[Table of Contents] [Search]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: pricing

>I'm a little puzzled by some of the attitudes expressed in this thread
>about pricing. Those who make a profession of binding, as opposed to those
>of us who, like Peter, moonlight, seem to feel that they alone have a right
>to bind for profit. Part-timers and moonlighters immorally steal their
>business through low rates.
>I cannot see any decent moral argument to be made for these conclusions. In
>the first place, there is no reason to suppose that anyone has a right to
>clients. Put in reverse, it is false that all in need of binding services
>are morally obligated to take their business to only full-time
>professionals who charge top dollar. Moreover, we generally think that
>informed and consenting adults are free to enter into whatever
>(non-harmful) contracts they wish. Just because one is an amateur or
>part-timer does not abrogate this right to form contracts.
>Indeed, it seems to me that if anything is immoral here, it is the
>suggestion that we binders collude to fix prices at a high level. Consider
>if oil companies all got together and agreed to double the retail price of
>crude oil. And why not? They all deserve decent salaries, etc. etc. The
>consumer public would go ballistic at this. No bookbinder, professional or
>otherwise, has an ethical expectation of any sort of income or salary at
>Steven D. Hales
>Assistant Professor                     email: hales@xxxxxxxxxx
>Department of Philosophy                phone: (717) 389-4229
>Bloomsburg University                   fax: (717) 389-2094
>Bloomsburg, PA 17815

[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents] [Search]