Amazon Marketplace Absurd Prices - This may top them all
Randy Lane
But in light of an earlier thread, I thought this might be of
interest.
And it isn't exactly a misplaced comma, I don't think so at least.
This is from a large reseller that contnuously systematically adjusts
prices to be competitive.
Mr. Mike
<randy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>And it isn't exactly a misplaced comma, I don't think so at least.
>This is from a large reseller that contnuously systematically adjusts
>prices to be competitive.
I have on occasion e-mailed sellers on Ebay who have ridiculous prices
like this.
Of course, the typical reply is "This is a free market economy, I can
charge whatever I want."
Norman Schwartz
"Randy Lane" <randy...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:15c92684-8bfd-4e0b...@z3g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
Ample justification for a brain MRI for the person that listed it.
>
Matthew�B.�Tepper
typed in news:omjti51amj31fp69l...@4ax.com:
Or, "I only need to sell ONE."
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
Matthew�B.�Tepper
letters to be typed in news:4b2eeed1$0$5010$607e...@cv.net:
No -- already brain-dead, so go ahead and harvest the organs already.
Steve de Mena
It's a mistake. It's not of any interest.
You can get the same SKU at Amazon UK for �3.88 new.
Steve
Bob Harper
> Mr. Mike <m...@spamcop.net> appears to have caused the following letters to be
> typed in news:omjti51amj31fp69l...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 16:38:31 -0800 (PST), Randy Lane
>> <randy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> And it isn't exactly a misplaced comma, I don't think so at least.
>>> This is from a large reseller that contnuously systematically adjusts
>>> prices to be competitive.
>> I have on occasion e-mailed sellers on Ebay who have ridiculous prices
>> like this.
>>
>> Of course, the typical reply is "This is a free market economy, I can
>> charge whatever I want."
>
> Or, "I only need to sell ONE."
>
economic theory.
Bob Harper
Bob Harper
Bob Harper
Matthew�B.�Tepper
letters to be typed in news:4LNXm.381402$8m4.80988@en-nntp-
07.dc1.easynews.com:
> You're no fun! :)
Listen to Steve. He's the cold, hard voice of reason.
Some of the time. Other times, he's kind of fun. ;--)
Kevin N
> Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
> > Mr. Mike <m...@spamcop.net> appears to have caused the following letters to be
>
> >> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 16:38:31 -0800 (PST), Randy Lane
> >> <randy.l...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> And it isn't exactly a misplaced comma, I don't think so at least.
> >>> This is from a large reseller that contnuously systematically adjusts
> >>> prices to be competitive.
> >> I have on occasion e-mailed sellers on Ebay who have ridiculous prices
> >> like this.
>
> >> Of course, the typical reply is "This is a free market economy, I can
> >> charge whatever I want."
>
> > Or, "I only need to sell ONE."
>
> The seller is obviously a charter member of the P.T. Barnum school of
> economic theory.
>
> Bob Harper
I'm sure it was data entry error where two numeric data got entered
into a single field (as what happens when the tab key isn't pressed
all the way). I have bought frequently from the seller (moviemars) as
they generally have very reasonable prices.
On the other hand, sellers who really do offer items at $100+ per disc
are swindlers as far as I am concerned.
John Wiser
[much snippage]
> On the other hand, sellers who really do offer items at $100+ per disc
> are swindlers as far as I am concerned.- Hide quoted text -
>
"Kevin N" <boss...@gmail.com> wrote: [much snippage]
> On the other hand, sellers who really do offer items at $100+
> per disc are swindlers as far as I am concerned.
Mr. N,
I have CDs on sale through Amazon from $12.50 to "$100+"
Please make quite sure you never order anything at any price
from ceeclef, because it would be a waste of your time,
incurring immediate cancellation.
While we're at it, to paraphrase Tepper....plonk!
--
John Wiser
Jicotea Used Books
Howells NY 10932 0136 USA
cee...@gmail.com
http://www.amazon.com/shops/ceeclef
Recovered Reviewer
> On the other hand, sellers who really do offer items at $100+
> per disc are swindlers as far as I am concerned.
Mr. N,
Mr. Mike
<cee...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>Please make quite sure you never order anything at any price
>from ceeclef
How the heck can search for a specific seller on amazon.com?
John Wiser
> On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 17:24:28 -0500, "Recovered Reviewer"
>
> >Please make quite sure you never order anything at any price
> >from ceeclef
>
> How the heck can search for a specific seller on amazon.com?
Look at the last line of my signature.
Substitute the known Amazon name
of any seller for "ceeclef" and pop it in
the address slot and hit return. If you are on
any Amazon sale page click on the seller's name
and obtain a profile and a link to that seller's Amazon
Marketplace storefront. Try, for example "lombardmusic"
to see another rmcr denizen's offerings.
--
John Wiser
Jicotea Used Books
Howells NY 10932 0136 USA
Matthew�B.�Tepper
to be typed in
news:f3733f19-7b8c-450b...@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:
> On Dec 21, 11:53�am, Bob Harper <bob.har...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
>> > Mr. Mike <m...@spamcop.net> appears to have caused the following
>> > letters to be typed
>> > innews:omjti51amj31fp69l...@4ax.com:
>>
>> >> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 16:38:31 -0800 (PST), Randy Lane
>> >> <randy.l...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>> And it isn't exactly a misplaced comma, I don't think so at least.
>> >>> This is from a large reseller that contnuously systematically
>> >>> adjusts prices to be competitive.
>> >>
>> >> I have on occasion e-mailed sellers on Ebay who have ridiculous
>> >> prices like this.
>>
>> >> Of course, the typical reply is "This is a free market economy, I
>> >> can charge whatever I want."
>>
>> > Or, "I only need to sell ONE."
>>
>> The seller is obviously a charter member of the P.T. Barnum school of
>> economic theory.
>
> I'm sure it was data entry error where two numeric data got entered
> into a single field (as what happens when the tab key isn't pressed
> all the way). I have bought frequently from the seller (moviemars) as
> they generally have very reasonable prices.
>
> On the other hand, sellers who really do offer items at $100+ per disc
> are swindlers as far as I am concerned.
But there actually are some items which typically sell for $100+, like
Martzy LPs. I don't understand why, although she was certainly a good
fiddler, but that's what they go for.
Mr. Mike
<oy�@earthlink.net> wrote:
>But there actually are some items which typically sell for $100+, like
>Martzy LPs. I don't understand why, although she was certainly a good
>fiddler, but that's what they go for.
Another item is Roberto Gerhard's The Plague, conducted by Dorati on
Headline. Check completed listings at Ebay at the moment, there are
three copies that sold at prices ranging between about $80 to $200.
Matthew�B.�Tepper
You mean this one, selling for $9.98 at amazon.com?
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000EQHV9I
Mr. Mike
<oy�@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> Another item is Roberto Gerhard's The Plague, conducted by Dorati on
>> Headline. Check completed listings at Ebay at the moment, there are
>> three copies that sold at prices ranging between about $80 to $200.
>
>You mean this one, selling for $9.98 at amazon.com?
That is the CD of the LP that sells for $100 and up.
td
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 00:53:05 -0600, "Matthew B. Tepper"
>
> >> Another item is Roberto Gerhard's The Plague, conducted by Dorati on
> >> Headline. Check completed listings at Ebay at the moment, there are
> >> three copies that sold at prices ranging between about $80 to $200.
>
> >You mean this one, selling for $9.98 at amazon.com?
>
> That is the CD of the LP that sells for $100 and up.
That LP is one recommended years ago by Harry Pearson on one of his
SuperDisc lists.
