Fair distribution of shooting supplies

[onelight]

I don't have a problem with limits that are imposed by the store owner because he thinks it is better for his business and it is his decision on how he prices it.
He is the one who lives with the consequences of his decision and he is the one who has worked hard and invested to build his business .
When I use the term fair price it is a category as in , great price , fair price , you have got be kidding I won't pay that price , and shop somewhere else or do with out. We can still do with out most of what we buy

[fredj338]

To me, limiting quantities is the least offensive approach. Shops raise prices to limit demand but most of us don't care for that approach. Limiting quantities also keeps the opportunists from buying it all up,& reselling for profits.

[downzero]

I would raise prices so people wouldn't clean me out. In a capitalist society, resources are allocated by PRICE, not by command.

The idea that there should be limits or other artificial, non price related rationing is the very epitome of socialism, also called "command economy."

[downzero]

To me, limiting quantities is the least offensive approach. Shops raise prices to limit demand but most of us don't care for that approach. Limiting quantities also keeps the opportunists from buying it all up,& reselling for profits.

Prices do not change demand. They change quantity demanded. They are not the same thing and knowing the difference is key to earning an A in microeconomics and not a B.

The demand curve represents buyer's willingness and ability to buy at every price. Raising prices moves along the curve, it does not change the curve in any way.

Limiting quantities doesn't prevent opportunists from buying it all and selling it for profits. If there's money to be made, someone will do it. Limiting quantities just means there need to be more opportunists for the market to find its equilibrium.

To put my money where my mouth is: the first person who shows up at my door with an unopened jug of IMR 8208XBR can have double the pre-pandemic price.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

Would you not think that getting some is better than getting none?

DG

[dtknowles]

I would raise prices so people wouldn't clean me out. In a capitalist society, resources are allocated by PRICE, not by command.

The idea that there should be limits or other artificial, non price related rationing is the very epitome of socialism, also called "command economy."

You mean in a free market not a capitalist economy. Capitalism says nothing about setting prices. Capitalism is about private ownership of the means of production. A free market is one that has no governmental price controls that would include no sales taxes or at least the same taxes on all items. Ammo is already price controlled since it has a special excise tax. The two things are often equated with people often favoring "Free Market Capitalism" We do not have Free Markets, the government does many things to control prices. Milk or Tobacco for instance. With the huge taxes on motor fuel, the government drives up the cost of fuel. The price does fluctuate with supply and demand but the tax elevates the price which drives down demand. There are few free markets.

Tim

[Petrol & Powder]

I would disagree that, "....Ammo is already price controlled since it has a special excise tax......"

An excise tax doesn't SET the price of the ammo, it increases the total price of the ammo.

The final price of the product at the retail level is determined by the retailer's cost to acquire the product, PLUS the retailer's mark-up (his profit), PLUS local and state sales taxes, PLUS federal excise tax and any other tax.
So while taxes are a PART of the cost of any item sold, the taxes are not the sole controlling factor of the total price.

The person selling the item gets to add as much mark-up as they choose.
If they increase the price beyond what their customers are willing to pay, they will not sell those items.

Free market doesn't mean a market devoid of all government intrusion.

[Winger Ed.]

An excise is just on top of the price.

Like gasoline, if there is 32 cents road tax on a gallon--- it doesn't affect the world market price of crude oil/gas.
It just piggy backs on top of it as the market price goes up & down.

An excise tax is a drag on the demand part of the market
However; when demand is high, and supply is low, excise taxes on that commodity or item is not really much of a factor.

[fredj338]

Prices do not change demand. They change quantity demanded. They are not the same thing and knowing the difference is key to earning an A in microeconomics and not a B.

The demand curve represents buyer's willingness and ability to buy at every price. Raising prices moves along the curve, it does not change the curve in any way.

Limiting quantities doesn't prevent opportunists from buying it all and selling it for profits. If there's money to be made, someone will do it. Limiting quantities just means there need to be more opportunists for the market to find its equilibrium.

To put my money where my mouth is: the first person who shows up at my door with an unopened jug of IMR 8208XBR can have double the pre-pandemic price.

Quantity demand is demand. The study of economics is based quite a bit on opinions & not solid math. Jmo.
Yes raising prices is very capitalistic, but I would remember that the owner tried making extra $$ off me & not return when things got better. If I were the owner I would put limits on & not raise prices. That would slow consumption about as much as say a 50% price increase. My customers would not be as pissed off that I am trying to spread my inventory to as many as possible. I thnk most of us see it as gouging, but it really isn't, just opportunistic greed, not capitalism.

