"People are buying them purely to re-sell at a profit, making an already scarce item even scarcer and more expensive.
If you can't see something wrong with that, I'm not sure I can really explain much further.
Mark"
I can't see something wrong with that. I have no idea what you are trying to get at, in regard to where the "wrongness" comes in. If you can see something wrong with this, you should be able to explain what it is you see that is wrong about it... so I am not sure why you won't articulate your argument, and say you can't.
I guess you must have a far more expansive sense of what constitutes "wrong" or "unfair" than I do. I'll tell you what... I'll articulate for you my sense of how right and wrong applies in this situation, and you can then tell me how reselling knives for profit is wrong by responding to my argument.
To me, the root of wrong behavior is aggression upon a non-aggressor. This generally involves the unwarranted use, or threat of use, of physical force, against a person (or set of people) or a person's property.
When I look at the situation regarding resale of Busse family knives, such unwarranted usage of force against a non-aggressor appears conspicuously absent. What I see is a chain of completely voluntary interactions. The Busses voluntarily sell their wares, which are their property to do as they please with. The customer voluntarily buys these wares with their own money, which is theirs to do as they please with. The customer, in turn, voluntarily resells the knives, which are their property to do as they please with, at a profit. The buyer voluntarily buys these knives.
Voluntary at every step of the way. If anyone at any point in these dealings felt that the deal was not satisfactory, they could opt not to participate in the deal.
Ergo, no wrongdoing has occurred.
"The DM, for example, is listed as $70 in the shop. I have yet to see one sell for under $100 on the Exchange. The cheapest one I have seen went for $110.
...If I could get a DM for $70 plus shipping, I'd have one now, but I don't like the thought that I'm having to cough up extra just because I wasn't in the right place at the right time, financially and physically."
So, because you can't get what you want, when you want, at the price you want, that makes other peoples' behavior wrong, and makes the situation unfair? I just don't see it. All I see is unexplained complaints on your part, apparently because you don't like the way that the free market functions to distribute scarce goods. (I hope I am not mischaracterizing your argument, but I have asked for your argument and this is all you've given. Please feel welcome to correct me about the source of your contention.)
Who are you to step in the middle of mutually consensual transactions between other people, and say, "Hey, that's not right; you guys are committing wrongs; I want you to change your dealings, for
my sake"?