All the Headline LPs are quite rare, but the recording quality is no
better than on the average Decca LP of the same period, in my opinion.
TD
Matthew�B.�Tepper
What the heck is so special about the LP?
Bob Lombard
> Mr. Mike <m...@spamcop.net> appears to have caused the following letters to be
> typed in news:29e1j591uqdphhjtq...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 00:53:05 -0600, "Matthew B. Tepper"
>> <oy�@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> Another item is Roberto Gerhard's The Plague, conducted by Dorati on
>>>> Headline. Check completed listings at Ebay at the moment, there are
>>>> three copies that sold at prices ranging between about $80 to $200.
>>> You mean this one, selling for $9.98 at amazon.com?
>> That is the CD of the LP that sells for $100 and up.
>
> What the heck is so special about the LP?
>
It doesn't exhibit the evil effects of digitalization. All those ones
and zeros, y'know. Plus, the CD can't effectively utilize the
turntable that cost as much as a good diesel tractor.
bl
--
Music, a few books, a few movies
LombardMusic
http://www.amazon.com/shops/A3NRY9P3TNNXNA
Mr. Mike
<oy�@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> That is the CD of the LP that sells for $100 and up.
>
>What the heck is so special about the LP?
Because slobbering audio lunatics have opinions about this recording
like the following (taken from Ebay item 380184877260, referred to in
earlier posting of mine):
Let's Cut Right To The Audio Chase :
There Are But A Handful Of Records Of True Note . I Mean, Shockers .
Records That You Feel On Your Skin, They Are That Good . The Reiner
ZARATHUSTRA, Dorati's FIREBIRD, Any Of The Gales, The Early Sheffield
Town Halls . And, Of Course, This � The DECCA Head-6 Of Roberto
Gerhard's THE PLAGUE .
Better Staging, I Promise You, Cannot Be Found On Vinyl . The Sonics,
The Work Itself, The Hall, The Reading �. All Legendary .
Once, In A Large Room Of Chatty Audiophiles And Music Lovers Who Had
Not Heard This Piece, I Eased Up The Volume Through A Set Of Very
Large Electrostatics . The Opening Measures ---- Those Whispers Of
"The Rats ...." --- Was All It Took, As, Quietly, Listeners Scrambled
For Their Seats .
This Is Not Just A Very Good Record . It Is Among The Ten Best I Have
Ever Heard, Produced By Anyone, Anywhere . Better Yet, This Is The
Original Decca Head Red FFSS Label, The Heavy Platter, And It Sings .
Word Of Warning, Though : This Is A Hi-Fi Eater If You Play It Too
Loud . Just Find The Exact Volume That Places You As A Listener
Within The Original Acoustic . From There, It Will Be Magic, Complete
.
Note, Too, Please --- And I Mean This --- Do Not Play This Record In
The Presence Of Small Children, At Least Until You Hear It First .
This Disc, I Warn You, Is Downright Scary . (It Could Easily Haunt A
Child .)
Definitely One Of The Choices I�d Make, If Only Allowed 10 Records On
A Desert Island . An Audiophile, Music - Lover Gem, Not To Be Missed .
Bob Harper
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 09:35:51 -0600, "Matthew B. Tepper"
> <oy�@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>> That is the CD of the LP that sells for $100 and up.
>> What the heck is so special about the LP?
>
> Because slobbering audio lunatics have opinions about this recording
> like the following (taken from Ebay item 380184877260, referred to in
> earlier posting of mine):
>
> Let's Cut Right To The Audio Chase :
>
> There Are But A Handful Of Records Of True Note . I Mean, Shockers .
> Records That You Feel On Your Skin, They Are That Good . The Reiner
> ZARATHUSTRA, Dorati's FIREBIRD, Any Of The Gales, The Early Sheffield
> Gerhard's THE PLAGUE .
>
> Better Staging, I Promise You, Cannot Be Found On Vinyl . The Sonics,
> Once, In A Large Room Of Chatty Audiophiles And Music Lovers Who Had
> Not Heard This Piece, I Eased Up The Volume Through A Set Of Very
> Large Electrostatics . The Opening Measures ---- Those Whispers Of
> "The Rats ...." --- Was All It Took, As, Quietly, Listeners Scrambled
> For Their Seats .
>
> This Is Not Just A Very Good Record . It Is Among The Ten Best I Have
> Ever Heard, Produced By Anyone, Anywhere . Better Yet, This Is The
> Original Decca Head Red FFSS Label, The Heavy Platter, And It Sings .
>
> Word Of Warning, Though : This Is A Hi-Fi Eater If You Play It Too
> Loud . Just Find The Exact Volume That Places You As A Listener
> Within The Original Acoustic . From There, It Will Be Magic, Complete
> .
> Note, Too, Please --- And I Mean This --- Do Not Play This Record In
> The Presence Of Small Children, At Least Until You Hear It First .
> This Disc, I Warn You, Is Downright Scary . (It Could Easily Haunt A
> Child .)
>
> A Desert Island . An Audiophile, Music - Lover Gem, Not To Be Missed .
>
Bob Harper
Matthew�B.�Tepper
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 09:35:51 -0600, "Matthew�B.�Tepper"
><oy�@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>> That is the CD of the LP that sells for $100 and up.
>>
>>What the heck is so special about the LP?
>
> Because slobbering audio lunatics have opinions about this recording
> like the following (taken from Ebay item 380184877260, referred to in
> earlier posting of mine):
>
> Let's Cut Right To The Audio Chase :
>
> There Are But A Handful Of Records Of True Note . I Mean, Shockers .
> Records That You Feel On Your Skin, They Are That Good . The Reiner
> ZARATHUSTRA, Dorati's FIREBIRD, Any Of The Gales, The Early Sheffield
> Town Halls . And, Of Course, This � The DECCA Head-6 Of Roberto
> Gerhard's THE PLAGUE .
[snip more of the creepy same]
Ah, I get it now. So some "expert" in some booga-booga magazine said it's
the bee's knees. I wonder how many copies that "expert" had stashed away
that he could then sell fox big bucks via multiple intermediaries?
Kevin N
> Kevin N <bossk...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following letters
> to be typed innews:f3733f19-7b8c-450b...@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:
I don't have any comments on collector's items. But it is endlessly
frustrating to add a disc to my wish list or saved shopping cart, only
to come back and find it has gone out of print, and all available
copies can only be bought for some multiple of the original list
price. I'm sure I'm pissing off some of the free market hawks here,
but sellers who do so are no better than people selling bottled water
at $20 a bottle simply because they can. Not to mention it is free
market hawks that got us into the mess we're in.
Kevin N
> On Dec 21, 4:56 pm, Kevin N wrote:
>
> [much snippage]
>
> > On the other hand, sellers who really do offer items at $100+ per disc
> > are swindlers as far as I am concerned.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > On the other hand, sellers who really do offer items at $100+
> > per disc are swindlers as far as I am concerned.
>
> Mr. N,
> I have CDs on sale through Amazon from $12.50 to "$100+"
> Please make quite sure you never order anything at any price
> from ceeclef, because it would be a waste of your time,
> incurring immediate cancellation.
You needn't worry about that. The late Sy Syms would have described me
as his best customer. Leave it to those born every minute according to
P. T. Barnum to keep your store in business.
> While we're at it, to paraphrase Tepper....plonk!
Boohoohoohoo!
Gerard
> Mr. Mike wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 09:35:51 -0600, "Matthew B. Tepper"
> > <oy�@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > > > That is the CD of the LP that sells for $100 and up.
> > > What the heck is so special about the LP?
