Should money be able to buy EVERYTHING?

[jp1]

I just picked up "Mine: How the Hidden Rules of Ownership Control Our Lives" at the library. I've only read the first chapter so far but it's been very interesting and I thought that chapter alone might make for an interesting conversation here. The chapter is titled "First Come: Last Served" and discusses the various ways that businesses have monetized the avoidance of waiting. Examples abound:


Disney sells fastpasses that allow one to skip the line for a few rides during their visit to the theme park, and a really expensive super duper fastpass (I forget the marketing name for it) that costs several thousand dollars and allows one to avoid the lines for all rides during the visit
A freeway in Virginia charges real-time congestion tolls. Normally a few dollars for a ten mile trip, but one day the toll went up to $35. Only wealthy (or desperate) people paid the price so the road remained moving at normal speed while all the other roads around it ground to a stop and go crawl
entrepreneurs built bots to get around "Hamilton The Musical's" efforts to make tickets available to everyone so that they could buy the tickets and then resell them on stubhub and other sites for exponentially more money
A business has grown around paying people to "wait in line" at venues where there is no other option. An example is that the supreme court allows anyone to attend their hearings on a first come first served basis. Only a limited number of people get in because the gallery is not large. There are businesses that charge big bucks for this and hire homeless people at minimum wage to do the waiting for days in advance of key cases, then shortly before the case is to start lobbyists and bigwig lawyers show up to take the homeless people's spots, having paid a lot of money for them.
Airlines sell the opportunity to board earlier or offer it as a perk to frequent flyers who have flown a specified number of flights or miles

An interesting wrinkle to thinking about this occurred to me in the middle of the chapter. YMOYL talks about the importance of spending one's life energy on things that one wants to and not on things that one doesn't value. In that light it would seem that all of this is great. Rich people have a lot of stored up life energy in their bank accounts and if they want to spend it on these, and other similar, things then that shouldn't bother anyone. Personally, if rich people want to hand disney thousands of dollars for the privilege of not having to wait in line for rides, I don't really care one way or the other. On the other hand, if my taxes helped pay for that road in Virginia, or for that supreme court, should the wealthy really be able to buy the right to have access leaving me out cold if I don't have the bucks to afford it? And is it right that ticket scalpers, with the help of computer bots, be able to make more money off of a performance of Hamilton than the actors/writers/producers did?

[Yppej]

In my state you can pay a runner to go to the Registry of Motor Vehicles for you since the lines there are long.

[happystuff]

It's an interesting question. When it comes right down to it, if someone is willing to pay for something and someone else is willing to accept that pay - and it is not breaking the law, harming someone else, etc. - I don't think it is for me to say yay or nay. When it is something that is in the realm of morally/ethically right or wrong, everyone seems to draw those lines in different places and depending on circumstances. (Hopefully some of this makes sense. lol)

[razz]

It has always been thus. Immigrants to North America in 1700's and probably earlier could travel first class or less. Today, flyers can travel business class or economy. One decides however one chooses to suit one's budget or preference. Where I might have a concern is if access is denied due the cost being prohibitive and is a basic need like safe water to drink.

[LDAHL]

Willing buyer, willing seller. I don’t consider the rest to be my business.

[jp1]

How about this scenario. Person lives in a ‘must vote in person’ state, in an urban area with a large minority population so the lines at the polls are always long. Should they be allowed to hire someone to do the waiting for them?

[catherine]

Only one of those examples bother me. In the case of the frequent flier perks, I'm a recipient of those, and I feel I earned them, having sat in a seat for over a million miles for the airline who grants me those perks.

The one that irks me is the one related to scalpers who drive up prices at concerts, plays, etc. I'm actually in a dilemma in that regard. Last fall I bought a couple of tickets for Hamilton. I don't know what I was thinking, but I think the impulse buy was driven by having listened to the Broadway cast recording simultaneously while drinking a glass or two of wine. So after enjoying the recording and the wine, I looked up availability for six months later--my birthday--and there were American Express seats in the front row of the mezzanine. I bought them, and I felt instant remorse, and I continue to.

So, I've held onto them for the past 4 months waiting for some inspiration to come to me as to how to explain the purchase to DH. So I've decided I'm going to sell them for many reasons. Ticketmaster has a "verified resale" policy where you can list your tickets on their website and if they sell, you get the money back. You can post for any amount of money you want. I just checked this out a couple of weeks ago, and saw that the market value of those seats has actually appreciated 25%. So, should I just set my selling price at the price I bought them for, or should I try to make a profit on them?

[iris lilies]

How about this scenario. Person lives in a ‘must vote in person’ state, in an urban area with a large minority population so the lines at the polls are always long. Should they be allowed to hire someone to do the waiting for them?
Living in an urban area with a large minority population as I do, i can assure you the lines are not long. Except, PERHAPS in a Presidential year and then only at peak time and if Barack Obama is running. Can’t see that happening again.

But regardless of the reality on the ground, sure if I want to hire someone to stand in line for me why not?

[happystuff]

How about this scenario. Person lives in a ‘must vote in person’ state, in an urban area with a large minority population so the lines at the polls are always long. Should they be allowed to hire someone to do the waiting for them?

