Yes - in fact, in my opinion, it's even less than that - it's a meaningless concept.
But even you will have to admit that there's a very real sense (even if you don't share it) that something is wrong and that feeling is growing and being shared by more and more people. The phrase Rip-Off seems to encapsulate something for an awful lot of people, the phrase wouldn't have found such wide use if it didn't hit a nerve.
The fact that over half a million people are tuning in indicates that this Brand has meaning to a lot of people even if you and I can't agree what that meaning is.
A Rip-Off is an exploitation. Perhaps the popularity of the phrase reflects a sense of being exploited.
Here are a few reasons why people might feel exploited, I've tried to be balanced and include counter arguments.
People look back to a time when one salary was sufficient to buy a house and now find themselves needing two salaries AND help from their parents.
They are forgetting that many families were lucky to have any salary to survive on.
We should be thankful that now it's possible for two people to get a job.
Possibly true, but perhaps the people who feel most Ripped off are the ones who grew up in homes where one parent did have a job, and it was enough to get by and buy a house.
People look back to a time when childcare was less of an issue because one parent could stay at home, and now find they pay more for childcare than for their mortgage.
People now find that they spend so much of their time either working or commuting to and from work that they get to spend less time with their kids than their parents did.
If they didn't have a job they'd have lots of time with their kids but it mightn't be quality time. They probably didn't spend as much quality time with their own working parent as they think they did.
But at least they spent a lot of time with one of their parents. Kids today where both parents are working are certainly getting a raw deal compared to the upbringing I enjoyed.
People are constantly told they live in a low tax economy but when they total up the taxes they pay and then add the additional cost of living that's caused by the government compounding other taxes they question just how low is low.
Compared to the 80's taxes are low. Compared to our neighbours some of our taxes e.g. corporation tax is very low. This is the justification for calling it a low tax economy.
Perhaps we should call Ireland a No Frills economy. We've adopted the Ryan Air idea that if you cut the up front cost (income tax), you can convince people to accept a lower level of service. Then to make your profits you create additional charges for everything.
People see €50million wasted here, €100m wasted there with little apparent concern on the part of government and then wonder why a €40 credit card tax has to be introduced to shore up the public finances.
There is wastage in all governments and all big businesses and always has been. The difference now is that there is greater scrutiny, therefore greater outrage.
This is true of course, but people might feel a little less exploited if there was a little more humility in the face of such waste and errors, instead of a brass necked insistance that there was no mistake, it was money well spent, and we the people just don't understand.
People pay €10 for a fantasic meal in one country and then come home and pay €25 for a lower quality meal and understanably think it's the restaurant ripping them off.
It's understandable to blame the restaurant. Most people don't have the time or the inclination to think it through and see that it's probably caused in the main by their government rather than the restaurant owner. Rates, Rent, Regulations, VAT, Tax, Excise Duty, etc, etc, etc. It's entirely possible that the cheaper foreign restaurant is making a bigger profit.
The consumer might be wrong about who's to blame, but they are entitled to feel agrieved. They're entiled to compare what they can enjoy with their months pay with what people in other countries can enjoy.
If they learn that in fact the restaurant owner has succesfully lobbied to stop other restaurants opening in the area, then they are entitled to feel exploited.
Actually percentage share of the vote does not directly translate into percentage share of the seats.
I thought that as I was writing it. I wanted to test my theory that you'd be the one to call me on it.
-Rd