[fredj338]

Y

You mean in a free market not a capitalist economy. Capitalism says nothing about setting prices. Capitalism is about private ownership of the means of production. A free market is one that has no governmental price controls that would include no sales taxes or at least the same taxes on all items. Ammo is already price controlled since it has a special excise tax. The two things are often equated with people often favoring "Free Market Capitalism" We do not have Free Markets, the government does many things to control prices. Milk or Tobacco for instance. With the huge taxes on motor fuel, the government drives up the cost of fuel. The price does fluctuate with supply and demand but the tax elevates the price which drives down demand. There are few free markets.

Tim

Not really. Govt adds cost with taxes & regs, but the supplier is free to charge what ever they can get. There are also opportunists, not capitalists, that will buy everything & then resell it at higher prices. There is a diff in the two.
The ammo thing is supply & demand. All centerfire ammo prod in the US is 4-5B rds a year, all calibers. If just 30M shooters want 100rds a month, that is 3B rds a month! If the ammo manuf made just 9mm right now, they could not keep up with demand. Most primer production is going into ammo. It's all connected, so we have a shortage.

[Meatball357]

Good stuff.
So my takeaway from this is:

I believe Joe Shopowner has every right to charge whatever he wants. It's his decision alone.
I believe John Q Handloader has every right to buy if he wants/can, but does not have the right to have whatever he wishes.

We should be thankful we're in a country (that people have fought and died for) where this is even a topic.

Also makes a guy think about being even more self-reliant (or group reliant) in every way possible going forward. Probably how it was in the early days of the American West.

[Blanket]

Good stuff.
So my takeaway from this is:

I believe Joe Shopowner has every right to charge whatever he wants. It's his decision alone.
I believe John Q Handloader has every right to buy if he wants/can, but does not have the right to have whatever he wishes.

We should be thankful we're in a country (that people have fought and died for) where this is even a topic.

Also makes a guy think about being even more self-reliant (or group reliant) in every way possible going forward. Probably how it was in the early days of the American West.

You got it

[dtknowles]

I would disagree that, "....Ammo is already price controlled since it has a special excise tax......"

An excise tax doesn't SET the price of the ammo, it increases the total price of the ammo.

Free market doesn't mean a market devoid of all government intrusion.

Yes, it does. Not only does the government push up the price of ammo they decide who can and who can't buy it, make it and sell it. In a true free market there would be none of those controls.

We don't have a free market or an open market we have a government regulated market.

Tim

[dtknowles]

An excise is just on top of the price.

Like gasoline, if there is 32 cents road tax on a gallon--- it doesn't affect the world market price of crude oil/gas.
It just piggy backs on top of it as the market price goes up & down.

An excise tax is a drag on the demand part of the market
However; when demand is high, and supply is low, excise taxes on that commodity or item is not really much of a factor.

I agree that the taxes don't do a lot to dampen demand my point is that it is only a mostly free market but there is the invisible hand of the government in the market. The market in not without government influence on price and access. We are not a truely free country, the government is quite authoritarian. Taxes and regulation also affect the supply. Having to get ITAR approval to sell cast bullets, give me a break.

[dtknowles]

Y
Not really. Govt adds cost with taxes & regs, but the supplier is free to charge what ever they can get. There are also opportunists, not capitalists, that will buy everything & then resell it at higher prices. There is a diff in the two.
The ammo thing is supply & demand. All centerfire ammo prod in the US is 4-5B rds a year, all calibers. If just 30M shooters want 100rds a month, that is 3B rds a month! If the ammo manuf made just 9mm right now, they could not keep up with demand. Most primer production is going into ammo. It's all connected, so we have a shortage.

You are right about the primer thing and about no limit on the price you can charge for ammo but that is not the case with everything. The government does set prices on a lot of things.

[Petrol & Powder]

Yes, it does. Not only does the government push up the price of ammo they decide who can and who can't buy it, make it and sell it. In a true free market there would be none of those controls.

We don't have a free market or an open market we have a government regulated market.

Tim

I understand your dislike for government intrusion into the lives of the people but any form of government is going to include some restrictions. The total absence of all government intrusion would be anarchy.

Adding taxes to some item or some transaction doesn't destroy the existence of a free market, nor does it "control" the price of that item. It increases the price of that item but it doesn't set the price of that item.
As for laws that restrict the sale of some items, those laws may intrude upon your definition of a totally free market but they do not eliminate the existence of a free market.

Laws setting the minimum age to enter into a contract, prevent a 7 year old from obligating himself to a $400,000 loan at 39% interest. That is generally an acceptable intrusion into the free market.
Setting a minimum age to purchase alcohol is an intrusion into the free market but it's generally accepted in our society.
Maintaining control over the production of Sarin gas or Plutonium 239, is an intrusion into your definition of a "free market".

