“urges”
Carney after getting a majority:
A good way to present surveillance pricing as illegal is to give it the discrimination angle (based on race, sexuality, religion, practically everything).
Individuals belonging to these different classifications tend to share certain similarities in their purchasing habits. My guess is that this would result in measurable pricing patterns for folks depending upon their race/sexuality/religion, etc. Which would be discrimination.
Hence, my guess is that this doesn’t even need to be legislated by Parliament. A lawsuit by someone motivated enough could bring this down. Any legal folks here who can validate this?
Given that thought, I’m actually surprised someone hasn’t sued already over the pink razor blue razor pricing.
