Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T18:19:20.667Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Efficiency, Equity, and Price Gouging: A Response to Zwolinski

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2015

Jeremy Snyder
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

In this response, I reiterate my argument that price gouging undercuts the goal of equity in access to essential goods whereas Zwolinski emphasizes the importance of the efficient provision of essential goods above all other goals. I agree that the efficient provision of essential goods is important as I argue for the goal of equitable access to sufficient of the goods essential to living a minimally flourishing human life. However, efficiency is a means to this goal rather than the end itself. Finally, I offer additional arguments against the non-worseness claim.

Type
Articles
Information
Business Ethics Quarterly , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , April 2009 , pp. 303 - 306
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Business Ethics 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Goodin, Robert. 1988. Reasons for Welfare. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herman, Barbara. 2001. “The Scope of Moral Requirement,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 30: 227–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, Jeremy. 2009. “What's the Matter with Price Gouging?” Business Ethics Quarterly. 19(2) (April): 275–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wertheimer, Alan. 1996. Exploitation. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwolinski, Matt. 2008. “The Ethics of Price Gouging,” Business Ethics Quarterly 18(3) (July): 347–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwolinski, Matt. 2009. “Price Gouging, Non-Worseness, and Distributive Justice,” Business Ethics Quarterly. 19(2) (April): 295–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar