It was a self-perpetuating cycle: people became increasingly curious about the hype, and LCBO stores repeatedly sold out. This sparked a fierce wave of profiteering on Bunz. There was even a backlash against the constant pleas for the liquid gold.
I decided to try my hand as an amateur bootlegger and picked up a bottle shortly after Christmas, when a small shipment arrived at the Summerhill LCBO.
I was certain that someone would want a bottle on New Year’s Day—when the LCBO is closed and supplies of the beverage would reach maximum scarcity, having been exhausted the prior evening.
Sure enough:
I replied with this image:
Shortly thereafter, we agreed to meet and perform the trade (in front of St. Andrew’s Church! How humorous). But here’s the thing: for expediency, the other bun paid me the face value for the whisky, plus $10: Before he handed me the money, I told him I would spend the $10 on a burrito.
The next day I very deliberately got a delicious fish burrito from Chino Locos:
Two different theoretical violations of Bunz principle occurred here.
First, personally speaking, I generally never purchase anything in order to make a trade happen. It has to be something I already have. Buying the liquor for the purpose of trading it, was thus kind of wrong.
Second, the trade involved an exchange of cash for the goods! The one and only explicit rule of Bunz is, no cash in the zone.
So how could I justify my actions?
Bunz is about helping people. If I wasn’t around to supply the Northern Harvest, this Bun (and his girlfriend) would not have been able to drink it!
In regards to the cash, think about the net result of this trade. The Bun didn’t truly pay me for the liquor; he paid the LCBO for it.
The extra $10, meanwhile, served merely as a placeholder for the burrito, which I got the next day.
Essentially, the effect of this trade was, he traded me that burrito, in exchange for the service of going to the LCBO and delivering him a bottle of this scarce alcohol. I never “profited” money-wise from the trade; nor did I spend any money (effectively): I simply got a burrito for my labour.
If the trade had not gone through due to puritanical reasons, his thirst would have remained unslaked, and I would have had no burrito. It’s obvious—to me—which was the better outcome: the one where we both got what we wanted.
What do you think? Would you deem this trade kosher? Or would you deny its Bunz-itivity?
Next— Trade 29: Bunz t-shirt for books
Previous—The Skittles Holiday Pawn Shop: 91 packs for books
Gallery of Trades
No comments:
Post a Comment