Price Gouging and Surgical Masks

In the mass paranoia over COVID-19, supplies of surgical masks are being depleted as non-surgeons seek the false comfort of covering their mouth and nose. Of course, individuals should be free to engage in useless activities, but their use of surgical masks poses a potential threat to health care professionals.

Some health care professionals are experiencing difficulty obtaining supplies of masks. Both the World Health Organization and the United States Surgeon General have urged the public to quit buying masks, as they are ineffective in stopping the spread of COVID-19.

Normally, when demand spikes and supply is insufficient, prices rise. That is a basic principle of economics. But when demand spikes because of an emergency or crisis, prices do not rise appropriately because of anti-gouging laws.

While such laws vary from state to state, they essentially prohibit businesses from charging “exorbitant” prices during an emergency. The result is a rapid depletion of the product’s supply.

As an example, in the days before Hurricane Harvey struck Houston, bottled water was increasingly difficult to find. Stores did not raise their prices, and so, many consumers bought “exorbitant” quantities of bottled water. However, if the businesses had raised their prices, consumers would have been more restrained in their purchases. Marginal buyers would have been priced out of the market.

The same is true of surgical masks. If sellers of masks could raise their prices without fear of prosecution, marginal buyers would be driven from the market. Certainly, those who value the masks more would have to pay a higher price. But higher prices and higher profits motivate individuals to produce more or find creative ways to bring a product to market.

The solution to the potential shortage of surgical masks isn’t government intervention in the market. The solution is for government to get out of the way and let the market function.

Similar Posts

  • Rights do not Conflict

    The pandemic has exposed how widely misunderstood concepts like freedom and rights are. Many claim that rights conflict, and policy must balance there rights. For example, in a piece titled “COVID brings front and center the tug between individual rights and the public good,” the author writes: Why should anyone be allowed to spread a…

  • By What Standard?

    During the lockdown, businesses that were declared “non-essential” were prohibited from opening. In Texas, liquor stores were considered essential, but hair salons weren’t. By what standard was a business considered essential? Like many aspects of the lockdown, government officials weren’t very transparent regarding their criteria and standards. Instead, they issued dictates and expected the masses…

  • Judging the Coronavirus Science

    Government officials frequently tell us that they are “following the science.” While this may make their decisions seem objective, philosopher Ben Bayer argues that the specialized science–including medicine–don’t settle questions of value. Only the science of morality does that. If we are to move forward, we need leaders who are willing to guide their decisions…

  • The Roundup 10

    At The Objective Standard, Aaron Briley addresses the anti-American ideas underlying Black Lives Matter. Many seem to regard BLM as a humanitarian organization that fights on behalf of the downtrodden—as a nonviolent movement dedicated to protecting the rights of vulnerable citizens. However, this is not true. Founders and leaders of the organization advocate an ideology…

  • Amesh Adalja Discusses COVID-19

    In this interview, infectious disease expert Dr. Amesh Adalja discusses the development of our understanding of COVID-19, including the dynamics of its spread. Interestingly, he notes that for most people, the disease is mild and this aids in its spread. https://scgshow.com/2020/06/12/the-truth-about-coronavirus-w-dr-amesh-adalja-the-lockdown-show-podcast-ep-18/