In our wonderful capitalist and greed driven society where the gap between those that have and those that haven't is continuously expanding, the one's who benefit from holding or increasing profits will, almost to a one, cry foul when faced with any action that may rein in their profits.
The supposed benefit of the 'free market' almost never actually benefits anyone but those who sell rather than those who buy. This applies as much to basic needs as to unnecessary but, perhaps, desirable wants.
One of the most common deceptions or, perhaps more kindly, misdirections used by sellers to delude the buyer about the extent of their profit, particularly where living essentials are concerned, is that when speaking of their profits they inevitably do so in terms of their margins, as opposed to their markups. For instance, if a retailer buys at a wholesale price of $100 and sells at $200, i.e. a 100% markup or profit over cost, the margin will be 50% as the margin represents the difference between sale price and cost, i.e. $100/$200 a margin of 50%. It therefore serves the seller as the average purchaser is unlikely to be aware of the difference in emphasis.
Smith already made a whiny rebuttal called "why you should not ignore the economists", arguing that price gouging can be good, actually, because it prevents hoarding.
So random people hoarding supplies is so bad that price gouging needs to be legal, but wealth hoarding is A-OK in his view and Taxes Are Bad. He's laughably unserious.
So unserious that you couldn't relay his position in good faith. It's "price gouging is good" instead of "supplier prices responding to demand is good". Smh
A perfect example of unexcused excessive pricing exists in the military industrial complex. Even back in the 1970's-'80's when I served in the US Army in the old Hawk air defense missile system. I have long used the example, when I discuss this, of one small part on a Hawk radar, basically a simple electronic switch that cost Raytheon maybe around $30 to make, was sold by Raytheon to the Army and Marines for $600...if we established a program that forced pricing accountability in the market and limited profit to, perhaps, 150% of the proven actual cost of a given item, the industries would still profit well and prices on things would be much better affordable, thus attracting more buyers...to create more profit and put, for example, more newer automobiles on the road, and to reduce government spending on necessities for American security...taxpayers would benefit, and Americans, in general, would be able to have better things.
"tendency to presume markets will behave as if their structure is perfectly competitive."
At the very least they mention this assumption in economics 101 classes, although it's still commonly brushed by. I'd like to know what if any market is "perfectly competitive". Even something like restaurants aren't. Although they are more so than maybe prescription drugs.
If Kamala was serious about eliminating "price gouging" why did the Biden administration let it happen?
"If Kamala was serious about eliminating "price gouging" why did the Biden administration let it happen?"
Because the Congress is controlled by Republicans and the Senate is barely controlled by Democrats, some of whom defect routinely. Presidents cannot unilaterally make law.
I'd believe that more if they'd even try to get any price fixinglegislation across the table. Even with control of both houses the farthest left congressmembers never even uttered the word "price controls". Blaming Republicans isn't going to cut it for them
Your “point” is not a reason to ignore unconscionable price increases. Democrats are relatively diverse in terms of their embrace of the myth known as “ free market” capitalism. So even though they kind of controlled the Senate for the last 2 years, there were senators who would not support more progressive approaches to managing the economy. Now that the smoke has cleared from the supply chain disruptions of the pandemic, it’s time to address the outliers. Groceries being one of them, real estate being another.
Capitalism needs to be monitored and managed in order for its benefits to be realized. Grocery chains are consolidating driving out real competition. Or to put it simply when a simple box of cereal goes from $3 to $9, it’s pretty obvious that there is price gouging at work… especially since it’s a market that targets kids as consumers.
This isn’t just a political stunt. It’s a serious proposal to do something about a real problem affecting millions in spite of the shrieking Republican “red baiters” worn out charges of communism.
I agree and we should definitely be mad about price increases. My point is that we shouldn't put much if any faith in the Democratic party and can't let ourselves be emotionally manipulated into ignoring their shortcomings and broken promises.
The Democrats are all we have. Making such a proposal as a Republican is cause to be “primaried”. Being “mad” doesn’t cut it. We need a legislation or antitrust action to ratchet grocery prices back to where they should be.
In our wonderful capitalist and greed driven society where the gap between those that have and those that haven't is continuously expanding, the one's who benefit from holding or increasing profits will, almost to a one, cry foul when faced with any action that may rein in their profits.
