Debate - Ethical Consumerism
If I want to buy some currently available goods, e.g. the Watchmen book and/or the new Prodigy album, where should I do so?
I can order both from Amazon. I may even be able to get them from my local Tesco (CD more likely, I feel).
Or I can look for a retailer in town somewhere, maybe a (comic) book shop for one, and a CD store (if any still exist) for the other.
But does the second option actually have any economic value? Does the retailer gain significantly from my purchase, or is the vast majority of the price I pay sucked up by the cost, profit margins having been squeezed to tiny percentages?
If large retailers are able to offer me a much better price (and if nothing else, inform me about their price in a manner that is more easily accessible to me), should I not reward their efforts by shopping where it is cheapest for me?
Or is there some intrinsic value in bricks-and-mortar shops that I should support by buying goods in them, even if it costs me more? (Their price may well be the same once p&p is factored in, but in addition there is my time and transport to consider. Since I work from home, staying in to receive a parcel costs me nothing.)
In terms of economics, the best price should win the most business, that is the mechanism of free markets. If you want to charge me more than the going rate, you have to offer me something more - in the case of shops, I get to take the goods home immediately, which may or may not be of value to me. As far as I can see, any other benefits are of an intangible sort.
In terms of ethics, the whole thing becomes more muddled - which business model do I feel good about supporting? Does it even matter, since neither purchasing method influences production in any way?
What would (or did) you do, Dear Reader?
There's a new article by Philip Pullman in the Times called "Malevolent voices that despise our freedoms".
I'm unsure how I feel about this, too. On the one hand, it's very emotive stuff, and most certainly based in fact. On the other, it is not a new idea, and as I generally tend to believe that the world is becoming neither better nor worse in general, I don't know whether I should be concerned now (rather than at any other point). Does it matter? Can I do anything about it?
Has it not always been the case that private citizens must fend for themselves against a powerful state, and notions of democracy have never been all that important versus the reality of government - and that this, while possibly bad in theory, has few practical implications on our lives?
Thoughts etc. welcome.
I can order both from Amazon. I may even be able to get them from my local Tesco (CD more likely, I feel).
Or I can look for a retailer in town somewhere, maybe a (comic) book shop for one, and a CD store (if any still exist) for the other.
But does the second option actually have any economic value? Does the retailer gain significantly from my purchase, or is the vast majority of the price I pay sucked up by the cost, profit margins having been squeezed to tiny percentages?
If large retailers are able to offer me a much better price (and if nothing else, inform me about their price in a manner that is more easily accessible to me), should I not reward their efforts by shopping where it is cheapest for me?
Or is there some intrinsic value in bricks-and-mortar shops that I should support by buying goods in them, even if it costs me more? (Their price may well be the same once p&p is factored in, but in addition there is my time and transport to consider. Since I work from home, staying in to receive a parcel costs me nothing.)
In terms of economics, the best price should win the most business, that is the mechanism of free markets. If you want to charge me more than the going rate, you have to offer me something more - in the case of shops, I get to take the goods home immediately, which may or may not be of value to me. As far as I can see, any other benefits are of an intangible sort.
In terms of ethics, the whole thing becomes more muddled - which business model do I feel good about supporting? Does it even matter, since neither purchasing method influences production in any way?
What would (or did) you do, Dear Reader?
There's a new article by Philip Pullman in the Times called "Malevolent voices that despise our freedoms".
I'm unsure how I feel about this, too. On the one hand, it's very emotive stuff, and most certainly based in fact. On the other, it is not a new idea, and as I generally tend to believe that the world is becoming neither better nor worse in general, I don't know whether I should be concerned now (rather than at any other point). Does it matter? Can I do anything about it?
Has it not always been the case that private citizens must fend for themselves against a powerful state, and notions of democracy have never been all that important versus the reality of government - and that this, while possibly bad in theory, has few practical implications on our lives?
Thoughts etc. welcome.