Gubmint intervention at work

[crazy canuck]

On a more serious note, do you not have a concern about deceptive trade practices?

Not on whether an item an item advertised as on sale is actually at a reduced price.

So its ok for a retailor to be dishonest, so long as its on and item by item basis?

[alfred russel]

So its ok for a retailor to be dishonest, so long as its on and item by item basis?

It isn't okay in the ethical sense, and that may put their souls in danger of eternal hellfire. But I don't think it is a good use state power and society resources to investigate whether that roll of toilet paper advertised on sale was actually sold for a higher price last week.

[crazy canuck]

So its ok for a retailor to be dishonest, so long as its on and item by item basis?

It isn't okay in the ethical sense, and that may put their souls in danger of eternal hellfire. But I don't think it is a good use state power and society resources to investigate whether that roll of toilet paper advertised on sale was actually sold for a higher price last week.

Your right, that is why there are private procecution provisions.  I guess you missed that part

[alfred russel]

So its ok for a retailor to be dishonest, so long as its on and item by item basis?

It isn't okay in the ethical sense, and that may put their souls in danger of eternal hellfire. But I don't think it is a good use state power and society resources to investigate whether that roll of toilet paper advertised on sale was actually sold for a higher price last week.

Your right, that is why there are private procecution provisions.  I guess you missed that part

That doesn't change anything: your judges, court administrators, etc are still state employees. Actually, if the government is going to allow action in these cases, I'd prefer it to be managed by government regulators rather than privately, which seems to have more potential to have costs spiral out of control.

[crazy canuck]

So its ok for a retailor to be dishonest, so long as its on and item by item basis?

It isn't okay in the ethical sense, and that may put their souls in danger of eternal hellfire. But I don't think it is a good use state power and society resources to investigate whether that roll of toilet paper advertised on sale was actually sold for a higher price last week.

So you would rather have deceptive trade practices then fund the court system.  Interesting.

Your right, that is why there are private procecution provisions.  I guess you missed that part

That doesn't change anything: your judges, court administrators, etc are still state employees. Actually, if the government is going to allow action in these cases, I'd prefer it to be managed by government regulators rather than privately, which seems to have more potential to have costs spiral out of control.