The first major hurricane of the 2020 Atlantic hurricane season, Laura, has wreaked havoc across the southern coast of the U.S. Louisiana and Texas received the brunt of the storm as it made landfall Thursday, Aug. 24 as a Category 4 hurricane. 

Before arriving in the U.S., Laura moved past the Lesser Antilles and Virgin Islands as a tropical storm to then through Hispaniola. Despite warnings to evacuate in Haiti, the death toll was confirmed to be 31 with eight people missing as of Aug. 28. The damage was widespread with over 2,000 houses damaged and 6,000 flooded. The Dominican Republic was also hit, with four confirmed deaths.

Laura continued its path, moving through Jamaica, the Cayman Islands and Cuba. The Cayman Islands issued a Tropical Storm warning Aug. 23. Landfall was made in Cuba on Aug. 23 with tropical storm watches and warnings issued beforehand. Many people throughout Cuba’s provinces were evacuated and power was preemptively cut in some areas. Evacuations proved challenging in the era of COVID-19 especially with quarantine centers for those who were suspected to be positive for the virus. 

In the United States, the governors of Florida and Louisiana issued a state of emergency Aug. 21, with Mississippi also declaring a state of emergency on Aug. 22. Texas followed suit the next day. 

While several states including Florida, Texas, Mississippi and Arkansas experienced high wind gusts, tornadoes, power outages and destroyed communities, Louisiana was hit the hardest. The landfall point of Cameron, La. experienced wind gusts of 127 miles per hours with speeds of 137 miles per hour reached in other areas of Louisiana. In the aftermath, more than 400,000 residents went without power and 200,000 without water. The hurricane related death toll rose to 26 Tuesday, Sept. 8. Several victims were affected by carbon monoxide poisoning attributed to the improper use of portable generators. 

President Donald Trump approved an emergency disaster declaration for Arkansas Aug. 27. Trump visited both Lake Charles, La. and Orange, Tx. Saturday, Aug. 29 to meet with first responders and local officials. He toured the damaged areas and received a storm recovery briefing. He vowed to help the area rebuild by declaring, “We have to take care of Louisiana. We have to take care of Texas.”

Throughout all of the affected areas, a total of 71 deaths have been reported. Recovery has been  slow with many residents displaced or still without power as the power grids may take weeks, if not months, to repair.

We are currently in the middle of hurricane season here in the United States, with Dorian being the most notable hurricane to hit the U.S this year. With the influx of hurricanes comes the debate of price gouging; a debate that is brought up every time a hurricane-like Dorian makes landfall. In this article, I will attempt to discuss both the economical side of this issue and the human welfare side of things, as well as cover common criticisms and benefits of price gouging.

Price gouging is, put simply, the act of jacking up prices to a level much higher than normal during an extreme and sudden increase in demand or decrease of supply. These extreme and sudden increases in demand often occur during natural disasters like hurricanes. During hurricanes, the demand for basic goods and supplies skyrockets because everybody wants to buy those goods at the same time, and the supply can’t keep up. 

Before we get into the moral side of things, let’s talk about the economic implications of such a sudden increase in demand. 

When the demand for a product increases, it means that consumers are willing and able to buy more of that product at a market price. When this happens, this demand for the products starts to outpace the producer’s ability to supply that product, which causes an imbalance between supply and demand. In response to this imbalance, the most common response is for suppliers to increase the cost of the product to fund increased production of said product. This puts the supply and demand back in balance, just at a higher price.

Based on that statement, price gouging makes a fair bit of economic sense. However, there is a small exceptionality to supply and demand in the case of price gouging. In situations that often lead to price gouging, like natural disasters, suppliers are often limited to what they have on hand at the time. This is called short-run supply, and short-run supply is called inelastic. 

Basically, this means that the supply is unaffected by an increase in price. So in normal situations of increased demand, both the price and supply increase. In cases of price gouging, where supply is usually in the short-run, the supply is therefore not increased, meaning that the high demand will not be met with a higher supply; only a higher price.

This leads to one of the many complaints against price gouging. Because the supply is not being increased, but the prices are, people argue that suppliers are simply making more profit without actually benefiting consumers. While for the most part, I would agree with this statement, I would not say that customers are not being benefited in any way. For example, price gouging often prevents people from hoarding goods. If they remained at the same prices, richer people could buy all of the goods for themselves and leave little to none for the middle and lower classes. Raising the prices, in a way, prevents the hoarding of goods by a small number of people.

Despite this benefit, you still have the glaring issue of income inequality; if the price shoots up drastically, then fewer people of lower economic status will be able to afford crucial supplies like gas and food. This is where the heart of the moral argument against price gouging lies. Rich people can afford to pay the drastically increased price of goods. People of lower economic status, while needing these goods just as much, often aren’t able to afford the jacked-up prices and if they are it is so expensive that it has a negative impact on their future. Basically, the argument is that price gouging hurts exclusively lower-income people. It is likely because of this that price gouging is illegal in many jurisdictions. 

As for my take on this complex issue, I can see both sides. On the business side of things, I don’t think producers and suppliers jack-up prices with the purpose being to screw over poor people. The idea of price gouging makes logical economic sense and that is the mindset that many producers and suppliers are in. There are certainly some benefits to price gouging as well, such as the fact that it reduces hoarding. So I don’t think people who raise prices during natural disasters are evil by any means. In an ideal world, everybody would get as much as they need, and even more, but that’s not possible.

With that being said, I am not a big fan of price gouging. Although it attempts to prevent supply from running out immediately and keep it all from going to a select few, it doesn’t really do that. In fact, it leads to only a select few (the rich) being able to reasonably afford most of the goods being sold. This leaves lower-income people and families to decide whether or not to spend most of their pay-check on gas and some bread, or whether to tough it out during the storm and live off limited supplies. That’s simply not fair. 

