"Overcharging" the rich to offer subsidy to the poor and needy, How moral?

[Iroh]

Well, no matter how noble that practice may seem to you and to whoever does it, it simply isn't morally right. Also, if that's your business model, I find it hard to see how you'll make a profit. Supposing word gets out on how you sell your products at a higher price to people who seem/looks loaded to you to subsidize it supposedly for people who are poor, what do you think would happen? You're likely going to lose some, if not most of your rich customers while acquiring a lot of new customers that are seemingly poor. Your business would end up going under.
As a business, your primary aim should be on how to make profit. Following this proposed idea, I struggle to see just how you'll do that. As your idea is all about helping the poor and needy, Isn't it better to set up a non profit organization that helps just the poor and needy in the society. That way,  you'll be helping just the people who need some help while still relying on the good graces of others.

[mirakal]

If I discover that you are charging me high for patronizing you, because you want to sell low to people you consider poor I will stop patronizing you. If I decide to dress well doesn’t mean that I should be over charged for what I’m buying. If you want to run a charity home for the poor in your business, make it known to people so that any one who want to donate to that course will support willing. I didn’t steal the money you think I have. I worked hard for it. The government are holding the resources of the people. Such idea will crumble your business. I don’t think I can ever do that if I’m a business owner.

Personally, I also see it that this kind of business won't thrive in the long run if its all for business sake. All business desire to make profits, making money is often the motivation of starting a business. So if your business does only make profits from the rich and turn charity to the poor, then most likely it will be abused in the long run.

I'm not saying that its bad to extend help to the poor and needy, but if you keep feeding them with fish, they will get used to it, but if you teach them how to catch fish, eventually they will learn on their own and make money by themselves.

Business is business, let it remain a good and profitable business that deals with equality, regardless of the individual's economic status.

[sunsilk]

It is not right to justify that it is for the poor and needy to overcharge people who look rich compared to the locals who are simply poor.

Where is the business ethics in this? to be honest, this will push away customers in these markets and they'll never come back to it.

Remember the quote "Honesty is the best policy". It doesn't define someone's social and financial status. They better be honest in doing business and they'll probably get more help because people like honest ones.

[crwth]

I don't think it's right to charge differently depending on the customer, because customers might react differently. Since it is related to consumer pricing, different pricing could lead to backlash, online posts, and being canceled. That would definitely affect the brand reputation.

I don't think that is the right mindset to cater to the customer background you have.

[SatoPrincess]

I think it’s unreasonable to charge someone higher than the normal price just because you “feel” like they are rich. I might dress good, and smell like a million bucks but that doesn’t mean I am wealthy. So my question to you OP is what exactly is the metric that you use to determine who is a rich customer? Because if I wanted expensive I would go to the big brands and shop.

[Perfectbaby]

This may depends on the business owner to know how good they could be to help the poor and needy's because there are some people who doesn't care about either the poor or the Rich people. Whenever their goods are delivered to them they wouldn't consider anyone out there rather what they feels is the amount they could be recovering from their business and sales.
Although, this is not a good idea for me because, we are all one and people should be treated equally irrespective of their status, business should be about transparency and not about favoritism.

[viljy]

It’s not entirely accurate to talk about a business model here. No business does that; even small enterprises, for example, in the food service sector, don’t differentiate prices for customers based on their wealth (unless it’s special discounts for pensioners or for birthday celebrants on that day, etc.).

This is more like a street vendor of trinkets trying to sell some souvenirs to a wealthy tourist at an exorbitant price. If they manage to sell it for a high price, that’s good; if not, they’ll cut the price in half. But this is not a business model (especially one with any element of social responsibility of the wealthy towards society), but rather ordinary market trade between a seller and a buyer.

[davis196]

In certain countries it's normal for businesses to charge customers based on their economic status. If a customer look wealthy or rich, he's charged higher than normal. If he looks poor, and possibly bargains really hard, he could end up getting a fair deal, sometimes below the cost price or eiven free of charge, typically for beggars who have nothing atall to pay... yet such model remains profitable.
Customers who don't get the idea may feel cheated and probably warn others to avoid such places. Others are understanding enough and happy to pay especially since the goods and services are relatively cheap compared to wealthy places. In Rwanda for example, I watched a foreigner trying to persuade fellow visitors to consider this fact, and for the sake of the poor.  
I believe the model is what sustains the poor... businesses are willing to keep price extremely low because of poverty. If some end up not being profitable, they are still able to survive from other people's helps.


I'm considering this topic because of the poor and needy. When we propose ideas that can help keep businesses profitable, we are burdened by the fact that they are probably going to be at the detriment of the poor and needy. So, for conscience sake, we focus on workable ideas that support the poor without affecting businesses negatively.

