Funny how products made as if there's no such thing as an externality or grotesque wealth inequality are always so much cheaper than they really ought to be.
ps. i am not suggesting that the author clock is externality-free. it probably is not. nor am i forgetting that it will be purchased mostly by people on the upside of that inequality.
It's buyer manipulation. "Here's this ridiculously priced item; but it's okay you can feel good about throwing this much money away, because we're planting a tree."
Instead of segmenting/targeting the high-income market by product quality, they target by emotional manipulation claiming good causes. (i.e. higher-priced product that does not have to be higher quality).
You're suggesting that it's somehow made in a way that's more conscious of externalities or wealth inequalities than cheaper competitors, a suggestion that I think is unwarranted.
I was contrasting "stuff associated with causes costs more than it should" with "a lot of stuff costs less than it should because the cost ignores externalities"
ps. i am not suggesting that the author clock is externality-free. it probably is not. nor am i forgetting that it will be purchased mostly by people on the upside of that inequality.