Comment by jpfromlondon 13 hours ago
More unnecessary meddling, this causes price convergence so anyone living close to a typically lower cost source of fuel is going to have an almost imperceptible increase in relative cost.
They certainly love spending taxpayer money on nothing don't they.
In the above model prices converge on a mean, reducing the potential savings for those that price really matters (the poor are the ones most likely to check existing price discovery sites), thus it's regressive - the government are either seeing it as an opportunity to marginally increase tax rake, or more likely are oblivious to the externality of the poor bearing the burden.
That's... not how markets work. The cheap petrol stations are very much aware that they're cheaper than their neighbours already. The more expensive ones may feel some downward pressure, but mostly won't.
People who are price sensitive can discover cheaper alternatives more easily; others still won't bother
Which model? Tested how? Are the poor the most likely to check existing sites?
This is not a new sites. Its making data more available so sites and apps will have more accurate data. This is most likely to benefit those who are willing to trade convenience for lower costs.
Conversely, some expensive petrol stations won't be able to get away with staying so expensive.
> More unnecessary meddling
This is a funny take, because we ostensibly assume 'perfect information' when we extol the virtues of capitalism. It would appear the government is supporting capitalism with this particular initiative...
We don't assume perfect information, or rather - it exists already in an unsanctioned form for those that seek it (usually those to whom price is sensitive).
Until this we assume marginality holds true and price dispersion has a benefit in society that we unwittingly enable.
Providing better price information makes a market work better.