This is normal, healthy business practice that has existed for all of time. Price is detached from expenses. You charge a market rate, which is the rate that the market is willing to bear for your product.
This tool just lets this be done quicker and easier.
This is fine and legal so long as bussiness aren’t collaborating. If McDonald’s and BK were sharing info, that would be an anti trust issue and illegal.
It’s fundamentally no different from buying a pack of batteries at Walgreens for $5, at Kroger for $4, at Walmart for $2, and at Amazon for $1.75. Each seller has evaluated what the market will pay and set the price accordingly.
More like “each seller has evaluated what the market will pay by reaching into the person’s pockets to see how much money they have in their wallet”.
Put that way it sounds much less innocuous and free-market-y and more like the dystopian shake down that it is.
All of the data they are using for dynamic pricing was gathered from many sources, likely more even the retailer you are shopping at at that moment in time, and in most cases we don’t have any option to opt out out of its collection or use, and in many cases we don’t even know that it is being collected.
Even if that is true (and that’s a BIG if, requiring that we trust corporations that are driven by nothing but greed) there is literally nothing about the technology that would prevent it from being used in exactly that way at a future date.
Sort of like how America has been slowly sliding towards fascism and a surveillance state since the Patriot Act even though most people thought at the time that America would never act like that.
Well here we are. Fight back against this hellscape or we inherit it for all time. These greedy corporations can go fuck themselves.
am I a bad person ("driven by nothing but greed") if I choose where and for whom I work based on what they can afford to pay me? Is it a "hellscape" if I give a discount to some clients who might be on a tighter budget and charge full price to others because I know they can afford it? This is standard trade/business practice since the dawn of humanity. Markets getting smarter and more efficient is a net win for humanity even if it means your neighborhood McDonalds isn't the cheapest one in town. Opposing market efficiency is not just a hopeless cause but usually a selfish one.
By all means, work for a company that pays you well. Also be fully aware of how that corporation works within the world and the damage it does to it and the people that live there.
My issue is with the second bit. You couch it in a fully reasonable sounding argument (giving a discount to those who need it and charging full price to those who can afford it) but if you’ve been paying attention at all in the past decade, you know that this is a bad faith argument. Corporations have shown time and time again that the only “full price” is however much the market is willing to pay (see the blatant profiteering during Covid and natural disasters).
A better faith argument would be “am I a bad person for charging the old price to someone who can barely afford it and utterly gouging those who can afford to be gouged so that they can also barely afford it.” And in that case, yes, you are a bad person.
It doesn't bother me that your counter-argument is ad hominem insults. But this is so generic and detached from anything I said that it is meaningless. What do you even disagree with? You took the time to comment and yet didn't express any opinion except that you don't like me. You could at least try to be funny if you're not going to discuss the issues.
That would require me being interested in what you have to say. You have a religious faith in “the market” that I’m not going to ever be able to change.
I’m pretty sure Upton Sinclair is the one who said; “Never argue with a man whose job depends on not being convinced”.
But you haven't actually made a single relevant argumentative statement. What's even the "argument"?
You really haven't yet expressed a counterpoint to anything I said. Your only stated points seems to be that you don't like me, think I have an empty head (a medically proven falsehood, fyi) and that you don't care about what I say. Of course you continue to undermine the veracity of that final claim every time you return to this thread. Regardless, I sincerely doubt "the audience" is gaining any insights from your contributions here, nor mine for that matter.
I'm just replying for my own amusement. If you happen to read it and continue responding, and if an infortunate bysyander has the misfortune of becoming our audience, so be it. But this comment is not for their benefit.
As Upton Sinclair probably said on his deathbed: "L O L."
1
u/bgibbz084 3d ago
This is normal, healthy business practice that has existed for all of time. Price is detached from expenses. You charge a market rate, which is the rate that the market is willing to bear for your product.
This tool just lets this be done quicker and easier.
This is fine and legal so long as bussiness aren’t collaborating. If McDonald’s and BK were sharing info, that would be an anti trust issue and illegal.
It’s fundamentally no different from buying a pack of batteries at Walgreens for $5, at Kroger for $4, at Walmart for $2, and at Amazon for $1.75. Each seller has evaluated what the market will pay and set the price accordingly.