| ▲ | nzach 4 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> While the law bans setting higher prices through surveillance pricing, it doesn’t address reducing prices. If a company raises its prices for everyone, and then offers individualized discounts, “suddenly you’ve arrived at the same outcome,” McBrien says. While I agree with the intent of this law, I don't think it will be effective. If you have a system capable of jacking prices up you can just multiply this calculated delta by -1 transform that into a discount. To effectively prevent this practice you probably need to ban any kind of personal discount. I don't think we will ever see such law, nor do I think this would be a good idea. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | gruez 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yeah, sounds like a law that's passed because it sounds/polls good (ie. "affordability"), even though it's addressing a non-existent problem and is trivial to work around. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | slg 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
>I don't think we will ever see such law, nor do I think this would be a good idea. Why isn't this a good idea? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||