> >
> > Because slobbering audio lunatics have opinions about this recording
> > like the following (taken from Ebay item 380184877260, referred to
> > in earlier posting of mine):
> >
> > Let's Cut Right To The Audio Chase :
> >
> > There Are But A Handful Of Records Of True Note . I Mean, Shockers .
> > Records That You Feel On Your Skin, They Are That Good . The Reiner
> > ZARATHUSTRA, Dorati's FIREBIRD, Any Of The Gales, The Early
> > Roberto Gerhard's THE PLAGUE .
> >
> > Better Staging, I Promise You, Cannot Be Found On Vinyl . The
> >
> > Once, In A Large Room Of Chatty Audiophiles And Music Lovers Who Had
> > Not Heard This Piece, I Eased Up The Volume Through A Set Of Very
> > Large Electrostatics . The Opening Measures ---- Those Whispers Of
> > "The Rats ...." --- Was All It Took, As, Quietly, Listeners
> > Scrambled For Their Seats .
> >
> > This Is Not Just A Very Good Record . It Is Among The Ten Best I
> > Have Ever Heard, Produced By Anyone, Anywhere . Better Yet, This
> > Is The Original Decca Head Red FFSS Label, The Heavy Platter, And
> > It Sings .
> >
> > Word Of Warning, Though : This Is A Hi-Fi Eater If You Play It Too
> > Loud . Just Find The Exact Volume That Places You As A Listener
> > Within The Original Acoustic . From There, It Will Be Magic,
> > Complete .
> > Note, Too, Please --- And I Mean This --- Do Not Play This Record In
> > The Presence Of Small Children, At Least Until You Hear It First .
> > This Disc, I Warn You, Is Downright Scary . (It Could Easily Haunt
> > A Child .)
> >
> > On A Desert Island . An Audiophile, Music - Lover Gem, Not To Be
> > Missed .
> >
> Hm. Interesting capitalization style.
>
> Bob Harper
And I don't understand why we ever have discussed hundreds or thousands other
recordings, while we could have done with 10 (all the rest must be far
inferior).
Bob Harper
(snip)
> I don't have any comments on collector's items. But it is endlessly
> frustrating to add a disc to my wish list or saved shopping cart, only
> to come back and find it has gone out of print, and all available
> copies can only be bought for some multiple of the original list
> price. I'm sure I'm pissing off some of the free market hawks here,
> but sellers who do so are no better than people selling bottled water
> at $20 a bottle simply because they can. Not to mention it is free
> market hawks that got us into the mess we're in.
Um, have you ever heard of the phenomenon known as supply and demand?
Bob Harper
Bob Harper
(snip)
> And I don't understand why we ever have discussed hundreds or thousands other
> recordings, while we could have done with 10 (all the rest must be far
> inferior).
>
>
constantly tweaking systems that cost 10 to 100 times more than our
music collections instead of talking (occasionally, at any rate) about
music in this place. :)
Bob Harper
Matthew�B.�Tepper
letters to be typed in news:yl8Ym.249655$mn3.145423@en-nntp-
03.dc1.easynews.com:
Um, have you ever heard of the phenomena known as scalping and gouging?
Matthew�B.�Tepper
to be typed in news:d8de8a87-0e1c-4e6c-bb51-
193614...@s19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com:
> On Dec 21, 8:58�pm, "Matthew�B.�Tepper" <oy�@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> But there actually are some items which typically sell for $100+, like
>> Martzy LPs. �I don't understand why, although she was certainly a good
>> fiddler, but that's what they go for.
>
> I don't have any comments on collector's items. But it is endlessly
> frustrating to add a disc to my wish list or saved shopping cart, only to
> come back and find it has gone out of print, and all available copies can
> only be bought for some multiple of the original list price. I'm sure I'm
> pissing off some of the free market hawks here, but sellers who do so are
> no better than people selling bottled water at $20 a bottle simply
> because they can. Not to mention it is free market hawks that got us into
> the mess we're in.
I agree completely. When I see something like that, I'll go without.
Screw them!
Kip Williams
> You needn't worry about that. The late Sy Syms would have described me
> as his best customer. Leave it to those born every minute according to
> P. T. Barnum to keep your store in business.
Actually, the quote you refer obliquely to was said -about- Barnum by
David Hannum.
http://www.historybuff.com/library/refbarnum.html
Kip W
Kip Williams
> Mr. Mike wrote:
...
>> Definitely One Of The Choices I�d Make, If Only Allowed 10 Records On
>> A Desert Island . An Audiophile, Music - Lover Gem, Not To Be Missed .
>>
> Hm. Interesting capitalization style.
Some programs will do that automatically. It's an option in InDesign,
for instance.
Kip W
Jay
wrote:
> "Kevin N" <bossk...@gmail.com> wrote: [much snippage]
> > On the other hand, sellers who really do offer items at $100+
> > per disc are swindlers as far as I am concerned.
>
> Mr. N,
> I have CDs on sale through Amazon from $12.50 to "$100+"
> Please make quite sure you never order anything at any price
> from ceeclef, because it would be a waste of your time,
> incurring immediate cancellation.
> While we're at it, to paraphrase Tepper....plonk!
> --
> John Wiser
> Jicotea Used Books
> Howells NY 10932 0136 USA
As I write this, 5:30 pm, Tues. Dec. 22, 2009, you have over 2,000
items for sale. Is there any way to browse your ceeclef store for
classical CDs? Unless I know what I want, it would seem to take
forever. And sometimes I don't know what I want until I see it. But
I'm not going to look at 2,000+ items.
I've always wondered why AM makes this so difficult, which then makes
me wonder if there's just something I'm not doing right.
Thanks.
Paul Penna
<2a020910-7b54-4819...@z7g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
Jay <jayfa...@gmail.com> wrote:
Type [Audio CD] in the Jicotea Used Book search box. I came up with 301
items on 13 pages.
Allen
set that Harper publish around 1920. I had read and reread almost
everything in it by the time I finished elementary school. Among the
many short works in the set was a story about the Cardiff Giant, in a
true Twain style. I hadn't thought about that hunk of stone in many
years, until your post. Tanks.
Allen
number_six
There was a chapter about the Cardiff Giant -- and another about
Piltdown Man -- in a compendium of frauds and hoaxes that my parents
had, and that I read as a kid. We also had that Twain set (from my
Grandmother's generation), in green binding. There was a volume
missing and I was able to replace it using bookfinder.com.
Bob Lombard
Excellent solution. You can also use the search box to search by
composer (gets nearly all of them) or by performer (gets most of
them). The big thing that's often ineffective is a search by genre,
dam it.
bl
--
Bob Harper
> Bob Harper <bob.h...@comcast.net> appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed in news:yl8Ym.249655$mn3.145423@en-nntp-
> 03.dc1.easynews.com:
>
>> Kevin N wrote:
>> (snip)
>>> I don't have any comments on collector's items. But it is endlessly
>>> frustrating to add a disc to my wish list or saved shopping cart, only
>>> to come back and find it has gone out of print, and all available copies
>>> can only be bought for some multiple of the original list price. I'm sure
>>> I'm pissing off some of the free market hawks here, but sellers who do so
>>> are no better than people selling bottled water at $20 a bottle simply
>>> because they can. Not to mention it is free market hawks that got us into
>>> the mess we're in.
>> Um, have you ever heard of the phenomenon known as supply and demand?
>
> Um, have you ever heard of the phenomena known as scalping and gouging?
>
judgments. Do not confuse the two.
Bob Harper
Bob Harper
> Kevin N <boss...@gmail.com> appears to have caused the following letters
> to be typed in news:d8de8a87-0e1c-4e6c-bb51-
> 193614...@s19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Dec 21, 8:58 pm, "Matthew B. Tepper" <oy�@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>> But there actually are some items which typically sell for $100+, like
>>> Martzy LPs. I don't understand why, although she was certainly a good
>>> fiddler, but that's what they go for.