So, while I understand and even admire that price gouging is trying to solve a crucial problem, it is doing more harm than good. People who are living through hurricanes have enough problems to deal with as it is and raising prices to a ridiculous level does not help.

The ten students were Jonathan Morris, senior psychology major; Rylan Schuster, senior accounting major; Aaron Brake, senior biology major; James Hobbs, first-year history and English major; Mason Bake, junior nonprofit leadership and business administration major; Tana Pottorf, senior biology major; Seki Anderson, senior biochemistry major; Hannah Keeney, sophomore chemistry major; Melissa Ward, sophomore pre-nursing and psychology major; and Zandie Mehlhaff, sophomore nursing and Applied Critical Thought and Inquiry major. They were accompanied by Jeff Buscher, College Chaplain, and Daniel Ramirez, Assistant Director of International Admission and Transfer Recruitment. 

Buscher organized the trip and connected with contacts in Houston.

“Over the course of three years, we took about five trips including Katrina. So when Harvey hit Houston, it was not long after school started and since we had fall break coming up in five weeks, I kind of put [forward] that possibility and I didn’t want it to be just my idea. So I put out a list to see who is interested in going and I started working finding a location, a place to stay, finding all the logistics work to do. The idea really came from disaster trips that came from the past. We did Katrina, we worked on cutting tree limbs after an ice storm in Springfield, we went to Florida one time after some hurricanes. We have a history of trying to respond to natural disaster when it is feasible at Jewell,” he said.

The group partnered with Butch Green, a cooperative Baptist fellowship missionary in that area, who works primarily with immigration and human trafficking issues. Green is currently working with disaster relief and is helping groups coming into Houston. He works with several different agencies to find projects and connect groups with residents who need help.

The Jewell group stayed at Temple Baptist Church, which supplied them with air mattresses, snacks, toiletries and shower trailers.

Students who participated were fueled by the desire to help those in need.

“One of my future career goals as a person in the medical field is to use my knowledge gained from schooling and experience to be able to get up and leave if a natural disaster or man-made catastrophe arises. Although this hurricane relief trip was not medicine based, I had two hands that worked and a caring heart. I had no reason not to go and help,” said Pottorf.

The group worked with a Cambodian community that relies on growing water spinach for a living. The group cleaned the steel poles of the destroyed greenhouse so that the community could rebuild a new one. The volunteers also partnered with the Fifth Ward Community Redevelopment Corporation to clear damaged items from houses. The group then organized and managed donations for Home Depot that would help residents rebuild and restore their furniture.

Later, they helped individuals empty their houses and tear up ruined wooden floors. The houses required full gutting. The group also removed kitchen cabinets and tile walls from bathrooms.

Students had an overall positive experience and were proud of the contributions they made to the communities affected by Hurricane Harvey.

“My personal favorite part of the trip was talking with the families we helped during and after the projects. The stories they told were very eye-opening and impacted me to want to help in as many ways as I can in the future with people in similar situations,” said Morris.

“This trip has affected me as a person by showing me that people of natural disasters are optimistic and thankful. The storm took a lot of their material things away from them, but they cared more about the people. As long as family members and friends were safe, the material things did not matter as much. This is a very good message for everyone who takes life for granted. It’s not about what we have, but it’s about the people we have that matter,” said Ward.

Buscher gave advice to students who want to help out but are not sure where to start.

“If folks want to go to Florida or Puerto Rico to help out in these disaster relief locations, the best thing I can recommend is that you make some connections. Find an agency that is handling volunteers and can help find a meaningful project. And if people [at Jewell] need help finding those agencies, I am happy to help. Besides, there are Baptist groups, there are nonprofit agencies who are trustworthy and will give you good work to do.”

A previous version of this article was published with inaccuracies. 

Since the weeks following Hurricane Maria 85 percent of Puerto Ricans do not have electricity while 3.4 million citizens are without running water. The Jones Act was suspended to provide aid to Puerto Rico. Congress enacted this act in 1920 in response to the threat of German U-boats during World War I. This Act meant to protect U.S. merchant ships has hindered aid to Puerto Rico as it must pay a tax for every U.S. vessel. The Act doubled the price of aid to the country, hindering relief efforts.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has provided over $53 million in home repairs and dental, medical and funeral expenses. FEMA has pledged additional aid in the near future, and the U.S. Senate should pass aid relief this week to further help the U.S. Territory.

The Puerto Rican government is attempting to stabilize the territory and its economy in the aftermath. Its failing economy and increased migration will make recovery a challenge. Puerto Rican governor Ricardo Rosselló hopes that 95 percent of power will be restored by Dec. 15, 2017. The government expects that 30 percent of power will be working by the end of October. They expect to have 50 percent electricity by Nov. 15, 2017 and 80 percent by Dec. 1, 2017.

President Trump tweeted Oct. 12  2017 “We cannot keep FEMA, the Military & the First Responders, who have been amazing (under the most difficult circumstances) in P.R. forever!”

He further stated that aid would be halted for Puerto Rico and that the country would have to pay back the money that the U.S. provides. Democrats such as Nancy Pelosi have criticized his position and stated that they will continue to provide aid to Puerto Rico.

Overall aid to Puerto Rico has been a slow process. Trump criticized sending aid and FEMA workers but he praised relief efforts in Houston and tweeted his support for continued Houston relief efforts.

Nevertheless, Puerto Rico has praised FEMA and the U.S. Department of Defense for their efforts. The U.S. government sent aid to Puerto Rico despite partisan infighting in Congress. The organizations above have pledged to provide further aid to restore power and clean water to the country.

Photo courtesy of Reuters.