225. No merchant, manufacturer or advertiser may, falsely, by any means whatever,
(a) invoke a price reduction;
(b) indicate a regular price or another reference price for goods or services;
(c) let it be believed that the price of certain goods or services is advantageous.
[...]
231. No merchant, manufacturer or advertiser may, by any means whatever, advertise goods or services of which he has an insufficient quantity to meet public demand unless mention is made in his advertisement that only a limited quantity of the goods or services is available and such quantity is indicated.
The merchant, manufacturer or advertiser who establishes to the satisfaction of the court that he had reasonable cause to believe that he could meet public demand or who offered the consumer, for the same price, other goods of the same nature and of an equal or greater cost price is not guilty of any infraction of this section.
I feel that the United States are a bit reluctant to protect their citizens.
The law you're referencing is a protection against raising the price before a sale so you can advertise the sale price as x% off the inflated price instead of the store's regular price. Most e-shopping sites advertise a discount relative to MSRP, not relative to any price they've previously charged, which leaves them free to raise or lower the prices as they want.
Further it's not "price fluctuation". It's a systemic raising of prices prior to a "sale" event, to deceive people into thinking they paid less than they would have by not waiting for the sale.
As for the person you are talking about may be acting irrationally, but there are many people who rationally wait for something they want to be on sale - because such a thing should save them some money. These people are maybe being naive - but without easy access to perfect market information, they have to rely on some sort of price messaging.
Finally - articles like this are good for people who shop to get better informed. Even if I were to track the price of something, to know that it used to be cheaper, I have no way of knowing if a given "sale" is a good price since future prices are unpredictable. However if I know of the "price inflation before sale" practice, with data to back it up, I can infer a pattern suggesting whether I should wait longer or not on a purchase.
However I do still believe some level on consumer protection is necessary. I do not think we ought to let the less-savvy be taken advantage simply because someone is smarter than them. Where to draw that line? That's always in flux.
Right, the problem comes when the stores inflate prices artificially just before a sale event so that they can display a bigger discount percent on the day of the sale. This in turn makes the consumers think they're getting a better deal than they're actually getting, it's also a bigger incentive for them to spend their money.
The problem is that it's a fake incentive. While this is not a crime it's certainly deceptive and shady.
Your reaction to this is to just be okay with entities profiting from the delusion of your friend?
Bottom line, none of these products are essentials to life. The price is either worth it to you as a buyer, or not. Thinking you lost money because it's later available for less is the same sort of faulty logic used by people who think they are "saving" money by buying something on sale (when it's an item they wouldn't ordinarily buy). I had a friend who used to do that all the time. We'd be at a store, and he'd see something on sale that he had no intention of buying before he walked in. He'd buy it, and congratulate himself on "saving" money. I'd point out "no, you just spent $50 that you hadn't planned to spend." He just didn't see it that way.