/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>18261265
There's no substantial difference between grabbing the product at the warehouse and grabbing the product at the store. In either case, he took it out of the hands of the masses and sought to place it where it was most needed — at hospitals and with medical personnel.

The court case should go as follows. The defendant makes a motion to pull a random file out of a local hospitals' billing department. They look at what the insurance was charged for medicines. If the mark-up for anything is greater than 200% all the hospitals' executives are arrested for 'price gouging', the FBI agents who organized the PR raid against the plaintiff are dragged through the streets and caned as in Singapore, and the defendant walks free with full compensation at the markup he requested for the masks.

In this country many forms of otherwise regular economic action magically become unacceptable when one fails to donate to the political machine and retain a room full of lawyers. An organization that is itself freely marking up services to the tune of 1,000 - 15,000% in a time of crisis cannot be protected from being so 'victimized' at the expense of a man's property and freedom. Something something equal protection clause. But do not confuse this for a solely legal issue, it is without a doubt, a moral one regardless of what the law may say.

Crisis is arbitrary, over-blown, subjective, and transient — if the civilization notion of property rights is so flimsy that the State may completely overturn them whensoever it declares a 'crisis' there are truly no property 'rights' at all. Such powers being granted to a State is both a symptom and cause of decline. Soon, your gun will be seized because of the gun violence 'crisis', your house will be seized because of the homelessness 'crisis', your food will be seized because of the famine 'crisis', and your life will be seized because of the counter-revolutionary 'crisis'.