DC Braces for megastorm

[Hauldren Collider]

Lots of people profit off of tragedy and misfortune for a living- just look at doctors who work at hospitals, funeral directors and trial lawyers. Nothing wrong with it.

QFT. I was going to say this and discovered that you beat me to it.

[DinoDoc]

Depends on which public interest you are interested in having served, right?

Which interests were served by the police confiscating generators during Hurricane Katrina in a region that at the time had been left without power from post 58 and how did the public benefit?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Oh wait, I forgot, you're a smug bastard, and you pick and choose parts of the Bible that match your own prejudices, so that you can shove them in people's faces. There are parts that disagree with your own personal moral code, but you know better than God so you just ignore those.

This is incredibly ironic.

Though I'm not surprised.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Which interests were served by the police confiscating generators during Hurricane Katrina in a region that at the time had been left without power from post 58 and how did the public benefit?

We can pick and choose examples of things going overboard on either side, but lets discuss the general premise please.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Lots of people profit off of tragedy and misfortune for a living- just look at doctors who work at hospitals, funeral directors and trial lawyers. Nothing wrong with it.

Let me restate then. People would not like to see business unfairly profit off the misfortune of others. Unfairness is determined, of course, by societal norms. Those who are in the general trade of dealing with misfortune (of the aftermaths thereof) are considered different that those who decide to use their increased demand to charge much higher prices than usual in order to make greater profit. In the vast majority of societies the later is unconsidered immoral.

[Dinner]

Help I'm being oppressed!

For once I agree with Kid.

[DinoDoc]

We can pick and choose examples of things going overboard on either side, but lets discuss the general premise please.

OK. What moral good is served in interfering with free transactions between free people?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Actually, let me save some steps and get to the core of the disagreement (though I honestly thought DD would get it where HC and others may not): moral decisions made by people aren't necessarily the most economically rational decisions. Hell, they may not be rational in any sense - it may just be a collective offending of conscience. However, my belief is that that isn't always bad and may not be that bad the majority of the time (one example - we aren't that keen, morally, on 15 year olds getting married, even if they may as rationally mature as 18 year olds - I'm sure Ozzy can come up with something on this - based on our ideas of when people are able to fully 'consent'). Others will likely disagree. I also believe that our society has become too indebted to rationality and the pendulum of the Enlightenment has swung too far (so to speak).

Have I encapsulated the issues here sufficiently?

[Imran Siddiqui]

OK. What moral good is served in interfering with free transactions between free people?

If the society disagrees that the transaction is morally beneficial. For example, indentured servitude - society does not believe it is morally good for people to contract into x years contract because even if they do it of their own free will, they should be allowed to sell that freedom for an amount of time. One can argue that economically speaking it may be better and more efficient these days, but that wasn't the reason it was abolished in the 1860s in the US, right?

[giblets]

Let me restate then. People would not like to see business unfairly profit off the misfortune of others. Unfairness is determined, of course, by societal norms. Those who are in the general trade of dealing with misfortune (of the aftermaths thereof) are considered different that those who decide to use their increased demand to charge much higher prices than usual in order to make greater profit. In the vast majority of societies the later is unconsidered immoral.

It may be considered immoral, but vilifying those who charge what people are willing to pay is not necessarily the right course of action. Why should we help the poor in inefficient ways by implementing price ceilings instead of finding economically efficient ways to help the poor? Jacking up the price of a needed commodity seems like a dick move but that does not mean it is actually wrong, and if you claim morality is determined by public opinion in a particular area you're essentially saying morality is entirely subjective.

[Imran Siddiqui]

if you claim morality is determined by public opinion in a particular area you're essentially saying morality is entirely subjective.

Not entirely. A lot of morality is subjective, however.

There are general principles of morality that I think exist (not that this is going to earn me any favors but, ones that I think match God's views on what just society should look like); however, I don't necessarily think they are consonant with what is most economically efficient (once again, I know I'm appealing to God, but forgive me - if you treat your neighbor as yourself that may not be efficient).

[Dinner]

OK. What moral good is served in interfering with free transactions between free people?

If I put a gun to your head and said give me all of your money or I will blow your brains out then there would be nothing wrong with that? I mean you did agree to it, right, champ? Stop being such a ****. Extorting from desperate people is immoral you religious hypocrite.

"Give me what I want or you'll die! I see nothing immoral about this!"

[DinoDoc]

(though I honestly thought DD would get it where HC and others may not):

I understand the point you are driving at. I merely disagree with it. It limits the amount of supplies and help people can receive in situations like this and doesn't adequately protect the people price controls are supposed to serve.

[DinoDoc]

If I put a gun to your head ...

... free transactions ...

[Kidlicious]

OK. What moral good is served in interfering with free transactions between free people?

Preventing a moral bad, not doing unto others as we would have done unto us.