Hurricane Sandy’s Lesson on Preserving Capitalism

Mark Thoma gibt eine einleuchtende Erklärung, warum es gar keine gute Idee ist, die Schere zwischen Arm und Reich immer weiter aufklappen zu lassen – und zwar besonders dann, wenn man weiterhin am Funktionieren der Grundfeste des Kapitalismus interessiert ist, dem freien Markt:

[…]

But if there is such an advantage to allowing the price system to work after an event like Hurricane Sandy, why did producers often choose to stick with pre-disaster prices?

[…]

Most of the explanations economists have come up with rely upon the idea of fairness. After a natural disaster, people consider food, water, even goods like gasoline a necessity, and despite attempts by economists to explain that allowing prices to rise is best, they are sensitive to two types of inequities.

[…]

First, […] If consumers feel they are being taken advantage of at a time when they already have enough problems due to the disaster, they might decide to shop elsewhere and this could hurt future sales to the extent that firms will forego price increases. […] Second, […] The wealthy should not be able to corner the available supplies of goods and services that are in high demand because of the disaster.

[…]

This relationship between the acceptance of the price allocation system in the wake of natural disasters and how fair the system is perceived to be has lessons that extend beyond times of crisis.

[…]

If inequality and the economic and political power that come with it continue to grow, the belief that capitalism is unfair could become widespread. This, in turn, could bring about the kinds of changes to the market system that free-market advocates fear so much.

(Via)