>> I don't have any comments on collector's items. But it is endlessly
>> frustrating to add a disc to my wish list or saved shopping cart, only to
>> come back and find it has gone out of print, and all available copies can
>> only be bought for some multiple of the original list price. I'm sure I'm
>> pissing off some of the free market hawks here, but sellers who do so are
>> no better than people selling bottled water at $20 a bottle simply
>> because they can. Not to mention it is free market hawks that got us into
>> the mess we're in.
>
> I agree completely. When I see something like that, I'll go without.
> Screw them!
>
free to make such decisions.
Bob Harper
Bob Harper
Bob Harper
Matthew�B.�Tepper
Allen
bookstore when it was published. It was missing _two_ volumes--Sawyer
and Finn--which she had loaned to a young boy whose house burned down. I
found replacements in a used book store a long time ago. My favorite
short work in the set is "Some Learned Fables for Good Old Boys and
Girls". I first read it when I was in the third grade and thought it was
very funny. I have no idea how many times I reread it, but by fifth
grade I understood what he was really saying. That short work alone
should have won him the Nobel, whose judges snubbed both Twain and
Tolstoy (and many other worthies later), awarding the prize to authors
who are remembered today mainly because they got that trip to Stockholm.
Allen
Kip Williams
> Kip Williams wrote:
>> Kevin N wrote:
>>
>>> You needn't worry about that. The late Sy Syms would have described me
>>> as his best customer. Leave it to those born every minute according to
>>> P. T. Barnum to keep your store in business.
>>
>> Actually, the quote you refer obliquely to was said -about- Barnum by
>> David Hannum.
>>
>> http://www.historybuff.com/library/refbarnum.html
>>
> set that Harper publish around 1920. I had read and reread almost
> everything in it by the time I finished elementary school. Among the
> many short works in the set was a story about the Cardiff Giant, in a
> true Twain style. I hadn't thought about that hunk of stone in many
> years, until your post. Tanks.
I've been putting books into my new Sony Reader. Thanks to a deal they
have with Google, I can get scans of a lot of ex-library volumes, which
is helping me to avoid even the $1 and $2 prices for some of the Twain
books. What I really wish I could get would be the Library of America
two-volume set of his tales, speeches, sketches, and essays. I'd pay
twenty bucks for that, though they'd probably ask sixty or seventy. (Who
knew paper and printing were irrelevant to the price of a book?)
Of course, with the Google scans, you get what you pay for, like Jerome
K. Jerome's "THREE MEN IN A BOAT, TO SAT [sic] NOTHING OF THE DOG." Then
again, I paid a couple of dollars for the "CANTERBURRY TALES" too, so
caveat emptor, I guess.
I just finished putting an ebook of my own short pieces together last
night, complete with clickable index. Very satisfying.
Kip W
Bob Harper
> Bob Harper <bob.h...@comcast.net> appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed in
> news:I_eYm.398231$Jp1.3...@en-nntp-06.dc1.easynews.com:
>
>> Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
>>> Bob Harper <bob.h...@comcast.net> appears to have caused the
>>> following letters to be typed in news:yl8Ym.249655$mn3.145423@en-nntp-
>>> 03.dc1.easynews.com:
>>>
>>>> Kevin N wrote:
>>>> (snip)
>>>>> I don't have any comments on collector's items. But it is endlessly
>>>>> frustrating to add a disc to my wish list or saved shopping cart,
>>>>> only to come back and find it has gone out of print, and all
>>>>> available copies can only be bought for some multiple of the original
>>>>> list price. I'm sure I'm pissing off some of the free market hawks
>>>>> here, but sellers who do so are no better than people selling bottled
>>>>> water at $20 a bottle simply because they can. Not to mention it is
>>>>> free market hawks that got us into the mess we're in.
>>>> Um, have you ever heard of the phenomenon known as supply and demand?
>>> Um, have you ever heard of the phenomena known as scalping and gouging?
>>>
>> Supply and demand is a reality. 'Scalping and gouging' are value
>> judgments. Do not confuse the two.
>
> The one is an implementation of the other.
>
charging more than which should be impermissible. For necessities during
natural disasters this might make sense, but for a CD you want but for
which you are unwilling to pay the market price it makes none.
Bob Harper
Matthew�B.�Tepper
letters to be typed in news:2jpYm.73881$de6....@newsfe21.iad:
> Of course, with the Google scans, you get what you pay for, like Jerome
> K. Jerome's "THREE MEN IN A BOAT, TO SAT [sic] NOTHING OF THE DOG." Then
> again, I paid a couple of dollars for the "CANTERBURRY TALES" too, so
> caveat emptor, I guess.
I'm afraid I'm going to have to be Samuel T. Cogley until scanning methods
(or, more likely, proofreading by hu-mans) gets a whole lot better.
Jay
> In article
> <2a020910-7b54-4819-a48b-a6cf8ffa2...@z7g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
Thank you so much. That's très "why didn't I think of that?"
Steve de Mena
> Kip Williams <k...@rochester.rr.com> appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed in news:2jpYm.73881$de6....@newsfe21.iad:
>
>> Of course, with the Google scans, you get what you pay for, like Jerome
>> K. Jerome's "THREE MEN IN A BOAT, TO SAT [sic] NOTHING OF THE DOG." Then
>> again, I paid a couple of dollars for the "CANTERBURRY TALES" too, so
>> caveat emptor, I guess.
>
> I'm afraid I'm going to have to be Samuel T. Cogley until scanning methods
> (or, more likely, proofreading by hu-mans) gets a whole lot better.
Did you realize we all help with Google's OCR efforts every time we
fill in a reCAPTCHA box?
Steve
Matthew�B.�Tepper
letters to be typed in news:jNWdnU-Szbti3a7W...@giganews.com:
That's very true; one should beware, however, because some of those are
attempts by spammers to create more throwaway Gmail accounts. Be careful if
any Facebook application asks you to fill out a reCAPTCHA.
John Wiser
> Bob Harper <bob.h...@comcast.net> yadda yadda
>> Kevin N wrote:
>> (snip)
>>> I don't have any comments on collector's items. But it is endlessly
>>> frustrating to add a disc to my wish list or saved shopping cart, only
>>> to come back and find it has gone out of print, and all available copies
>>> can only be bought for some multiple of the original list price. I'm
>>> sure
>>> I'm pissing off some of the free market hawks here, but sellers who do
>>> so
>>> are no better than people selling bottled water at $20 a bottle simply
>>> because they can. Not to mention it is free market hawks that got us
>>> into
>>> the mess we're in.
>>
>> Um, have you ever heard of the phenomenon known as supply and demand?
>
> Um, have you ever heard of the phenomena known as scalping and gouging?
>
A proposed New Year's Resolution:
Heed the precept of old, Carpe Diem.
You and Tepper appear to belong
to that entertaining subspecies of Hom. sap.,
the Schnorrer, aggravated in Tepper's case
by a world-eating sense of entitlement.
I would judge my Amazon selling to be rather successful, and value my time
and effort sufficiently to avoid listing items at prices much under
US$12.50.
RMCR readers may directly benefit from that, as I am accumulating many many
attractive CDs which I will dispose of here for from US$2.00 to 5.00, none
higher
with shipping at exact cost and no hesitation to ship abroad. Write for the
list to cee...@gmail.com. It will be mailed simultaneously to all
applicants
at 10 PM Eastern Standard Time (GMT -4 hours) on Saturday, 26 December 2009.
