging for gas in a shortage). That being said, I would be in favor of a consumer law that required manufacturers to disclose their total cost to produce an item. This would still allow retailers to charge what they feel is fair, but level the playing field for the consumer to see how much they are paying over the cost of production.

[Evbn]

Surprised no one has nailed you for the gas gouging example. During a shortage, raising prices gets the gas to where it is needed most. Raising gas during an emergency ("value prcing") when there is no shortage, is a different matter.

[kls]

Sorry I was not clear, the shortage I was talking about was something like a hurricane. Where people are preying on the desperation of the situation. Sure we could allow an unbridled market in such situation, but I think most would agree that gouging in an emergency goes beyond even the rent seeking of the rent to own establishments.