Moral or Immoral?

[nakinate]

... Today I learned what an echo trigger is.

Intriguing. Are there any risks or downsides to using one?

I don't have experience but Tim from Military Arms Channel uses one on his go-to rifle. Seems reliable.

 

[T.Lex]

Say you buy a couple of AR15s for $900 each. One for you, one for your wife, because you think it would make an awesome anniversary gift. It’s a really nice AR. The very next day some ******* shoots up a school. Next thing you know everyone is calling for bans on “assault rifles”.

A week later you see ARs are selling out everywhere. Everything is selling out. Ammo. Mags. Guns. The ARs in the classified or gun broker are going >$2000. You see some adds for your make/model for $2500. You think, wow. Glad I bought mine when I did.

so your anniversary comes around and your wife actually yells at you for buying her a rifle, and that hou better sell it and get her what she really wants.

Do you sell it for what you have in it or do you sell it for the going price? What if the going price is 5x what you paid?

Everything is worth what people are willing to pay. When is it immoral to sell something at the price people are willing to pay? I think there are times when it is immoral. But not usually.

Well, that's an awkward question for me as I've never sold a firearm that I owned, and only traded 1 for what I thought was a fair deal.

Putting myself in the hypothetical, though, I think the same framework would apply. I'd try to get a fair deal for me and the buyer. I tend not to be a binarist. Things aren't brightly fair or unfair, rather, there is a range. I'd try to get somewhere in that range.

The range would probably cap out at 1.5x from what I had in it. It would not be 6x.

But, everyone must chart their own course in life.

 

[jamil]

Well, that's an awkward question for me as I've never sold a firearm that I owned, and only traded 1 for what I thought was a fair deal.

Putting myself in the hypothetical, though, I think the same framework would apply. I'd try to get a fair deal for me and the buyer. I tend not to be a binarist. Things aren't brightly fair or unfair, rather, there is a range. I'd try to get somewhere in that range.

The range would probably cap out at 1.5x from what I had in it. It would not be 6x.

But, everyone must chart their own course in life.

What moral principle leads you to that moral judgement? Like I said, it can get immoral. If you’re misrepresenting what you’re selling to make it sound more valuable, that’s lying. That’s clearly immoral. If you are guided by a set of moral principles then those principles guide you through the morality of your actions, regardless of the nature. No need to set arbitrary limits for pricing.

So what moral principle is broken if you charge more than 1.5x for anything you sell?

 

[nakinate]

I won't sell anything for more than 1.4 times what I paid.

Arbitrary numbers are arbitrary.

 

[jamil]

I won't sell anything for more than 1.4 times what I paid.

Arbitrary numbers are arbitrary.

You are obviously 1.1x morally superior to T.Lex. And I’m not even in the running.

 

[T.Lex]

What moral principle leads you to that moral judgement? Like I said, it can get immoral. If you’re misrepresenting what you’re selling to make it sound more valuable, that’s lying. That’s clearly immoral. If you are guided by a set of moral principles then those principles guide you through the morality of your actions, regardless of the nature. No need to set arbitrary limits for pricing.

So what moral principle is broken if you charge more than 1.5x for anything you sell?

Well, hold on.

I was presented a hypothetical. I'm absolutely not saying certain multipliers are inherently immoral - not at all. It wherever the line is crossed between profit and greed.

My occupation is a professional service. I've already paid off my cost of acquisition (subject to annual maintenance) in terms of student loans.

I won't sell anything for more than 1.4 times what I paid.

Arbitrary numbers are arbitrary.

Ok. But, do you not agree that greed is immoral?

Maybe that's a more interesting conversation.

You are obviously 1.1x morally superior to T.Lex. And I’m not even in the running.

How about you? Is there a point at which profit-taking becomes immoral?

 

[nakinate]

Well, hold on.

I was presented a hypothetical. I'm absolutely not saying certain multipliers are inherently immoral - not at all. It wherever the line is crossed between profit and greed.

