So should we also make laws controling the producting and making it unlawfull for companies to produce few units and having customer waits as well?

What value does stores add to the products sold? Because they didn't produce it, they are just selling it, just like scalpers. So they should sell for the price the producer sells it?

I'll say again and perhaps you can read a little on it. Adding value or the value itself isn't a reflex of the pircetag. Or should we as well make a crime to sell a Da Vinci painting for over 100 USD because that was the price it was originally sold at?

As said you can just say I won't buy.

Read at least a little about monopolistic practices. The scalpers can't just buy all products made, at one point or another the cost of buying and revenue from sales won't match. As long as people don't keep paying excessive for the scalpers they won't keep doing it.

Nintendo had issues for 2 or 3 years on stocking, would you fault the scalpers? Wii was being sold for more than PS3. I fault Nintendo.

Thanks god you aren't a congressman, because you would make a law for everything you dislike.

I think you're right about Amazon. I ordered an accessory at regular delivery speeds and tracked it. They didn't even ship it until Thursday (4-5 days after my order) and I got it on Friday. Wtf!

I dislike you defending those scumbags but I would not make a law that says you can't because I believe in free speech. So there goes that argument.

As for a law against scalpers, well I would cause I have this crazy notion that laws should defend the consumer, in this specific case, the weak minded that would fall prey to those "business practices" on top of the smart ones like me that end up not buying a product simply cause all copies were acquired by scalpers. If one would go as far as calling scalping a business practice.

By your reasoning, hardcore drugs should be legal and people should simply say "no" do drug dealers. Tobacco companies should be allowed to advertize cigarettes in schools and it's up to kids and their parents to teach them not to fall for that poison. I could give you a million other examples but I think you get the gist of it.

I'm not defending them and I wouldn't buy from them or be a scalper. But I don't see the point on defending a law against it.

Yes you have a very crazy notion of law, basically a law that defends what you think is right and adapt to your view of justice.

By my reasoning? Yes they should. As much as anyone willing to say company X is being a criminal on its practice without being sued to death.

15 minutes for 5 points? Yeah, no thanks...rather just read an article or something

You don't see a point for such a law or you don't want to see a point for such a law? I just made the point for that law so you see it but you don't want that law implemented. And if you don't want a law that protects people by going against predators, you are by definition defending them.

As for my crazy notion of law that defends what I think is right? Ok, so defending victims of scalpers is wrong? it's crazy? it's only my view?

But then you admit in that last line that yes hardcore drugs should be legal and tobacco companies should be allowed to sell to kids. So with a moral compass that far from north, I don't know what to say anymore. If you think laws should not protect people then, yeah, all is said here.

We've made our points and they are forever divergent but our poins are made.

I don't see the point in the law, I'm very against government control. So you want people to be protected from their own stupidity? They will always find ways to be stupid. And please doesn't try such a lowly falacy of saying if someone isn't positive about creating laws against something they are suportive of it.

My moral compass is that I would never use drugs, never offer to kids, never harm a kid and I'm against anyone doing it, as much as I'm against abortion. But I'm against laws regulating it because the more you give control for the government the more you end up fucked up.

I finished by saying we'll have to disagree and we made our points but you are not happy with that ending of our discussion so fine then.

What I said is no fallacy, we are specifically talking about one issue where there are dishonest people trying to con other people for whatever reason. And now you are twisting this into a different issue: Government control. Well I'm not for governement control either but we are on a very specific topic. If governement control was your primary motive then you would speak of it in general but the fact you wish to let scalpers get away under the pretext of government control, seems a bit far fetched to me.

I don't mind speaking of government control, it's an issue in and of itself. But the fact that we live in a society with a government controlling is just that, a fact. So since it's here, I think the government might as well do its job of protecting the weak or the stupid if we want to call them that. They have laws for everything else so why do you want to make this crime an exception?

Do you game? There is this famous game called Bioshock and there is a book that was written on the world of Bioshock called Bioshock: Rapture by this author called John Shirley. I read that book and I think you should read it. In short it describes a new society founded by a billionaire called Andrew Ryan and this guy escaped the Soviet Union and went to America where he made a fortune. But in the end he was not happy with American capitalism because he thought it was not enough of a freemarket, Andrew dreamed of a freemarket that is 100% a freemarket, where anyone can do literally anything without the governement or laws telling them what to do.

So in theory his dream seemed to be a good idea but then he left America and founded this new society by building an amazing city uner the sea and down there people were free to do business and create whatever they wanted, drugs, weapons, medical experiments, anything. And when very dangerous and experimental drugs gave crazy powers to consumers and afterwards side effects were found where people were losing their minds and started murdering each other, the business of those drugs could simply go on because Andrew believed that no matter what, a free market cannot be regulated and must be left unchecked, if these drugs were somehow wrong, the market would regulate itself as people would simply not buy the drugs anymore, but boy was he wrong...

Suffice to say that things ended in the most horrible manner imaginable. Little girls were genetically altered to be part of a system of collection of a substance that allowed the use of those drugs, but that still did not stop Andrew Ryan. To him if those children were worth not being abused and destroyed for a business, the market again should do something about it, if the market did nothing and business kept going well it meant those little girls only got what they deserved...

Well it's a good read, if you have the chance and I think you'll simply like Andrew Ryan and his ideas. I think you'll see him as the hero of the story.