The supposed benefit of the 'free market' almost never actually benefits anyone but those who sell rather than those who buy. This applies as much to basic needs as to unnecessary but, perhaps, desirable wants.
One of the most common deceptions or, perhaps more kindly, misdirections used by sellers to delude the buyer about the extent of their profit, particularly where living essentials are concerned, is that when speaking of their profits they inevitably do so in terms of their margins, as opposed to their markups. For instance, if a retailer buys at a wholesale price of $100 and sells at $200, i.e. a 100% markup or profit over cost, the margin will be 50% as the margin represents the difference between sale price and cost, i.e. $100/$200 a margin of 50%. It therefore serves the seller as the average purchaser is unlikely to be aware of the difference in emphasis.
As usual, nobody understands the enemy they are up against when they fight the corporate status quo. And quotas.
Russian bots spend all day trying to scam women into believing that it’s a good idea to vote for Trump
Smith already made a whiny rebuttal called "why you should not ignore the economists", arguing that price gouging can be good, actually, because it prevents hoarding.
So random people hoarding supplies is so bad that price gouging needs to be legal, but wealth hoarding is A-OK in his view and Taxes Are Bad. He's laughably unserious.
So unserious that you couldn't relay his position in good faith. It's "price gouging is good" instead of "supplier prices responding to demand is good". Smh
RealPage is good. AgriStats is good. Greed is good.
A perfect example of unexcused excessive pricing exists in the military industrial complex. Even back in the 1970's-'80's when I served in the US Army in the old Hawk air defense missile system. I have long used the example, when I discuss this, of one small part on a Hawk radar, basically a simple electronic switch that cost Raytheon maybe around $30 to make, was sold by Raytheon to the Army and Marines for $600...if we established a program that forced pricing accountability in the market and limited profit to, perhaps, 150% of the proven actual cost of a given item, the industries would still profit well and prices on things would be much better affordable, thus attracting more buyers...to create more profit and put, for example, more newer automobiles on the road, and to reduce government spending on necessities for American security...taxpayers would benefit, and Americans, in general, would be able to have better things.
This is beyond great.
"tendency to presume markets will behave as if their structure is perfectly competitive."
At the very least they mention this assumption in economics 101 classes, although it's still commonly brushed by. I'd like to know what if any market is "perfectly competitive". Even something like restaurants aren't. Although they are more so than maybe prescription drugs.
If Kamala was serious about eliminating "price gouging" why did the Biden administration let it happen?
"If Kamala was serious about eliminating "price gouging" why did the Biden administration let it happen?"
Because the Congress is controlled by Republicans and the Senate is barely controlled by Democrats, some of whom defect routinely. Presidents cannot unilaterally make law.
I'd believe that more if they'd even try to get any price fixinglegislation across the table. Even with control of both houses the farthest left congressmembers never even uttered the word "price controls". Blaming Republicans isn't going to cut it for them
Your “point” is not a reason to ignore unconscionable price increases. Democrats are relatively diverse in terms of their embrace of the myth known as “ free market” capitalism. So even though they kind of controlled the Senate for the last 2 years, there were senators who would not support more progressive approaches to managing the economy. Now that the smoke has cleared from the supply chain disruptions of the pandemic, it’s time to address the outliers. Groceries being one of them, real estate being another.
Capitalism needs to be monitored and managed in order for its benefits to be realized. Grocery chains are consolidating driving out real competition. Or to put it simply when a simple box of cereal goes from $3 to $9, it’s pretty obvious that there is price gouging at work… especially since it’s a market that targets kids as consumers.
This isn’t just a political stunt. It’s a serious proposal to do something about a real problem affecting millions in spite of the shrieking Republican “red baiters” worn out charges of communism.
I agree and we should definitely be mad about price increases. My point is that we shouldn't put much if any faith in the Democratic party and can't let ourselves be emotionally manipulated into ignoring their shortcomings and broken promises.
The Democrats are all we have. Making such a proposal as a Republican is cause to be “primaried”. Being “mad” doesn’t cut it. We need a legislation or antitrust action to ratchet grocery prices back to where they should be.
The Democrats are all we have. Making such a proposal on the
If you had been paying attention, there have been many attempts to reign in drug costs legislatively, stymied by the Republicans.
They won't use the term "price controls" for the same reason they don't call themselves communists. It's a Republican scare term.