My occupation is a professional service. I've already paid off my cost of acquisition (subject to annual maintenance) in terms of student loans.


Ok. But, do you not agree that greed is immoral?

Maybe that's a more interesting conversation.

How about you? Is there a point at which profit-taking becomes immoral?

Let's say I do agree that greed is immoral. How do you determine the point at which it becomes greed? Who is the arbiter of such things?

I'd say greed is a bad thing, but it's a gray area that is hard to pin down. Selling a bumpstock for 6x what you bought isn't greedy in my mind since the market is setting that price. If you're selling a bump stock for 6x before the shooting and are doing it by taking advantage of an ignorant person, I'd say that is wrong.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

If you over-charge someone for wild mushrooms, is it immoral, or immorrel?

 

[T.Lex]

Let's say I do agree that greed is immoral. How do you determine the point at which it becomes greed? Who is the arbiter of such things?

Like I said, we all chart our own course.

Different religious organizations may have different answer.

I'd say greed is a bad thing, but it's a gray area that is hard to pin down. Selling a bumpstock for 6x what you bought isn't greedy in my mind since the market is setting that price. If you're selling a bump stock for 6x before the shooting and are doing it by taking advantage of an ignorant person, I'd say that is wrong.

Indeed, like I said, I'm not a binarist. There is certainly a range/gray area.

If the person was ignorant that they were selling for $100 (or less) before Las Vegas, would that make a difference? Ignorant that there is a risk these will be NFA'd and maybe not grandfathered?

I wonder if the person offering the bumpstock for 6x would have any similar issue if the situation were reversed. They wanted something badly, but the seller was at 6x. I wonder if they'd think that was reasonable.

 

[nakinate]

Like I said, we all chart our own course.

Different religious organizations may have different answer.



Indeed, like I said, I'm not a binarist. There is certainly a range/gray area.

If the person was ignorant that they were selling for $100 (or less) before Las Vegas, would that make a difference? Ignorant that there is a risk these will be NFA'd and maybe not grandfathered?

I wonder if the person offering the bumpstock for 6x would have any similar issue if the situation were reversed. They wanted something badly, but the seller was at 6x. I wonder if they'd think that was reasonable.

Sell it in an auction. Then you don't have to worry about this stuff.

 

[JettaKnight]

Can we get a report from the OP?

 

[nakinate]

Can we get a report from the OP?

What kind? Maybe a TPS Report with a cover letter?

 

[jamil]

Well, hold on.

I was presented a hypothetical. I'm absolutely not saying certain multipliers are inherently immoral - not at all. It wherever the line is crossed between profit and greed.

My occupation is a professional service. I've already paid off my cost of acquisition (subject to annual maintenance) in terms of student loans.


Ok. But, do you not agree that greed is immoral?

Maybe that's a more interesting conversation.

How about you? Is there a point at which profit-taking becomes immoral?

Okay. Good. So now we’re talking about a principle. Not being greedy. Is there a multiplier to indicate at which point you’ve crossed over into greed, and therefor are now immoral? It seems as though you’ve fxed that number at 1.5.

I would rather say there are circumstances under which profit-taking becomes immoral. It’s not a point on a scale. I wouldn’t put a number on it. I would judge it by principles. What is the moral limit multiplier for profit on selling Stocks on the stock market before you determine it’s greed? Is that morally acceptable multiplier higher for trading stocks on the NYSE than for selling a gun you own? Why?

I submit that for most transactions, charging the going rate is not immoral, not greedy. If you want to give someone a helluva deal, that’s fine. It’s a nice sentiment. But it makes you no more moral in the objective sense than the guy selling it at market price.

 

[T.Lex]

Okay. Good. So now we’re talking about a principle. Not being greedy.

Greediness is not a principle?

Gordon Gecko, where hast thou gone?!

Is there a multiplier to indicate at which point you’ve crossed over into greed, and therefor are now immoral? It seems as though you’ve fxed that number at 1.5.

Kut - is that you?

I did no such fixing, and specifically denied doing so earlier. For the hypothetical transaction, that's where my range would be.

