MB reader Richard S. writes:

I have long thought that the NYT should exercise differential pricing, based on ability to pay. Under this business model, Times readers would enjoy the same progressive pricing system the Times insists the government use.
Times subscribers in the high-rent neighborhoods would pay two, three or even four times what subscribers in less affluent neighborhoods pay to have the Times delivered. Thus a Times reader on the Upper West Side might be charged $2.00 a paper, but a reader in Harlem would pay only $0.25 — or might even be paid to take the paper under an earned income subscriber credit type of arrangement.
Naturally, newstands and free-standing news boxes would similarly follow this progressive pricing model. Certain locations, such as Starbucks, might charge as much as $5.00 for an issue of the Times, under the premise that anybody able and willing to pay $3.50 for a coffee is certainly able to pay more for the Times.

I’m really surprised they haven’t done this already. Is it fair that the rich can have Rich for a relative pittance, while the poor must pay a higher percentage of their incomes to learn, with relief, that “Bold Cheeses Created by Monks Aren’t Too Shy for Trappist Ales“?