I agree. What is a better way (beyond the hand wavy βlet the market decideβ)
Discussion
The market doesn't "decide," price controls don't work because the price is a result of voluntary market interaction. It's a thermometer, not the heat itself.
Price controls are analogous to capping the thermometer and letting pressure build up, while claiming that we've controlled the temperature outside.
Saying "the market decides" is like suggesting we are "letting the weather decide the temperature" instead of the weatherman. When the second statement is just nonsense. The weatherman doesn't control the weather, if he is manipulating the thermometer then its just lying about what the real temperature is.
My proposal isn't about "letting the markets decide," because markets are literally the only thing that create prices in the first place. I'm saying we shouldn't have institutions with the express authority to completely monopolize a market and then lie about the price.
Price controls are simply lies, we should just stop lying.
βIt's a thermometer, not the heat itself. β
π
I've come to associate the concept of price controls as a form of subtle moral evil, in that a ruler decrees a value for a good that does not accurately match the real value for that good.
So it has to distort the truth.
I think, in an indirect way, it is lying?
While I think all value is subjective (as a good has different utility for every individual), there is still a kind of market truth.
If money could not be manipulated, then the going price of a thing would accurately reflect its place in a society's hierarchy of value
how do you stop them?
Great post Guy!
Your analogy is pretty god damn good. Permission to use at my next presentation?
Of course π«‘