Reminder I am not a lawyer, and as I am an engineer and an accountant might be able to speak better to the topic than self – I might miss something vital, worthy of consideration, and that is consequential.
I am trying to reason around the value in pricing something vs not pricing something. It is a wide topic with implications, implications around those that profit and those that do not, worth established, right established and worth and right not established – setting precedent, allowing precedent set is consequential.
Several concrete (not abstract) examples matter.
Imagine a bottle of soda. If the price is set at $1. I am setting precedent that fizz and sugar, compounded with a bottle and specific flavors is worth $1. Price set is nice, if I got to work and make $1000 in a month, I have potential to buy many soda bottles should I want. Many might not be all good or should, but no availability no capacity to purchase is likely to not be good or should either. Soda might settle an aching stomach, less pain, and encouragement added by the soda might help society get through the day better.
Imagine a judge is making a decision on a murder trial. The judge has the potential to give Life in Prison, or the Death Penalty. The judge has not agreed that society has set the valuation right, that there is no oppression in society, that they have ideal, perfect capacity to judge in all cases, cases that are limited based upon oppression they might be able to perceive or not be able to perceive based upon limited access. Judges required to be perfect would equate to no judgment, judges make decisions based upon human laws and human valuation which is far from always ideal. Price set factors into precedent for both good and bad.
There are other cases, like if a company does not follow guidelines and regulations and that leads to pain and suffering for others. A company that sets a price on the pain and suffering as a way to expedite reduced capacity for liability is both useful and common. Imagine a worker at a water bottle plant gets trapped in the machinery and is hurt substantially. The worker might be able to sue the company to a point where the company no longer can produce water bottles. 1 injury blocks society from many water bottles is not always good. There are many companies, there are many potential problems, and likely most products could be conflated to as consequential as not having water if lost in certain cases. If it was me, or someone I cared about that was maimed by the accident $5000, $10,000, $50,000, $100,000, $1million etc…. I might be given an option accept valuation or decline valuation. If I set precedent low, $5000 might equal the company doesn’t learn doesn’t fix the issue, if I set the valuation too high $1 billion the company might not exist in the future.
Price matters, we associate far from close systems in similar ways at times, expect repetitions on valuation and assessment, weighing to just automatically not bias results under different scenarios in my opinion.
Teaching and Learning throughput is not ideal for anyone, otherwise everyone on Earth would be exponentially smarter than Einstein. God knows how to ideally value things, to fee, to price set, and price get does not equate to humans who make decisions based upon human laws should be inflated to know how to price and fee in ideal ways. Less than ideal comprehension does not equate to dumb, intelligence does not equate to guaranteed to have all necessary details that are relevant for decision making. Man and Woman required to make decisions as if are God, have the visibility of God, comprehend at God’s level is too much of a burden for anyone, and allowing is consequential – less tests, less tempts to judgment is powerful. People don’t always ideal reduced judgment for others and lack of capacity to deliver on that is partially due to lack of comprehension, lack of ideal visibility.
Each day people learn new things. That said do we always revisit price and prior judgments based upon new data? Precedent set is more consequential than people truly acknowledge at the time of judgment and setting prices in my opinion. $1 for bottle of soda, big deal or not a big deal, delaying price actually set matters or does not matter?
This writing was inspired by a dream partially about a person singing a song, or at least rhyming words about agreeing to a price is not all good.
Price also factors into High Ground – potentially established less than ideally. Accept $5000 or $1 billion from a company might equate to can’t challenge High Ground – which might not be all good or should. Not accepting money might equate to not having capacity to accept money at a later date – not a bribe might feel like a bribe, not always ideal High Ground established. Leveraged into accept or don’t accept under pressure and timetables likely doesn’t feel all good in many cases. The combination of my reasoning around this might make me sound like a lawyer, reminder I am not, and if lawyers’ and accountants’ fees were cheap or I were close friends with ones I might have other ideas to factor into reasoning and thought processes. Value exists that might be crucial to comprehension does not equate to straying from the topic based upon less-than-ideal knowledge is all good or should either.
We as society invest in electricity that is less than ideal electrocutions reduced. We as a society invest in cars that are less than ideal crashes reduced. We as a society invest in systemic justice that sets some people to deserving of the death penalty and some not. People also potentially set the combination to no big deal, not ripe with inconsistencies.
Electricity also leads to lives saved, ambulances and cars lead to lives saved as well. A positive number all that is required not really ideal either. Saves 51 people but takes 50 not good. Levels matter, acceptable levels set and get matters in both ideal and non-ideal ways and I conjecture that people might always not know when that is. The Justice system that puts 51 guilty in jail, 50 innocent in jail too? It is not about injustice, it is about how much injustice feels a little LTI (less than ideal).
Peace made swiftly, fixing problems without setting price, requirement to set price might be high value added at times. Wade fee over fix?
No lingerie shops would likely lead to less adultery. No bars and no alcohol might lead to less DUIs (driving under the influence). We as a society know we turn up non-zero levels and we agree to a price, a price that is unknown at times for the sake of greater freedom, reduced requirement to litigate and punish. I doubt anyone really wants to go to all the beaches and public pools and say don’t wear bikinis – and that in combination might lead to less sin, less adultery. I know the problem exists, has potential to exist, does not equate to I want to be required to stop it. The price of less modesty might be higher than we like to admit at times, the price of increased modesty (two sweaters and heat strokes, everyone required to wear multiple layers of clothes in hospitals) might be higher than we like to admit at times.
Claim it in combination ideals with Golden Rule, price set by man or woman? Less stones, stone throwing based upon less-than-ideal delivery by society turned up in advance is valuable. Lingerie might lead to babies for some couples and bars might as well. Got to ideal, claims of will ideal not all good, does not equate to regulation is not both useful and desirable at times. Society of punishes some sin while fails to mention sin that is IBD (in by design, in by default) doesn’t feel all ideal value established and delivered, does not feel Just. Turn up a system that is profitable to some more than others, then allow society to punish the people that are lead to less-than-ideal value? People that profit set to will always have ideal energy to solve problems they are partial investors in seems unwise. Force owners of bars to get a degree in marriage counseling and fix all the marriages damaged by less-than-ideal value created based upon alcohol? Doesn’t really sound like a fair requirement. Collective divestiture from accountability and responsibility does not really feel like ideal value established either.
Bars and Lingerie shops are Encouragement, capacity to profit, enjoy art is also Encouragement. I believe that people that Love each other want each other to be Encouraged, and that in combination with the Golden Rule does not always lead to ideal value established and delivered.
I think my art is valuable for encouragement, would not say it replaces the encouragement of real conversation (bars) or lingerie shops.
Free Starter Image
My Tech Blog 