I don't see the difference in this scenario versus waiting in line to purchase tickets. Ultimately, the person paying for the tickets or the person placing their vote is the one performing the desired end action. My concern would be the reactions of the individuals in front of, behind or near where the "space holding exchange" would take place. People sometimes get emotional when they see what looks like someone "cutting the line". Safety for the payer and payee might sometimes end up being an issue.

[iris lilies]

In Catherine’s situation, if I was still in wealth accumulation phase, I might charge 25%. Now I’m past all that and I give crap away so it wouldn’t matter, although the tedium of listing them is the same regardless of how much I ask for these tickets.

It’s good karma to release into the universe. Even though I don’t believe that crap, I do think it’s fun to give people little gifts, little anonymous gift. And tickets at face value would be a good gift although you don’t know if scalper is going to grab them and turn around and double any profit you would’ve earned. But see that’s just it you can’t control what happens to the things you release to the universe.

[ApatheticNoMore]

Two of those bother me: obviously the supreme court example. Yea paying for access to politics is a problem. Standing in line for voting is a problem too, and it is a failure to provide enough polling places. The freeway example bothers me too. Transportation is a public service and a requirement for life (I didn't say it had to be freeways but that's what has been built).

[jp1]

How about jury duty. If someone doesn’t want to do it should they be able to hire a replacement?

[happystuff]

How about jury duty. If someone doesn’t want to do it should they be able to hire a replacement?

No. In all the other scenarios, the payer ultimately does the action. Paying someone as a replacement for something like jury duty is allowing the payer to avoid the actual action.

Edited to add: There are current legitimate ways to relieve oneself of obligations like jury duty, etc. If one doesn't want to do jury duty, they should pursue the legal outs.

[Yppej]

How about jury duty. If someone doesn’t want to do it should they be able to hire a replacement?

What about fighting in a war?

[Rogar]

It seems to me like the it is myopic to assume that people can typically even afford to fly for leisure, or go to Hamilton or Disneyland regardless of the bonus privileges. I know there were long periods in my life when those things would have been luxuries slightly out of my frugal allowances. The gap between the haves vs the have nots is a lot bigger than several of the minor examples.

[happystuff]

It seems to me like the it is myopic to assume that people can typically even afford to fly for leisure, or go to Hamilton or Disneyland regardless of the bonus privileges. I know there were long periods in my life when those things would have been luxuries slightly out of my frugal allowances. The gap between the haves vs the have nots is a lot bigger than several of the minor examples.

Actually, those things are currently out of my allowances - frugal or not. LOL. And, yes, I agree the gap between the haves and have-nots is HUGE! Sometimes I don't think the haves realize how big the gap actually is.

[jp1]

What about fighting in a war?

That was going to be my next question. I admit it was a leading question. The answer to the question of what we can buy ourselves out of something isn’t as simple as some think at first glance.

[happystuff]

That was going to be my next question. I admit it was a leading question. The answer to the question of what we can buy ourselves out of something isn’t as simple as some think at first glance.

Googled "how to not fight in a war" and got:

Those who can prove a religious, ethical or moral opposition to all wars may apply for a discharge or transfer to a non-combat job as a conscientious objector. ... Those who don't receive such status but refuse to fight can face court-martial and penalties from dishonorable discharge to prison

Edited to add: There are always choices and options, each with their own consequences/resultant effects.

[jp1]

It seems to me like the it is myopic to assume that people can typically even afford to fly for leisure, or go to Hamilton or Disneyland regardless of the bonus privileges. I know there were long periods in my life when those things would have been luxuries slightly out of my frugal allowances. The gap between the haves vs the have nots is a lot bigger than several of the minor examples.

There is currently a heated discussion going on in the comments on - dailykos diary going on about if guilliani gets convicted would it be fair to send him to prison vs. Home confinement given that his life might be at risk in prison. How much privilege does it take to think that if convicted he shouldn’t face the reality of prison? I personally don’t think it would be right if he were harmed/killed in prison but given the number of people he put in prison and that prison is our current punishment for wrongdoing then if convicted that’s where he should go.

[Yppej]

In the Civil War you could hire a substitute to go to war for you.

[LDAHL]

In the Vietnam War, you could stack up student deferments like our two most recent presidents.

[Rogar]

In the Vietnam War, you could stack up student deferments like our two most recent presidents.

Even a low income person such as myself could get a student deferment, but agreed that the cost of concocting a bone spur might be more expensive.

I suppose there are minimum security prisons for low risk white collar criminals, but having expensive lawyers would be a big advantage for the wealthy.

[pony mom]

Catherine, why not donate them to a charity to be raffled off in a fundraiser? They make the money, someone who wants to see the show gets the tickets, and you get a tax deduction (maybe?)? Everyone wins.

I have no problem paying for something I want or to do something I'd rather not do. Lots of people pay for someone to clean their house, cut their lawn, etc. But being a frugal thrifty person, I'd probably do most things myself.

[pinkytoe]

As someone who has been looking to buy a house for over two years now, apparently all cash money is the only way to get one in many areas. I have been flat out told by realtors not to bother unless you have cash in hand.

[Teacher Terry]

Here many are paying cash but my offer was accepted because I was putting down 65% and my house was in escrow. I actually didn’t choose the cash offer for my house because they offered 50k less than my highest offer.