AFAIK, this is being called "dynamic pricing" and stores like Walmart are aggressively implementing it in the US. The whole idea seems pretty stupid. The end result would be all shoppers dressing like homeless people, only for the sake of getting a lower price. The poor people need donations and jobs, not lower prices at the shop. I'm not saying that low prices are bad, but the price is supposed to be covering production costs, transport costs and a decent markup for the manufacturer and the merchant. Having extremely low pricing for the poor would ruin the business, sooner or later.

[Biirakedee]

For me a better approach is that in a situation whereby many people struggle to afford basic need, helping those who genuinely needs help is very important but making someone pay more just because they appear to be wealthy is unfair. Having forgotten that Some one may look rich but have serious financial responsibility while another person may look poor but be financially comfortable. We can help people without doing it based on assumptions. The rich should not automatically be treated as people who must pay more just as the poor also should not have to prove their hardship to deserve help.
Supporting the people in need is a good thing but at the same time it ought to be done in a way that shows fairness and also keeps the business sustainable.

[Davidloki]

I think it’s the right thing to do some people are so rich that nothing will ever be done to them. I think it’s only right to help those in need and to share a portion of their immense wealth. For example, Elon Musk in America has suggested the possibility of giving one SpaceX share to every child born, and Trump has stated that the big tech companies must contribute to the country’s development and give a portion of the dividends derived from AI to American citizens.

This should be a good initiative if it is actually implemented, it would drastically reduce the rate of poverty and help boost the economy of the US government. But it would nice that the US as the world power would also look out for other countries and provide necessary support that would help boost their economy as well. This should be channelled to mostly African countries with one of the highest poverty percentage rate, it would mean almost nothing for the rich Americans.

[Zlantann]

I'm considering this topic because of the poor and needy. When we propose ideas that can help keep businesses profitable, we are burdened by the fact that they are probably going to be at the detriment of the poor and needy. So, for conscience sake, we focus on workable ideas that support the poor without affecting businesses negatively.

Some of my colleagues dress poorly when they want to go to the market. They do this because sellers consider the physical appearance of buyers before considering the price of goods and services.  Out of pity, these sellers could give considerable discounts to the less privileged.

Paying more for a product to support the poor is a good course. I know many supermarkets that encourage customers to give to the poor through different platforms. But it should be voluntary. The rich shouldn't be forced to pay more because it would be redistributed to the poor. Many people work very hard to become rich, so it would be unfair to coerce them to giveinto giving to the poor.

[Junii]

I'm considering this topic because of the poor and needy. When we propose ideas that can help keep businesses profitable, we are burdened by the fact that they are probably going to be at the detriment of the poor and needy. So, for conscience sake, we focus on workable ideas that support the poor without affecting businesses negatively.

Maybe that idea works well but there must be some conditions not just looks because it is not necessary that if someone looks good and his dressing is good doesn't mean he will be rich same for the poor that if he looks poor doesn't mean he will be poor in reality there must be some conditions plus peoples should have to show honesty in this because i know if they see that there is a subsidy for a poor by just looking poor majority of them wears dirty clothes before buying any necessities. In our place there is a pharmacy they have a box on the entry gate of the store the people donate and put money in it and if some needy person came to the pharmacy for medicines and he doesn't have money they will take money from that box and buy the medicines so that is a  good idea from my side if someone need it and we can use that idea in any store with that way we can actually help the poor.

[alani123]

There would be no need for any charity if the taxes were handled in a fair way.

Just think of all the various ways you pay tax with. Your wages are taxed even before they hit your wallet. Then at the end of the year if you made any money you also pay more tax. And then there's consumption tax, road tax, sales tax, fuel tax, environmental tax whatever else...

Can you imagine if all these payments were used responsibly? Each country could have a top notch free education system, good roads and decent hospitals. Imagine then, what need would there be for charity?

[Rengga Jati]

In certain countries it's normal for businesses to charge customers based on their economic status. If a customer look wealthy or rich, he's charged higher than normal. If he looks poor, and possibly bargains really hard, he could end up getting a fair deal, sometimes below the cost price or eiven free of charge, typically for beggars who have nothing atall to pay... yet such model remains profitable.

This does indeed happen in some traditional markets, where bargaining is still common and product prices are not explicitly displayed. Consequently, there is always a possibility of being charged more. It isn’t just a matter of being wealthy or poor. Sometimes, people from other regions might also end up paying a higher price than the actual one. Ultimately, it often comes down to one's own ability to negotiate the price.

I'm considering this topic because of the poor and needy. When we propose ideas that can help keep businesses profitable, we are burdened by the fact that they are probably going to be at the detriment of the poor and needy. So, for conscience sake, we focus on workable ideas that support the poor without affecting businesses negatively.

It actually comes down to the individual. In reality, no need to categorize ourselves as poor, middle-class, or wealth. We should simply conduct ourselves based on our specific needs. It includes maintaining a professional approach regardless of the setting. For instance, when shopping in a marketplace where prices are not marked on items, we should already have an idea of  the expected price range. This allows for negotiation. Until we get a fair price. If the seller is unwilling to agree, simply walk away and look elsewhere.

