Pay What It Costs
I have developed a "Pay What It Costs" philosophy as a reaction to the cultural sales-mania that induces people to buy things they don't need. At times I've found myself conflicted by this philosophy, because the world seems to reward those those that seek out the best deals. My counter-argument was always that one just spends time and energy instead of money. But discounted and variable pricing are staples of a free market -- perhaps, I realize, my philosophy was based on defense.
This proposal is for a rejection of my longstanding "Pay What It Costs" philosophy. As a publicly traded person, I am entrusted with other people's money. Should I take my stewardship of those funds as a obligation to maximize returns? A yes vote will support a new, cost-effective attitude and an adoption of the adage that "a penny saved is a penny earned." There is no "true" price because the value of everything, even the dollar we use to measure value, is variable.
A no vote reinforces the concept that items have an inherent cost and bargaining and sales and pricing tricks are no way for a modern day enterprise to conduct business. It's a rejection of loss-leaders, coupon-clipping, and loyalty programs and a principled stand against the tomfoolery of modern day commerce that is best summed up as "Pay What It Costs."
I look forward to your collective decision.