I’d be more embarrassed to claim that the comment was an attempt at a joke in response to the article than to admit to not having read the article before commenting - in part because of how unconvincing a defense it is.

It’s best to actually read articles before commenting on them.

So.... stare in awe at their arms/torso, and ask if I may feel their muscles?

Nazis were socialist.

The bottles of water cost $1.75, but you seem to prefer Soviet famines?

Or if they left the price of bottled water at $4 per case, the first few customers buy as much as they can cart away, leaving others thirsty.

Wow, you really might want to pass theses articles over to someone with a little understanding of economics. In the meantime, Walter E. Williams has written extensively about how “gouging” isn’t actually a thing. Research.

Educate yourself -

Maybe go read a book or dozen on this issue? This is such a settled issue in Economics that it’s used as case studies in textbooks.

Your comment is incredibly short sighted. If you are only allowed to charge $2 for a water bottle. Then you have however many water bottles each store has, and when that runs out game over.

If you’re allowed to charge $100 for a water bottle, then people will fill up U-hauls from all over the country and drive to…