No argument from me.
The subject, however, is whether or not gouging is something which should be defended as a good and natural thing.
I doubt even Adam Smith would defend pirates.
Politicians can either leave it alone, or create shortages. That's it. Most of them will opt for the former, while pretending to take action to magically reduce prices and increase availability.
Again, no argument from me.
Even during World War II, when the need for intervention was obvious to most people, wage, price controls and an extensive rationing system gave birth to black markets and profiteering. But the controls were required to distribute goods where they needed to go and still provide the folks at home with some sense of fairness.
There's a reason Adam Smith is known as the first political economist. Economics is not a science and neither is the operation of markets.
"The subject, however, is whether or not gouging is something which should be defended as a good and natural thing."
Fair point. I would answer that "gouging" (merchants setting the price for the goods they sell at any level they wish) is neither good nor bad. It just is.
In a free society, absent any other force, it is impossible to gauge a persons "need" for a gallon of gas in any other way but price. The objective of the market is to provide every consumer with their "need". Some people "need" gas at more than $6.00 a gallon in Atlanta (at least last night)..... sounds crazy, but if that station sold at $2.00 a gallon, there would be no gas - because consumers are every bit as "greedy" as the merchant and would have bought the gas even though they didn't "need" it.
Prices will go as high as people are willing to pay. We'd all be surprised just how hight that price actually is for a gallon of gas.