I'm not sure I understand. With many things there is a pretty standard price range. Unless you mean that all the increased "value" of a fancy store is baked into the higher food price.
Again I dont understand your point. I would agree with you if they were the only store that then it would be much harder to set a price for what is being provided. Why is there less fault on the stores when there are multiple options?
I happen to agree that there is 100% responsibility on the shopper, but that doesn't mean that the stores aren't taking advantage. A store can't say "since there are more options we have every right to take advantage of unsuspecting customers". If every consumer was 100% aware of the options and prices and all the variables for shopping at different places then maybe a store can make such a claim, but assuming, which I think you agree to, that many shoppers dont conciously plan on getting ripped off, that the stores might be taking advantage.
Let me try to come at this from a different angle. In my area, there are a few different types of stores. There are the budget stores, like Walmart, Target, and Aldi. There are the middle class stores, offering a nicer experience, but with higher prices, such as Publix and Winn Dixie. We have health food stores, including Whole Foods, The Fresh Market, Sprouts, and Nutrition Smart. And then there are the specialty stores, targeting ethnic demographics like Kosher, Asian, Hispanic, and Italian.
Within each group, there are strengths and weaknesses, and each of the groups also covers different price points (ex. Target is pricier and nicer than Walmart, some ethnic markets are cheaper or nicer than others). No one faults Publix for being 30-100% more expensive than Walmart, because they are offering a different overall product: a more customer-centric shopping experience. Same goes for the ethnic markets; people don't complain that the Italian market's produce is 500% higher than Walmart. They have a great product, and budget produce isn't it. Each business is successful at servicing people who are looking for what they offer.
If I want to open a kosher store in BP, there's no way I can compete with KRM on budget, so I'd try for a different demographic. I can choose to focus on prepared foods, costumer experience, higher-end products, or any other niche where I feel can be successful. If you walk into my higher-end store expecting KRM prices, you're in the wrong place. If you don't feel you're getting value out of what I'm offering, go someplace which will give you that value. You don't get to have tainos on my pricing. I'm not taking advantage of anybody; my product is what it is, and it may not be for you. I don't owe anybody anything. If there isn't enough demand for what I'm offering, my business will have to change or it won't survive. If there are enough people who feel that another budget store is warranted, you can be sure that someone will come fill the void sooner or later. That has nothing to do with me or my choice of business model.
Now, if I was the only source of kosher products in the area, and I bill myself as providing a service to the community, and my existence is prohibiting another store from opening (exclusive deals, limited customer base, etc.),
then I can understand you having an issue with me taking advantage of circumstances to the the detriment of the community. Additionally, if there are multiple stores in the area, and they all collude to restrict competition and keep prices high for personal gain, there again I understand your tainos. What I don't understand is anyone deciding that there is a "standard" that needs to be adhered to, and to assign "fault" on stores who don't meet this arbitrary "standard." Short of collusion and profiteering, the free market allows consumers to control the prices.
