[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: pricing-- a reply to Denis and Jack
- To: BOOK_ARTS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: pricing-- a reply to Denis and Jack
- From: "Rayburn L. Taylor" <RayTay@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 15:56:52 -0500
- Message-id: <199704302058.NAA17416@SUL-Server-2.Stanford.EDU>
- Sender: "The Book Arts: binding, typography, collecting" <BOOK_ARTS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I am really sorry, but I am going to unsubscribe from this list. I
thought I could learn from others about books and "maybe" add something
here or there, but not with this type and a few others on the list.
Thanks, but no, thanks.
McLennan Community College
Denis Gouey wrote:
> Steve, you've got to make up your mind on your qualification, either
> you are an assistant professeur in philosophy as your signature claims
> ,or you are engaged in the conservation business. I respect your
> opinions on the present topic althought I do not agree with it. I will
> respect your opinion about the bookbinding and conservation business
> when you present me with credential on the topic. In other words, what
> are your accomplishments in the field of bookbinding and restoration?
> Apologies from me you are unlikely to receive. First, my saying that you
> do not have a clue about the business is no more insulting than you
> saying that I did not understand a post. Does this imply that I do not
> have the intelligence to understand? Second, I really think that you
> have had no experience in a privatly owned business, be it bookbinding
> or shoemaking or farming. Speaking of farming, your apple analogy does
> not make any sense when applied to thread number 2, the apples you are
> selling at any sort of price have grown on a tree owned by the public.
> If you think there is no ethical issue in moonlighting and profiting at
> the expense of the institution and the tax payers money, then why not
> take some of the rare books in your library and sell it cheaper than a
> rare book dealer would,and, all under the forgiving umbrella of free
> enterprise, make a bundle.
> To answer thread number 1, there is no problem for any one to charge
> lower prices than the competition, as long as it is done at their own
> cost, but it is unethical if the community is picking up the tab.
> On the second chapter you go on taking Jack appart. You've got to admit
> that the sentence is, to say the least, ambiguous. But I will ask you, :
> do "ethical expectation of income" applies to academics as well as
> Steven D. Hales wrote:
> >you obviously don't have any clue about the binding ,
> >restoration and conservation business.
> It is unfortunate that Denis Gouey chose to insult me rather than
> my argument. I know that Denis is a fair person as well as an
> binder, and I am confident that this is just an indication of his
> on this topic.
> There are two threads in this discussion that need to be pried
> 1. Is it wrong for part-time binders to charge lower than average
> 2. Is it wrong for binders to use publicly subsidized equipment in
> order to
> moonlight and charge lower prices than the private sector?
> Jack Thompson, in his declaration that "Dennis Gouey is right and
> Hales is wrong" addresses only the second question, and mistakenly
> that I am doing the same. However, this is false. I addressed the
> Moreover, here is an analogy to support my original point. Suppose
> that I
> own an apple tree, on my land, that I personally cultivate and
> harvest. I
> am at liberty to sell my apples, or give them away free to whomever
> choose. If I decide to give them all away to whomever asks, I am not
> unfairly competing with the local grocery store. They are *my*
> apples, and
> the grocery store has no claim against me that I charge what they
> The store has no rights over me, my apples, or my labor. Likewise I
> own all
> of my binding equipment, and paid for it from my private funds.
> Professional binders may be resentful if I do free bindings for
> asks (since those binders wanted the business), but this
> resentfulness is
> not a moral argument. As in the apple case, I am at moral liberty to
> do as
> I wish.
> To address another of Jack's claims, he writes,
> >Steve says: "No bookbinder, professional or otherwise, has an
> >>expectation of any sort of income or salary at all."
> >I haven't the foggiest idea what Steve means here. Expectation of
> >has absolutely nothing to do with ethics.
> This is strange. Jack claims not to understand me, then gives an
> approximate paraphrase of what I said. His following complaints
> income confuse me, however. Jack complains about the cost of his
> and the little money he has made on videotapes and writing books.
> Since he
> thinks that "expectation of income has absolutely nothing to do with
> ethics," he obviously does not believe that these things are unfair
> unjust. Therefore I conclude that he is either 1. complaining for
> its own
> sake, 2. expressing envy of those who are better off financially as
> result of these practices, or 3. expressing resentment of those who
> better off financially as a result of these practices.
> Jack also claims that "But do not think of ethics. Ethics have no
> place in
> business as conducted by non-profit institutions or governments." As
> matter of practice, I sincerely hope that he is mistaken. As a
> matter of
> principle, morality has an important place in these arenas. Indeed,
> thought this was the whole topic of conversation.
> Steven D. Hales
> Assistant Professor email: hales@xxxxxxxxxx
> Department of Philosophy phone: (717) 389-4229
> Bloomsburg University fax: (717) 389-2094
> Bloomsburg, PA 17815
> Denis Gouey
> Denis Gouey Bookbinding Studio
> PO Box 383 Norfolk CT, 06058
> 860 542 5063