I’m not quite sure I understand the reasoning of your argument.
I certainly agree that if someone is buying a bmw they can afford an extra $7/month. But I think that the question is value as well as a sense of fairness. Just because someone has money doesn’t mean they will spend it arbitrarily for things of little value.
This does happen all the time (eg, natural water), but there is certainly a large group of people who don’t purchase based on this philosophy. This may contribute to their wealth level making them capable of buying luxury vehicles. I think so.
Arguing that people have the money to pay, therefore should pay, without evaluating the value of the item is silly and will lead to increased poverty. As the market will make more and more expensive things without value until an equilibrium is reached where the buyers can not afford it.
I certainly agree that if someone is buying a bmw they can afford an extra $7/month. But I think that the question is value as well as a sense of fairness. Just because someone has money doesn’t mean they will spend it arbitrarily for things of little value.
This does happen all the time (eg, natural water), but there is certainly a large group of people who don’t purchase based on this philosophy. This may contribute to their wealth level making them capable of buying luxury vehicles. I think so.
Arguing that people have the money to pay, therefore should pay, without evaluating the value of the item is silly and will lead to increased poverty. As the market will make more and more expensive things without value until an equilibrium is reached where the buyers can not afford it.