Subject:
|
Fair Auction? (Was Re: Honest Capitalism)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.theory
|
Date:
|
Mon, 13 Sep 1999 05:29:32 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1420 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.market.theory, John Neal writes:
> > > Are you just bitter because there are others who want something more than
> > > you?
> >
> > No. Am I bitter because others have more money than I do - No.
> > Do we have a different definition of fair - Yes.
>
> What *is* your definition of fair? I am honestly interested in what you have
> to say.
Okay, but remember that this is written in a sleepless, jet-lagged haze.. so
please forgive any muddy thinking :)
Picture a non-profiteering auction-sale system. Every member starts with a
certain number of credits. Your credit level determines the maximum you can bid
between any number of auctions, and if you win a bid then that amount is
subracted from your credit total. But, you would pay the auction holder a
previously determined value that was advertised at the beginning of the
auction. Eg paid-price plus 5% profit.
To earn more credit you have to auction items on that system, where you recieve
a percentage of the credits spent on the winning bid. The percentage could be
100%, or it could be 200% if it's agreed that sellers contribute more to the
system.
That way even if an ebay scalper saved up credits and made profit on a rare
item, they would still have contributed positively to the system. Ie it would
self-regulate to that extent and no troublesome bars on entry or vetting would
be needed.
There are at least a few issues with this:
*If credit percentage from selling items is greater than 100%, then two people
could theorhetically multiply their credit, by alternatively out-bidding on
each others auctions.
*Other ways to gain credit - charitable donations?
*Needs hub to regulate credit - how secure would it have to be? Lugnet would
be an ideal location!
*Needs people to want to sell and by low-profit items.
I think this sounds fair - a child fan could sell $10 sets every week and once
a year bid 520 credits on a 6277, and pay $100 for it :)
Does anyone think this is workable and/or desirable?
> > This isn't almost about me wanting a 6277, or any other set.
>
> Seriously then, what is it about?
A disturbing altruistic streak..
> > > But puleeze remember this: LIFE ISN'T FAIR period.
> >
> > Do you seriously believe that it isn't worth trying to make things more
> > fair? Even if at first you believe that it isn't possible?
>
> You *can't* make life more fair. We are all different. That is good, not
> bad.
Yes, and we are also all equal, even though we aren't treated equally.
> Is a person being born blind not fair? How can you make their life more fair?
You can give them some independance with a guide dog, you can provide
wheelchairs for those who can't walk by themselves. Or am I missing the point
entirely? It's late and also probable!
> What about gender?
From the suffragettes to the latter day feminist movement to gay pride, steps
are being rightly taken to make every gender as 'fair' as the next.
> No hard feelings:-)
Non taken :)
Richard
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Fair Auction? (Was Re: Honest Capitalism)
|
| (...) Workable? Who knows - I'm not a mathematician or an economist. Desirable? Heck no. We live in the real world. In the real world the person willing AND able to spend the most for something gets it. That's the way it is, and that's the way it (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
Message is in Reply To:
52 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
