Perhaps to get the ball started, let me send a link and ask a couple of questions.

http://redtape.msnbc.com/2009/02/companies-often.html

The second to last section of this article has the heading "Our Wilting Economy." Do you agree with the author that bait-and-switch policies like those in the online flower industry are dishonest capitalism, and that the general public is then prevented from making rational choices by the obfuscation of the true cost? If it is dishonest, should there be government regulation of that behavior? This is a part of the philosophical question: "Should all unethical behavior also be illegal?" Reply with thoughts.

Phil Bott Added the following:

I'm in and I have several points, but I'll start with one volley and see where it goes. While I don't agree with the extreme labeling of the article, I tend to agree with the sentiment. Most free market economic principles are based on the idea that both parties have the pertinent information. Granted, there is a principle which recognizes that at some point more research into the costs (i.e. comparison shopping) is more expensive than any actual price difference (if you drive to three stores to save $.05 on a gallon of milk, you've actually lost money), but that's not what this is about. This is about going into the store, seeing a gallon of milk for $.75, only to be charged additional fees at check-out. That's the reason I've always hated Ream's supermarkets. They added 10% at check-out.

Let's start there.

Phil