Quakers and the ethics of fixed pricing

June 22, 2015

From a 1956 issue of the then-newly rebrand­ed Friends Jour­nal, an expla­na­tion of the ethics behind pro­vid­ing a fixed price for goods:

Whether the ear­ly Quak­ers were con­scious­ly try­ing to start a social move­ment or not is a moot point. Most like­ly they were not. They were mere­ly seek­ing to give con­sis­tent expres­sion to their belief in the equal­i­ty of all men as spir­i­tu­al sons of God. The Quak­er cus­tom of mark­ing a fixed price on mer­chan­dise so that all men would pay the same price is anoth­er case in point. Most prob­a­bly Friends did this sim­ply because they want­ed to be fair to all who fre­quent­ed their shops and give the sharp bar­gain­er no advan­tage at the expense of his less skilled broth­er. It is unlike­ly that many Quak­ers adopt­ed fixed prices in the hope of forc­ing their sys­tem on a busi­ness world inter­est­ed only in prof­it. That part was just coin­ci­dence, the coin­ci­dence being that Friends hit upon it because of their con­vic­tions; the sys­tem itself was a nat­ur­al success.
 — Bruce L Pear­son, Feb 4 1956

 

Soldier against the war gets mistrial

February 7, 2007

Just over the wires: “Mis­tri­al declared court-martial of war objector”:http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2007 – 02-08T000024Z_01_N05474363_RTRUKOC_0_US-USA-IRAQ-OFFICER.xml&WTmodLoc=PolNewsHome_C1_%5BFeed%5D‑3. Details:
bq. A mil­i­tary judge declared a mis­tri­al on Wednes­day in the court-martial of a U.S. Army offi­cer, who pub­licly refused to fight in Iraq and crit­i­cized the war.
It’s great to see that some sol­diers are seri­ous­ly debat­ing the ethics of this war.