Ethics of under valuing  

I asked a similar question
I asked a similar question - in regards to excellent finds at flea-markets/unknowing shops etc. Interesting answers in the original posting. I've attached the link below.
http://www.designaddict.com/design_addict/forums/index.cfm/fuseaction/th...

This may seem a bit esoteric, but...
in a money economy with markets, most economic theory would say you are making a positive contribution to the economy to buy the valuable thing regardless of how little you pay, because you are putting it in the hands of someone who knows its worth and so will price it accordingly subsequently. In short, the market is repricing it the good at its appropriate value, when you get ahold of it. This is called using competition to wring inefficient pricing out of the economy. Pricing inefficiency can be wrung out either by the seller becoming informed through market information that the good is worth more than he thought, or by the buyer recognizing it is priced too low and so buying it to reprice it. The profit you make on recognizing the profit inefficiency, whether you are the seller, or the buyer who learns the price was too low, is your reward for participating in a competitive market. If everyone is competing to learn information indicating the price things are worth, then inefficient money allocations to goods is quickly ended and then market participants can begin to search out the next pricing inefficiency attributable to uneven distribution of information. This process keeps the system lean. Once pricing inefficiencies are achieved, then transactors and their monies can be directed toward toward new items that are coming on line. At least that's the theory. The trouble is that outside of flea markets, garage sales, ebay and craigs list, there's hardly a competitive and open market where pricing efficiencies through spread of market information are allowed to occur. Most markets are oligopolized or monopolized, or other wise asymmetrically constrained by gov. regulations to bias pricing outcomes to favor certain players. Regarding the morality of paying a very little to an uninformed buyer, I suppose it depends on the buyer. If they are old and infirm or especially poor and in need of money, it would seem the decent thing to do to inform them of what they have and either pay the going price yourself or move on and let someone else do it. If they are just lazy about studying up on what things are worth and wanting to get rid of their junk, why shouldn't you get the profit increment rather than them? Our economy is based on knowledge. You get profit by having the right information at the right time and the capital to invest and capture the increment. Those are the rules of the game. If you are a designer, you have more knowledge than me at designing and so you get the designer's profit and not me; that's how it should be. Now if you lie to me and run a sting on me to prevent me from knowing the relevant market information, then you're getting into fraud and that's a crime. But knowing more than the seller is not a crime. The system is supposed to reward those with the most knowledge. Else why would we educate ourselves and improve our productivity, which is supposed to be a net benefit to society? At least that's the theory.

.
This is tricky, I have given more for lesser stuff because the people needed the money badly.I frequently pay far below market value to people who CLEARLY do not need the money they just dont want the object/JUNK...Also I have never had anyone willing to take back a lemon its my loss...

value is relatve.....and who the devil cares!
it is perfectly fine purchasing something above or even below it's actual value. often people i find, wish to sell something based on convenience. i know i do. easy pain free transactions are good for everyone even if you happen to pay way below or way above its"value".
if you happen to be very concerned with the potential negative affects of "karma" because you paid too little for an object, just ask the seller if he is happy with the deal............i bet he is happy and so are you!

Getting a good deal doesnt...
Getting a good deal doesnt make you unethical. As long as you are honest you shouldnt have any ethical worries. Spanky stated in an reply to the my original question that she will answer honestly the value of an object if asked. And Mario makes a good point as well: if both parties are satisfied there is no problem.