This is great news, but a bit surprising. I think, truth be told, the socialist left would like nothing better than to have surveillance pricing, so long as it is deployed in the aid of poor people. And of course the designation "surveillance pricing" would have to go. Something like "equity pricing" would have a much better ring to it.

▲

someonebaggy 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

(good thing happens)

"I assume the people I hate would support the opposite bad thing to this good thing."

▲

pmdulaney 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I like it: a philosophical take.

What I would say is: "I assume that people who don't put the same value on the principle of self-sufficiency that I do would support a scheme to allow people of lesser means to buy groceries on the open market at a lower price than is permitted to me."

	▲	someonebaggy an hour ago \| parent [-]
		They'd probably just give them money actually

▲

agent_turtle 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

i'm not sure why this is surprising. the socialist left, the coalition who care about equal access to good and services, is leading the charge against surveillance pricing.

> the socialist left would like nothing better than to have surveillance pricing, so long as it is deployed in the aid of poor people

nothing about this makes sense. i think you're making an argument that the socialist left wants poor people to afford more, and yes that's true. but comparing that to price gouging is where logic left the station.

	▲	charcircuit 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		>nothing about this makes sense You are underestimating how much they want to take from the rich to subsidize others. They want to do this so much that they just implemented an unconstitutional income tax against the rich. As long as it's only rich people getting price gauged I do not think they would lose any sleep.