For buyers, first come first serve. Google's gmail timestamp rules.
Happy holidays to all.
--
John Wiser
Jicotea Used Books
Howells NY 10932 0136 USA
Frank Berger
> On Dec 21, 11:53 am, Bob Harper <bob.har...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
>>> Mr. Mike <m...@spamcop.net> appears to have caused the following
>>> letters to be typed
>>> innews:omjti51amj31fp69l...@4ax.com:
>>
>>>> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 16:38:31 -0800 (PST), Randy Lane
>>>> <randy.l...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> And it isn't exactly a misplaced comma, I don't think so at least.
>>>>> This is from a large reseller that contnuously systematically
>>>>> adjusts prices to be competitive.
>>>> I have on occasion e-mailed sellers on Ebay who have ridiculous
>>>> prices like this.
>>
>>>> Of course, the typical reply is "This is a free market economy, I
>>>> can charge whatever I want."
>>
>>> Or, "I only need to sell ONE."
>>
>> The seller is obviously a charter member of the P.T. Barnum school of
>> economic theory.
>>
>> Bob Harper
>
> I'm sure it was data entry error where two numeric data got entered
> into a single field (as what happens when the tab key isn't pressed
> all the way). I have bought frequently from the seller (moviemars) as
> they generally have very reasonable prices.
>
> On the other hand, sellers who really do offer items at $100+ per disc
> are swindlers as far as I am concerned.
Let's see. I have a disk that I am not willing to part with for less than
$100. You've been looking for this disk for years and are willing to pay
$100. You call this a swindle? How could that be? If it *is* a swindle
that implies that it would be ethical for you (or someone else) to force me
to sell it for less than $100 or keep it forever. That would leave both
parties worse off, as they would have made the exchange at $100 voluntarily
where must mean both considered themselves better off.
I know you are goint to disagree with this analysis and am interested to
hear your arguments.
Frank Berger
>> letters
>> to be typed
>> innews:f3733f19-7b8c-450b...@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Dec 21, 11:53 am, Bob Harper <bob.har...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
>>>>> Mr. Mike <m...@spamcop.net> appears to have caused the following
>>>>> letters to be typed
>>>>> innews:omjti51amj31fp69l...@4ax.com:
>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 16:38:31 -0800 (PST), Randy Lane
>>>>>> <randy.l...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> And it isn't exactly a misplaced comma, I don't think so at
>>>>>>> least. This is from a large reseller that contnuously
>>>>>>> systematically adjusts prices to be competitive.
>>
>>>>>> I have on occasion e-mailed sellers on Ebay who have ridiculous
>>>>>> prices like this.
>>
>>>>>> Of course, the typical reply is "This is a free market economy, I
>>>>>> can charge whatever I want."
>>
>>>>> Or, "I only need to sell ONE."
>>
>>>> The seller is obviously a charter member of the P.T. Barnum school
>>>> of economic theory.
>>
>>> into a single field (as what happens when the tab key isn't pressed
>>> all the way). I have bought frequently from the seller (moviemars)
>>> as they generally have very reasonable prices.
>>
>>> On the other hand, sellers who really do offer items at $100+ per
>>> disc are swindlers as far as I am concerned.
>>
>> like
>> Martzy LPs. I don't understand why, although she was certainly a good
>> fiddler, but that's what they go for.
>
>
> frustrating to add a disc to my wish list or saved shopping cart, only
> to come back and find it has gone out of print, and all available
> copies can only be bought for some multiple of the original list
> price. I'm sure I'm pissing off some of the free market hawks here,
> but sellers who do so are no better than people selling bottled water
> at $20 a bottle simply because they can. Not to mention it is free
> market hawks that got us into the mess we're in.
I've posted this instructional message before, but you apparently didn't see
it or don't believe it, so I thought you would benefit from it again.
Suppose a hurricane is coming to Houston. The roads are packed with people
evacuating. You own the last 7/11 on the way out of town and have a nice
inventory of water and other goods. If you are not induced to stay behind
and sell your stuff to the evacuees at a very nice profit (what you call
gouging), I predict that you are going to be in your car leaving town with
the other evacuees. You will lock up your merchandise. People who would
have been willing to pay $10 or even $20 for a bottle of water to give to
their thirsty, screaming children will go without. Nice going.
Gerard
>
> Let's see. I have a disk that I am not willing to part with for less
> than $100.
Why?
Why not sell it for $30?
I suppose only becaue you hope for money than the disk is worth.
If the disk is more worth than $30 to you, why do you want to sell it anyway?
wkasimer
> > Let's see. I have a disk that I am not willing to part with for less
> > than $100.
>
> Why?
> Why not sell it for $30?
If he isn't willing to part with it for less than $100, then to *him*
it's worth $100. Since you won't pay more than $30, that's all that
it's worth to *you*.
Bill
wkasimer
> I'm sure I'm pissing off some of the free market hawks here,
> but sellers who do so are no better than people selling bottled water
> at $20 a bottle simply because they can.
Water is a necessity of life. A CD is not.
You think the price of a CD is too high? Fine - don't buy it.
Bill
Gerard
> On Dec 24, 2:56 pm, "Gerard" <ghen_nospam_driksen�@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Let's see. I have a disk that I am not willing to part with for
> > > less than $100.
> >
> > Why?
> > Why not sell it for $30?
>
> If he isn't willing to part with it for less than $100, then to *him*
> it's worth $100. Since you won't pay more than $30, that's all that
> it's worth to *you*.
>
> Bill
So why sell it if it's so much worth to *him* ?
wagnerfan
news:ed2b7bef-b1eb-448c...@37g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
Bill
I don't get the problem - the seller fixes a price based on whatever
personal reasons or strictly monetary reasons and the buyer decides if he
wants it at that price. So what??? Wagner fan
Kip Williams
> Suppose a hurricane is coming to Houston. The roads are packed with people
> evacuating. You own the last 7/11 on the way out of town and have a nice
> inventory of water and other goods. If you are not induced to stay behind
> and sell your stuff to the evacuees at a very nice profit (what you call
> gouging), I predict that you are going to be in your car leaving town with
> the other evacuees. You will lock up your merchandise. People who would
> have been willing to pay $10 or even $20 for a bottle of water to give to
> their thirsty, screaming children will go without. Nice going.
I remember when the hurricane came to Houston. My first one.
I also remember when Isabel came to Virginia, knocking out our power for
ten days or so. I went out on my bike, and our grocery, Harris Teeter,
had managed to reopen a day or so after it hit, operating with generator
power and only able to sell canned goods in the dimly lit cavern that
was their store.
They also gave out gallons of spring water and bags of ice. Within a
couple of days, this operation had gotten so big that they were doing
the giving at a football stadium not far from our house.
I told them afterwards that they had my business for as long as I was
still in town, and they did.
(I can imagine one day someone finding somebody bleeding in a ditch,
begging for help. "I remember you! You're the guy with the 7-11 who
charged $15 for 20 oz of water after the hurricane. Sure I'll call an
ambulance for you. How much money do you have? In the bank, I mean.")
Kip W
Gerard
> "wkasimer" <wkas...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:ed2b7bef-b1eb-448c...@37g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 22, 1:06 pm, Kevin N <bossk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm sure I'm pissing off some of the free market hawks here,
> > but sellers who do so are no better than people selling bottled
> > water at $20 a bottle simply because they can.
>
> Water is a necessity of life. A CD is not.
>
> You think the price of a CD is too high? Fine - don't buy it.
>
> Bill
>
>
> I don't get the problem - the seller fixes a price based on whatever
> personal reasons or strictly monetary reasons
Not strictly monetary reasons. It's mor elike blackmailing reasons.
