--- In powderworks@yahoogroups.com.au, RM <m2k9@...> wrote:

I'm loving this thread ... relativity and market readiness is all 

you 

need to validate any form of profiteering.

Obviously we'd all pay hundreds to see them!!!!!
So also would a dying man in a desert pay thousands for a glass of 
water.  Market willingness to pay doesn't make it "right".
And if the guy next to you offers the dying man a glass of water 

for 

$1000, offering him one for $800 (that's cost you 10c) is somehow 
ethical?  Market relativity doesn't make profiteering "right" 

either.

The original point was entirely an ethics question, not a pragmatic 
proposal:  It's a benefit concert for the burnt out Victorians, 

stating 

"All profits go to ...".  Making profits on anything associated 

with it 

(eg: tee-shirts) is ethically dubious since it's declared "All 

Profits 

...", so how is it ethical to make a tidy profit on selling tix to 

the 

rabid punters to access what is ultimately a staging point for a 
non-profit benefit?

As I said, it's an entirely theoretical question anyway, it 

probably is 

cost price for putting together a one-off with fly-ins.

[Launch anti-missile ordinance now ...]

I just love analytical ethics ... get over it.  Of course it's a 
bargain!  The phrase "Once in a lifetime opportunity ..." is valid.

:)

By the way the original poster of the thread also said:  "Hey guess 
what...my town caught fire 2 days ago...you would have seen it on 

the 

news. It was that huge fire in the dandenongs, including Upwey and 
belgrave south.  [snip]", so there's some fairly reasonably 

proximity to 

the actual context in the original complaint.  Me? I'm just an 

amateur 

ethics philosopher, so I weighed in.   No valid context here.

Cheers
 RM

All I know is there's many atime Ive been in the Oils Mosh and would 
have paid $800 for a glass of water (ie Closing of The Stage Door 
Tavern in Sydney)