By your definition, free markets do not exist anywhere in the world that is controlled by some form of government.
Trafficking of Cocaine or Heroin, trafficking of stolen property, trafficking humans - those are probably the only types of "free markets" that exist in the modern world.
The existence of a government, by its very nature, is going to result in some loss of freedom by those governed.

So, I disagree that the existence of an excise tax on ammunition equates to the government "controlling the price" of that ammunition. It adds to the price and I don't care for the tax; but it doesn't eliminate the free market.

[dtknowles]

I understand your dislike for government intrusion into the lives of the people but any form of government is going to include some restrictions. The total absence of all government intrusion would be anarchy.

Adding taxes to some item or some transaction doesn't destroy the existence of a free market, nor does it "control" the price of that item. It increases the price of that item but it doesn't set the price of that item.
As for laws that restrict the sale of some items, those laws may intrude upon your definition of a totally free market but they do not eliminate the existence of a free market.

Laws setting the minimum age to enter into a contract, prevent a 7 year old from obligating himself to a $400,000 loan at 39% interest. That is generally an acceptable intrusion into the free market.
Setting a minimum age to purchase alcohol is an intrusion into the free market but it's generally accepted in our society.
Maintaining control over the production of Sarin gas or Plutonium 239, is an intrusion into your definition of a "free market".

By your definition, free markets do not exist anywhere in the world that is controlled by some form of government.
Trafficking of Cocaine or Heroin, trafficking of stolen property, trafficking humans - those are probably the only types of "free markets" that exist in the modern world.
The existence of a government, by its very nature, is going to result in some loss of freedom by those governed.

So, I disagree that the existence of an excise tax on ammunition equates to the government "controlling the price" of that ammunition. It adds to the price and I don't care for the tax; but it doesn't eliminate the free market.

I did not say that the government should not intervene in markets. I was just pointing out that they do and thus the market is not actually free. In the U.S. mosty the government does not control the markets just influences them, mostly a nudge or a push.

If the government did not intervene we still would not have free markets because Monopolists, Oligarchs and Gangs/the Mob would take over the markets and control prices and supply.

Tim

[fredj338]

Good stuff.
So my takeaway from this is:

I believe Joe Shopowner has every right to charge whatever he wants. It's his decision alone.
I believe John Q Handloader has every right to buy if he wants/can, but does not have the right to have whatever he wishes.

We should be thankful we're in a country (that people have fought and died for) where this is even a topic.

Also makes a guy think about being even more self-reliant (or group reliant) in every way possible going forward. Probably how it was in the early days of the American West.

Anyone reloading in 2012-13 saw this coming with the next Dem admin. We planned accordingly. Casting my own bullets is just part of the self reliance issue.
Since 2000 my reseve for powders & primers has been 10,000 rds worth. When I hit 10k, I am a buyer. Hopefully we return to sme normalcy by the end of the year but with Biden in charge, all bets are off.

[fredj338]

You are right about the primer thing and about no limit on the price you can charge for ammo but that is not the case with everything. The government does set prices on a lot of things.

Sorry, not true. Name me one thing the US govt fuses orices on?

[Petrol & Powder]

I did not say that the government should not intervene in markets. I was just pointing out that they do and thus the market is not actually free. In the U.S. mosty the government does not control the markets just influences them, mostly a nudge or a push.

If the government did not intervene we still would not have free markets because Monopolists, Oligarchs and Gangs/the Mob would take over the markets and control prices and supply.

Tim

" ....I did not say that the government should not intervene in markets. I was just pointing out that they do and thus the market is not actually free..."

I do not agree that ANY government intervention, regardless of how trivial, eliminates the existence of a free market.
A free market exists when there is private ownership of property and private individuals can buy, possess and sell that property. It may not be as free as you would like it to be, but the existence of some small amount of government intrusion does not kill off all possibility that a free market exists.

Brown-Forman, the owners of the Jack Daniels brand and many other whiskey and wine producers, pay enormous taxes. They pay federal excise taxes, import taxes, various state alcohol and sales taxes. They pay real estate taxes, fuel taxes, capitol gains taxes and countless other taxes. They are heavily regulated and face severe civil and criminal penalties if they violate those laws. And yet, they still own their products and sell them throughout the world. Government intervention may not be welcome but it does not equal the elimination of a free market. Brown-Forman made over 3 billion dollars in revenue last year.

You may not like the fact that the government taxes ammunition but the fact that the government taxes ammunition doesn't mean the government controls the price of that product. Companies manufacture ammunition within the U.S. and sell their product on the open market here. Companies import ammunition from foreign countries and sell that ammunition on the open market here.