> and the buyer decides
> if he wants it at that price. So what??? Wagner fan
So what kind of animals are those?
Bob Harper
that he believes (rightly or wrongly) that it will be worth $100 to
*someone*. If he *needs* to sell it, he'll reduce the price until he
gets a buyer willing to pay that much. It's called the free market.
Bob Harper
Bob Harper
they displayed the virtue of charity, savvy in that they got the
response they did from you--I'm sure the profit they made on future
sales to you, and others who had the same reaction, dwarfed what they
gave up by giving water and ice away for a few days. There's nothing
wrong with that.
OTOH, your promised reaction to the guy in the ditch reminds one of the
Parable of the Good Samaritan, except that in this version you're not
playing the Samaritan, but one of the other two.
Bob Harper
Gerard
No, no. He said "a disk that I am not willing to part with for less than $100".
He never said that he'll reduce the price; that's your fantasy.
If he *needs* to sell it, he'll not ask $100 (unless he knows that some people
are willing to pay that immediately).
> It's called the free market.
>
Serious?
Bob Harper
that I could have expressed myself more clearly). If he's not willing to
part with it for less than $100, then yes, it's worth that to him. If
you want it, you have to offer him more than that. What's the problem?
There is, however, no indication that his unwillingness to part with it
for less than $100 is absolute and unchangeable. If he needs money more
than he wants to hang on to the disc, and no one is willing to offer
$100, he'll have to reduce the price or forgo *any* money. Again, that's
his decision, and is of the essence of the free market. The notion that
it is 'wrong' for him to ask more than a third party believes it is
'worth' is one I find presumptuous, wrong-headed, and deleterious to
freedom.
Bob Harper
Frank Berger
Selling the water for less than what he could get for it would be an act of
charity. A wonderful thing. But do we have the right to determine how
much, when and where someone else has to give?
Frank Berger
It's also called mutually beneficial exchange.
Kip Williams
> Kip Williams wrote:
>> I also remember when Isabel came to Virginia, knocking out our power
>> for ten days or so. I went out on my bike, and our grocery, Harris
>> Teeter, had managed to reopen a day or so after it hit, operating with
>> generator power and only able to sell canned goods in the dimly lit
>> cavern that was their store.
>>
>> They also gave out gallons of spring water and bags of ice. Within a
>> couple of days, this operation had gotten so big that they were doing
>> the giving at a football stadium not far from our house.
>>
>> I told them afterwards that they had my business for as long as I was
>> still in town, and they did.
>>
>> (I can imagine one day someone finding somebody bleeding in a ditch,
>> begging for help. "I remember you! You're the guy with the 7-11 who
>> charged $15 for 20 oz of water after the hurricane. Sure I'll call an
>> ambulance for you. How much money do you have? In the bank, I mean.")
>>
> What your grocery did was both admirable and savvy. Admirable in that
> they displayed the virtue of charity, savvy in that they got the
> response they did from you--I'm sure the profit they made on future
> sales to you, and others who had the same reaction, dwarfed what they
> gave up by giving water and ice away for a few days. There's nothing
> wrong with that.
>
> OTOH, your promised reaction to the guy in the ditch reminds one of the
> Parable of the Good Samaritan, except that in this version you're not
> playing the Samaritan, but one of the other two.
Promised? You misread me, possibly on purpose.
Kip W
Frank Berger
What arguments do people who think "gouging" is wrong use to justify selling
their home or stocks at a profit?
It may be understandable to judge harshly someone selling water to Hurricane
evacuees for $20 a bottle (even, then for all you know he needs to raise
money for his mother's life-saving surgery and who says the evacuees
shouldn't give him *him* a little charit?y), but a CD? I would add
"arrogant" to your "presumptuous." I suppose next think we know the
government will be setting the wages of CEO's. Oops.
Bob Harper
No, just sloppily. If I stipulate 'imagined' or 'fantasized', will that
be OK?
Bob Harper
Frank Berger
You didn't assert it *was* on purpose, only *possibly* in purpose. So it
was possibly *not* on purpose. Therefore, the clause was meaningless.
Kip Williams
> be OK?
Imagined, then, by applying the same rules to the Samaritan (who is not
me) as to the clever capitalist. 'As he did, so he must / himself be
done by; and that's just,' as Augustus used to say, or "Do unto others
as you would have them do unto you." Does this apply only to the person
who is wronged the first time?
Kip W
Kip Williams
> was possibly *not* on purpose. Therefore, the clause was meaningless.
How cleverly you have matched it with this meaningless post.
Kip W
Kip Williams
> charity. A wonderful thing. But do we have the right to determine how
> much, when and where someone else has to give?
Interesting question. Do we have the right to determine how much the
hypothetical someone should charge for the use of his cell phone when
someone else's life depends on it? Seems like he could get a really good
price for it then, mutually agreeable to both parties in the circumstances.
Kip W
Frank Berger
Does the situation ever arise? If he tried to charge for the use of the
phone in those circumstance, he'd probably get beaten to death with it. We
can argue about the guy with the water. I don't think there's an argument
here. Maybe the difference is that it's essentialy costless to let someone
use your phone, where it isn't to give away your ineventory of water.
Gerard
You are introducing here: 'wrong'.
Gerard
>
> Does the situation ever arise? If he tried to charge for the use of
> the phone in those circumstance, he'd probably get beaten to death
> with it. We can argue about the guy with the water. I don't think
> there's an argument here. Maybe the difference is that it's
> essentialy costless to let someone use your phone, where it isn't to
> give away your ineventory of water.
Not giving the necessary help to survive in some countries is a crime, by law.
Asking money for that kind of help is not really human; it's a picture how
conservative - or do you call it "liberal", 'free market"? - people think.
Bob Harper
I'm not sure what you're driving at here. The Samaritan did what he did
out of charity; that's the point of the story. The sin of the priest and
the Levite was a lack of charity. This has nothing to do with
capitalism. Getting back to the price of a CD, why should anyone sell a
valuable good for less than the market price just because someone thinks
it's 'unfair'? The case of water after a hurricane is, I agree, more
complicated. I suspect I would be disinclined to jack the price up were
I the 7/11 owner, but that would be a personal decision. Absent a matter
of life and death (in which case the person needing it would be
justified in simply taking it), I don't see the price as a legal issue.
Bob Harper
Bob Harper
problem? Isn't it his business?
Bob Harper
Bob Harper
a considerably larger portion of their incomes to charity than do
self-described liberals, at least in the United States. Liberals, on the
other hand, are inclined to be considerably more generous with other
people's money.
Bob Harper
Gerard
Ah, I mixed up the US term "liberal" with the Dutch term "liberaal".
BTW "studies have shown" does not say much.
Have studies not shown that conservatives have larger incomes?
Gerard
I'm stil wondering why he is selling a disk that he is "not willing to part with
for less than $100."
Does he need that money so badly that he is selling disks that have so much
worth to him? Hard to imagine.
MiNe 109
Bob Harper <bob.h...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Studies have shown that self-described conservatives donate
> a considerably larger portion of their incomes to charity than do
> self-described liberals, at least in the United States. Liberals, on the
> other hand, are inclined to be considerably more generous with other
> people's money.
Is that corrected for income level? What counts as charity? To quote
Ezra Klein, using charity to score political points seems somehow
against the spirit of the enterprise.
Stephen
Kip Williams
> out of charity; that's the point of the story. The sin of the priest and
> the Levite was a lack of charity. This has nothing to do with
> capitalism.
We've seen it excused when the storekeeper charged $20 for the water.
What the market would bear.
