Katrina and "Price Gouging"

Over at the Volokh Conspiracy, Todd Zywicki has an interesting post:

Walter Williams on "Price Gouging":

The people's economist, Walter Williams, patiently explains once again why limits on "price gouging" are counterproductive (I noted Georgia's "crackdown" on price gouging a week or two ago):

The fallout from Hurricane Katrina has featured a lot of ignorance and demagoguery about prices. Let's look at some of it. One undeniable fact is that the hurricane disaster changed scarcity conditions. There are fewer stores, fewer units of housing, less gasoline and a shortage of many other goods and services used daily. Rising prices not only manifest these changed scarcity conditions, they help us cope, adjust and get us on the road to recovery.
Here's a which-is-better question for you. Suppose a hotel room rented for $79 a night prior to Hurricane Katrina's devastation. Based on that price, an evacuating family of four might rent two adjoining rooms. When they arrive at the hotel, they find the rooms rent for $200; they decide to make do with one room. In my book, that's wonderful. The family voluntarily opted to make a room available for another family who had to evacuate or whose home was destroyed. Demagogues will call this price-gouging, but I ask you, which is preferable: a room available at $200 or a room unavailable at $79? Rising prices get people to voluntarily economize on goods and services rendered scarcer by the disaster.

He also explains why the cost that the service stations paid when the bought the gasoline is simply irrelevant:

What about the house you might have bought for $50,000 in 1970 that you're selling today? If you charged me $250,000 for it, today's price for its replacement, as opposed to what you paid for it, are you guilty of price-gouging?

What are your thoughts?

Property Rights

I believe that the institution of private property--and the vigorous protection of economic liberties and property rights--are what make men and women truly free. No liberty is safe in a society in which government controls property, because in such a society your ability to pursue happiness, support a family, work, have a home, and even worship God often depends upon the grace of those who from time to time hold the reins of political power. How much political freedom do you have in a society in which "getting ahead" economically depends upon your towing the party line of those who wield political power?

On the other hand, Professor Ely once said that "an absolute right of property...would result in the dissolution of society." What do you think Prof. Ely means? What kinds of social restraints on private property rights are acceptable in a free society? Which do you think is more important in a free society--economic autonomy or sexual autonomy? Why?

In this course, we will focus on the acquisition of property rights and on the "sticks" in the bundle of private property rights--possession, use, development, control, and transfer. We will also focus on the "public law" of private property: the constitutional protection of private property under the Takings Clause of the U.S. Constitution, as well as a number of federal civil rights laws protecting certain property rights from being abridged. I hope you enjoy the class!

By the way, what is property?