Conversely, in a retail environment where prices are already fixed. One should not ask for a discount. Unless, of course, a discount is explicitly offered. The point is that while the poor and the wealthy are indeed different and may even represent different target markets. This does not mean they should be treated differently. Everyone is entitled to the same level of service, especially when they are all equally capable of making the purchase.

[Localhostspeed]

I'm considering this topic because of the poor and needy. When we propose ideas that can help keep businesses profitable, we are burdened by the fact that they are probably going to be at the detriment of the poor and needy. So, for conscience sake, we focus on workable ideas that support the poor without affecting businesses negatively.

I don't like this model at all. They do this in my country and it piss me off. Why charge someone based on their financial capacity. This is classicism and it's ready abuse by many people. If you active on Tiktok and see a product that you want to buy and you ask on the comments section about the price, they wouldn't tell you, they will first ask you to dm them and they will give you a price based on who you are on your profile, if you have money and it shows in you profile, they will slam you with big price and vise versa.

If you know that you are poor, go for the things you know you can afford. The rich will always go for things that are expensive. As for you that have nothing much to spend, settle for what is in between your needs. If you attempt to make this work, economy is will be affected and you may end up with high inflation.

[boyptc]

Some of my colleagues dress poorly when they want to go to the market. They do this because sellers consider the physical appearance of buyers before considering the price of goods and services.  Out of pity, these sellers could give considerable discounts to the less privileged.

This happens in wet markets at most times, when they see someone dress well they think it's a rich person shopping.

It's a good strategy to dress poorly but they have money that they're not showing to the people.

Paying more for a product to support the poor is a good course. I know many supermarkets that encourage customers to give to the poor through different platforms. But it should be voluntary. The rich shouldn't be forced to pay more because it would be redistributed to the poor. Many people work very hard to become rich, so it would be unfair to coerce them to giveinto giving to the poor.

There are products that are vocal that they are selling for a cause, they put a percentage of sales go to the charity.

I think if they want to help the needy people, this is the way to go. Declaring it that someone's purchase means a lot and goes to help the charity or community rather than doing it like the cheaters that they only change rates when looking rich is buying.

[lovesmayfamilis]

I think it’s the right thing to do some people are so rich that nothing will ever be done to them. I think it’s only right to help those in need and to share a portion of their immense wealth. For example, Elon Musk in America has suggested the possibility of giving one SpaceX share to every child born, and Trump has stated that the big tech companies must contribute to the country’s development and give a portion of the dividends derived from AI to American citizens.

I agree. The rich can pay more, and the poor can lose a lot. Charity is not very popular nowadays, so if something like what the OP describes can help the poor at least a little, I completely agree. In my country, of course, there is no such division, but services for tourists are much more expensive than for locals. In the end, there's always a choice: if someone doesn't like it, they can always refuse, right? We cannot eradicate poverty; it is utopia, but everyone can always help those who are in need more.

[Byebyebtc]

Well this are the little sentiments that one could attach to his or her business, you know it's not just about making money is also about how can you contribute to help to society it's self.
 Although you do have to see the strength of your business before you consider taking such actions your business might not be stable enough to have extra to help others, but if you realize your business is doing really good you should also do well to help others that are limited in some ways

[Shadiq]

Yes, there are some markets where the price of the product is asked several times more than the price and the product gets its value through bargaining. In this case, those who have a lot of money buy the product at a higher price and those who have less money buy the same product at a lower price by bargaining.

That is, suppose the price of a product is $100, but the seller charges $300-$400 for that product. Whether a person is rich or poor, he has to determine the price of that product through bargaining. For rich people, $300-$400 is not a big amount, so they do not want to go to the trouble of bargaining. But for those for whom the amount is very large, they can bargain and buy the product for $100.

I myself do not like this system. Before buying any product, one has to research the actual price of that product and go to the market and buy the product at a fair price by bargaining. Why doesn't the government make such a system mandatory where the price of all goods will be fixed and there will be no scope for charging different prices for the rich and the poor. Asking for a price based on appearance or making up a fake price is a kind of fraud that deceives many people.

[Alpha Marine]

In certain countries it's normal for businesses to charge customers based on their economic status. If a customer look wealthy or rich, he's charged higher than normal. If he looks poor, and possibly bargains really hard, he could end up getting a fair deal, sometimes below the cost price or eiven free of charge, typically for beggars who have nothing atall to pay... yet such model remains profitable.

Is that a variation of fraud? Don't you think you are cheating the rich simply because they have more money? You people need to forget this communist mindset and realise that rich people are not your problems. The fact that a person has more money than you does not make him your enemy.
If a business can reduce its price very low for the poor and still remain profitable, that means there is a problem in society because prices should not be that high when there is no need to. It's normal if, as a businessman, you decide to be kind to a person if you feel like it, but having different prices for people who appear rich and people who appear poor is not what an ethical business person should do.
The goal is to make things that people need affordable for all. The goal shouldn't be to overchange the rich and undercharge the poor.