Now you don't seem to think it's fair for someone who was gouged by him
to get some of his own back when the storekeeper is in the same sort of
vulnerable condition as his customers were during the hurricane.
So it's okay for him, but not for them. I'm guessing you identify with
the storekeeper.
Kip W
Kip Williams
> Not really. Studies have shown that self-described conservatives donate
> a considerably larger portion of their incomes to charity than do
Not hard, when giving to conservative causes can be counted as charity.
> self-described liberals, at least in the United States. Liberals, on the
> other hand, are inclined to be considerably more generous with other
> people's money.
Kip W
Matthew�B.�Tepper
letters to be typed in news:8n3Zm.835$mr6...@newsfe08.iad:
> We've seen it excused when the storekeeper charged $20 for the water.
> What the market would bear.
>
> Now you don't seem to think it's fair for someone who was gouged by him
> to get some of his own back when the storekeeper is in the same sort of
> vulnerable condition as his customers were during the hurricane.
>
> So it's okay for him, but not for them. I'm guessing you identify with
> the storekeeper.
Now, THAT is capitalism.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
Frank Berger
> Bob Harper wrote:
>
>> Not really. Studies have shown that self-described conservatives
>> donate a considerably larger portion of their incomes to charity
>> than do
>
> Not hard, when giving to conservative causes can be counted as
> charity.
That's probably correct, if you count giving to one's Church as a
"conservative cause." Otherwise there's no reason to suppose that liberals
are any less likely to give to "liberal causes," is there?
Bob Harper
(snip)
> We've seen it excused when the storekeeper charged $20 for the water.
> What the market would bear.
>
> Now you don't seem to think it's fair for someone who was gouged by him
> to get some of his own back when the storekeeper is in the same sort of
> vulnerable condition as his customers were during the hurricane.
>
> So it's okay for him, but not for them. I'm guessing you identify with
> the storekeeper.
>
>
> Kip W
bleeding in a ditch. One would think that an elementary distinction.
Bob Harper
Bob Harper
Again, not really. see
for an explanation that *should* help. You might be surprised.
Bob Harper
Kip Williams
> Kip Williams wrote:
> (snip)
>> We've seen it excused when the storekeeper charged $20 for the water.
>> What the market would bear.
>>
>> Now you don't seem to think it's fair for someone who was gouged by
>> him to get some of his own back when the storekeeper is in the same
>> sort of vulnerable condition as his customers were during the hurricane.
>>
>> So it's okay for him, but not for them. I'm guessing you identify with
>> the storekeeper.
>>
> bleeding in a ditch. One would think that an elementary distinction.
A difference in degree, perhaps, but clutch that straw for all it's
worth if it will help you avoid realizing what you've chosen to defend.
Kip W
Kip Williams
> Kip Williams wrote:
>> Bob Harper wrote:
>>
>>> Not really. Studies have shown that self-described conservatives donate
>>> a considerably larger portion of their incomes to charity than do
>>
>> Not hard, when giving to conservative causes can be counted as charity.
>>
>>> self-described liberals, at least in the United States. Liberals, on the
>>> other hand, are inclined to be considerably more generous with other
>>> people's money.
>>
>
> http://faculty.maxwell.syr.edu/acbrooks/Pages/Who%20really%20cares/First%20Things%20December%202006.pdf
>
> for an explanation that *should* help. You might be surprised.
I see nothing in there about which charities (or 'charities') are
counted here. I had to look at several other documents to find one where
Brooks, the professor who is cited here, says that he doesn't
distinguish between charities with or without political agendas.
Having looked at a dozen or so pages now, and tried to find some hard
information in them, it only appears that:
Religious people donate more.
This includes donating to religious causes (many of which are
indistinguishable from political causes).
More conservatives are religious than liberal.
Therefore, more conservatives donate than liberals.
But the causes they are donating to may be ones that benefit their
political views.
It's hard to say more than that without some breakdown, which is lacking
in the superficial and sensationalist reports I'm finding.
Kip W
Frank Berger
All differences can be measured in degrees. You dismissal of arguments you
can't counter in this manner is not worthy of your intellect.
Frank Berger
> Bob Harper wrote:
>> Kip Williams wrote:
>>> Bob Harper wrote:
>>>
>>>> Not really. Studies have shown that self-described conservatives
>>>> donate a considerably larger portion of their incomes to charity
>>>> than do
>>>
>>> Not hard, when giving to conservative causes can be counted as
>>> charity.
>>>> self-described liberals, at least in the United States. Liberals,
>>>> on the other hand, are inclined to be considerably more generous
>>>> with other people's money.
>>>
>> Again, not really. see
>>
>> http://faculty.maxwell.syr.edu/acbrooks/Pages/Who%20really%20cares/First%20Things%20December%202006.pdf
>>
>> for an explanation that *should* help. You might be surprised.
>
> I see nothing in there about which charities (or 'charities') are
> counted here. I had to look at several other documents to find one
> where Brooks, the professor who is cited here, says that he doesn't
> distinguish between charities with or without political agendas.
>
> Having looked at a dozen or so pages now, and tried to find some hard
> information in them, it only appears that:
>
> Religious people donate more.
> This includes donating to religious causes (many of which are
> indistinguishable from political causes).
I would venture to guess that the vast majority of charitable donations by
church members goes directly to the church or related educational
institutions and these are distinct from political causes. And let's not
forget that some of the money donated to churches is redirected to the poor
as opposed to supporting the church infrastructure. I would also venture to
guess that lacking churches to which to give, liberals are very much more
likely to give to political causes.
Kip Williams
> Kip Williams wrote:
>> Bob Harper wrote:
>>> Kip Williams wrote:
>>> (snip)
>>>> We've seen it excused when the storekeeper charged $20 for the
>>>> water. What the market would bear.
>>>>
>>>> Now you don't seem to think it's fair for someone who was gouged by
>>>> him to get some of his own back when the storekeeper is in the same
>>>> sort of vulnerable condition as his customers were during the
>>>> hurricane. So it's okay for him, but not for them. I'm guessing you
>>>> identify
>>>> with the storekeeper.
>>>>
>>> Being thirsty, even very thirsty, is not the same as lying injured
>>> and bleeding in a ditch. One would think that an elementary
>>> distinction.
>>
>> A difference in degree, perhaps, but clutch that straw for all it's
>> worth if it will help you avoid realizing what you've chosen to
>> defend.
>
> can't counter in this manner is not worthy of your intellect.
If one example is wrong, they both are. Perhaps I should have picked a
less dramatic parable, since that seems to be all you can see. Let's say
he's safe, but his car is teetering on the edge of a precipice and could
cost him a lot of money. Let's say he's late for a job interview that
could make all the difference to his future earnings. At which degree of
difference does it become okay to smile and say, well, you can always go
somewhere else and see if you get a better deal? What if he was bleeding
in the ditch from a broken nose, and that was the extent of his injuries?
Come on, make an argument instead of posing as a judge at a forensics
meet, safely above the fray and issuing points and demerits on matters
of style.
Kip W
Kip Williams
Churches aren't political? Where do you live? I lived in Virginia, where
Pat Robertson owned one of the TV stations I watched (and thanks, Pat,
for all the black and white Popeye cartoons -- I know they were just
something cheap to you, but to me they were the greatest) and a lot of
political clout was wielded by people who urged their followers to put a
hand on the set and be healed.
Money that goes to many churches goes to paying salaries of their
ever-increasing staffs (not in Utah, where much of it is handled by
volunteers), for a lifestyle that's nowhere near spartan for their
preachers, for political activity, for evangelism and missionary work,
and then something ends up going to the poor, in ways that amount to
advertising for the church. If, say, 25% of the money given to a church
benefits the poor (a generous assumption), how does that affect the
'giving' of parishioners who kick in for it? Just as some charities
spend more servicing the infrastructure, so do churches.