I would rather say there are circumstances under which profit-taking becomes immoral. It’s not a point on a scale. I wouldn’t put a number on it. I would judge it by principles. What is the moral limit multiplier for profit on selling Stocks on the stock market before you determine it’s greed? Is that morally acceptable multiplier higher for trading stocks on the NYSE than for selling a gun you own? Why?

We just aren't the same people anymore. It almost feels like you don't read my posts like you used to. We've just grown in different directions.

And that's ok.

I submit that for most transactions, charging the going rate is not immoral, not greedy. If you want to give someone a helluva deal, that’s fine. It’s a nice sentiment. But it makes you no more moral in the objective sense than the guy selling it at market price.

So price-fixing at price-gouging prices is ok?

 

[bmbutch]

When I sold my .308 DPMS after Sandy Hook, put it on GB for what I paid, no reserve. It sold for over 2x that, they even sent me an email thanking me for not placing a reserve on it. If peeps want to bid, that's their right.

Sold to fund Sig 716.

 

[T.Lex]

Yeah, an auction like that (or a reserve at a "modest" profit) makes sense.

 

[HoughMade]

So called "gouging" is a great way to prevent hoarding without government control.

 

[JettaKnight]

What kind? Maybe a TPS Report with a cover letter?

Mmmmm, yeah....

 

[jamil]

Greediness is not a principle?

Apparently you misunderstood. "Not being greedy" is the principle.

I did no such fixing, and specifically denied doing so earlier. For the hypothetical transaction, that's where my range would be.

Hmm. A range. For a multiplier. To determine greed. How is that different from what I said you said?

We just aren't the same people anymore. It almost feels like you don't read my posts like you used to. We've just grown in different directions.

And that's ok.

Oh c'mon. Nothing personal. We're just talking philosophy here. I haven't changed a bit. I'm still the sometimes compassionate, sometimes snarky ******* I've always been. You're talking in one of my favorite domains of philosophy. Morality. I have opinions. I will share them. I may be snarky when I share opinions. It's nothing personal.

So price-fixing at price-gouging prices is ok?

No It's not okay. Is there not a principle at work there too, beyond numbers?

It's immoral to manipulate the market prices for personal gain. That's clearly greed. It's not immoral to gain from a natural market. If it's not immoral for me to make a 100x profit from a sale of stock, why would it necessarily be immoral for me to make that kind of profit for anything else? If it IS immoral, and there are times when it is, it's not because I made a lot of profit, it's because of the way I brought that profit about.

"Fixing prices" implies collusion in the supply chain to agree to fixing a higher price than the market price. Selling and buying at market prices isn't immoral. Corrupting the prices artificially high so that you can sell at a higher price than the market would have reached on its own is immoral, as is corrupting the price artificially low so that you can buy lower than the market. There aren't any price multipliers in consideration for any of that. Morality doesn't usually reduce to a quantifiable construct. It's qualitative. That's really the only point I'm making here.

If people are buying up Colt 6920s at $2500 each, and you have one you want to sell, you're not immoral for selling it at ~2.8x what you paid for it. You're selling it to someone who is willing to give you that much. Now. If you did something to scare the market into higher prices so that you could sell it for that much, that's immoral.

And, let's say it's right after sandy hook and you're selling your Colt 6920 for $2500, and you meet a buyer in the Walmart parking lot, who by all appearances is obviously in hard conditions. And you think he really has no business paying that much for an AR. Maybe you help a guy out and cut him a break.

That's just being nice though. It's not being extra-special moral. And maybe apparently poor guy, who made you feel sorry for him, gives you the $1500 you asked for, takes the AR, and you watch as he walks over to his Mercedes S class, gets in, and drives away while shooting you a grin. At least you can say, HA! I made you pay $600 more than it was worth!

 

[jamil]

So called "gouging" is a great way to prevent hoarding without government control.

I thought INGO had worked out that principle back in 2013 in the ammo thread. Hornadylnl was spectacular in that thread.