I've been reading about Brooks's book since last time I commented, and
there are a few red flags here and there.
1) The figures he cites are based on pollsters asking people how much
they give. His statistics are based on self-serving hearsay.
2) Brooks seems to have trimmed things a bit. From a review in
Beliefnet.com:
"...To make his point forcefully, Brooks admits he cut out a lot of
qualifying information. 'I know I'm going to get yelled at a lot with
this book,' he said. 'But when you say something big and new, you're
going to get yelled at.'"
3) Liberals subscribe to a political theory that charity is best handled
by a state actor that can negotiate for better prices and which draws
money more fairly from all. So, they pay their taxes without
complaining. Conservatives are vested in the belief that government
can't handle charity, so they have an interest in making private
charities work. It benefits their political aims to try and make that
happen.
4) How does it count people who opted to work in the public sector for
idealistic reasons when they could have cleaned up in the private
sector? Does he count someone working a $40k/yr job instead of a
$200k/yr job as making a $160k/yr donation? I doubt it.
I can't get to the most-often cited scholarly takedown of his
methodology and results, which is behind a pay wall. The liberalmedia
doesn't seem interested in that, preferring to run with the 'liberals
are stingy' story, but according to several who've read it, correcting
for religious giving makes liberals more generous.
I can say from experience that the household I grew up in, with a very
conservative dad and maybe conservative mom was certainly charitable.
Even when we were broke, they were finding ways of giving to the poor.
Perhaps Brooks is right, but there are reasons to think he may not be.
Kip W
Bob Harper
exchange. But Merry Christmas and Happy New year.
Bob Harper
Kip Williams
> exchange. But Merry Christmas and Happy New year.
Of course. I spent an hour or two following up on this report which you
were content to wave at as if it proved something, and it's my mind
that's closed.
Enjoy the holiday!
Kip W
Kevin N
> On Dec 22, 1:06 pm, Kevin N <bossk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm sure I'm pissing off some of the free market hawks here,
> > but sellers who do so are no better than people selling bottled water
> > at $20 a bottle simply because they can.
>
> Water is a necessity of life. A CD is not.
>
> You think the price of a CD is too high? Fine - don't buy it.
>
> Bill
It's very rare that the price gouging for bottled water occurs in a
life or death situation. Just some some greedy asshole trying to milk
some other persons misfortune for a few extra bucks. Ditto for the CD
gougers.
Kevin N
> "wkasimer" <wkasi...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> news:ed2b7bef-b1eb-448c...@37g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 22, 1:06 pm, Kevin N <bossk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm sure I'm pissing off some of the free market hawks here,
> > but sellers who do so are no better than people selling bottled water
> > at $20 a bottle simply because they can.
>
> Water is a necessity of life. A CD is not.
>
> You think the price of a CD is too high? Fine - don't buy it.
>
> Bill
>
> personal reasons or strictly monetary reasons and the buyer decides if he
> wants it at that price. So what??? Wagner fan
So you think ticket scalpers are OK too?
Kevin N
> their home or stocks at a profit?
It is people who buy a home as an "investment" to sell at a profit a
few years later that made life pretty unpleasant for a whole lot of
people who simply wanted a place to live.
> It may be understandable to judge harshly someone selling water to Hurricane
> evacuees for $20 a bottle (even, then for all you know he needs to raise
> money for his mother's life-saving surgery and who says the evacuees
> shouldn't give him *him* a little charit?y), but a CD?
Yes. Because profiteering, whether it be in the housing market,
bottled water, or OOP CDs all have greed as the common motive, and
serve to concentrate wealth in to the hands of the few at the expense
of the many.
> I would add
> "arrogant" to your "presumptuous." I suppose next think we know the
> government will be setting the wages of CEO's. Oops.
Kevin N
> Kevin N wrote:
> > On Dec 21, 11:53 am, Bob Harper <bob.har...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
> >>> Mr. Mike <m...@spamcop.net> appears to have caused the following
> >>> letters to be typed
> >>> innews:omjti51amj31fp69l...@4ax.com:
>
> >>>> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 16:38:31 -0800 (PST), Randy Lane
> >>>> <randy.l...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>> And it isn't exactly a misplaced comma, I don't think so at least.
> >>>>> This is from a large reseller that contnuously systematically
> >>>>> adjusts prices to be competitive.
> >>>> I have on occasion e-mailed sellers on Ebay who have ridiculous
> >>>> prices like this.
>
> >>>> Of course, the typical reply is "This is a free market economy, I
> >>>> can charge whatever I want."
>
> >>> Or, "I only need to sell ONE."
>
> >> The seller is obviously a charter member of the P.T. Barnum school of
> >> economic theory.
>
> >> Bob Harper
>
> > I'm sure it was data entry error where two numeric data got entered
> > into a single field (as what happens when the tab key isn't pressed
> > all the way). I have bought frequently from the seller (moviemars) as
> > they generally have very reasonable prices.
>
> > On the other hand, sellers who really do offer items at $100+ per disc
> > are swindlers as far as I am concerned.
>
> Let's see. I have a disk that I am not willing to part with for less than
> $100. You call this a swindle? How could that be? If it *is* a swindle
> that implies that it would be ethical for you (or someone else) to force me
> to sell it for less than $100 or keep it forever. That would leave both
> parties worse off, as they would have made the exchange at $100 voluntarily
> where must mean both considered themselves better off.
>
> I know you are goint to disagree with this analysis and am interested to
> hear your arguments.
You're a funny person. I imagine you have all your possessions listed
on eBay for whatever price you'd be willing to part with them for. I
really believe a disc gives you more pleasure when you are able to
resell it for $100 than the performance.
All I can say is your thinking is completely alien to me. I know some
guy who camped outside Best Buy to buy 5 Sony PS3s when they first
came out so he could resell them on eBay for several times what he
paid. I don't consider that a mutually beneficial transaction. Perhaps
the person who ended up buying them on eBay at 3x the price was the
next person on line and the guy I know bought the last 5. So the eBay
buyer looses because payed far too much for something he felt his kids
had to have for Christmas.
When I buy CDs, it is simply because I want the music on them. And if
I ultimately decide I don't want the disc, I either give it to a
friend who would like, or sell it to a used record store--usually for
only a couple of dollars. It really does not make a difference if I
were able to sell it for $100, and wouldn't sell it for that even if
the person was willing to pay that much.
Bob Harper
(snip)
>
> 3) Liberals subscribe to a political theory that charity is best handled
> by a state actor that can negotiate for better prices and which draws
> money more fairly from all. So, they pay their taxes without
> complaining. Conservatives are vested in the belief that government
> can't handle charity, so they have an interest in making private
> charities work. It benefits their political aims to try and make that
> happen.
So coerced payments (taxes) are more 'fair' than free contributions, and
a central authority will do a better job than the people closest to the
problem. Sorry, but I disagree on both counts. Maybe that's why
conservatives give more of their income to charity than do liberals.
> 4) How does it count people who opted to work in the public sector for
> idealistic reasons when they could have cleaned up in the private
> sector? Does he count someone working a $40k/yr job instead of a
> $200k/yr job as making a $160k/yr donation? I doubt it.
>
While there are doubtless those in the public sector accepting lower pay
than they could earn in the private sector, the fact is that the average
government salary is now considerably higher than the average for the
private sector (http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb-0605-35.pdf). Outside
of top political appointees, I rather doubt that too many government
employees would get the big bucks in the private sector. And they
wouldn't have the same job security :)
Bob Harper
(snip)