ADVERTISEMENT

Kamala’s take on the Economy



PPI was the worst measured component of the 4. But when you hear people bleat about "record profits," they don't look at the margin, just the dollars. If my costs go up and I have to raise prices to cover cost increases, of course I'll have higher profits (assuming unit sales are constant). What is never discussed is the net margin likely hasn't increased and, in all likelihood, has taken a hit.

“Price gouging” and “Tax cuts for the rich” are the two tell tale signs of an economic illiterate.

Price gouging/ collusion is a real phenomenon. Most frequently found when governments have narrowed themselves down to a preferred oligopoly of contractors who price collude and cause prices to go through the roof. Most often seen in Defense and Healthcare.
🤩

 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
I have heard people speculating that she is going to blame farmers for high grocery prices,meanwhile grocery stores on avg earn less than 2% profit....smh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ty Webb iu and DANC
“Price gouging” and “Tax cuts for the rich” are the two tell tale signs of an economic illiterate.

Price gouging/ collusion is a real phenomenon. Most frequently found when governments have narrowed themselves down to a preferred oligopoly of contractors who price collude and cause prices to go through the roof. Most often seen in Defense and Healthcare.
 
Price controls never work, but we don't teach basic economics in schools anymore so it's an easy sell to the ignorant.

Blame higher prices on greedy businesses engaging in "price gouging" while ignoring the causes of the higher prices and the predictable results, then introduce price controls as a way to fix it.

282768cb2a76edbfcdbd8c7e0ab51830.jpg
I’m not in support of Harris’s proposed price controls, but they exist in some areas and do not wreck the systems. Pay day loans and legal fees are “controlled” at the top end by certain standards, for example. I realize this isn’t the type of thing Harris is proposing.

Nor are price controls tantamount to communism. Nixon used them, maybe Eisenhower?, and FDR in addition to some pre WW2 instances. None of those led to, or meant that at the time, communism in the US existed.
 
I’m not in support of Harris’s proposed price controls, but they exist in some areas and do not wreck the systems. Pay day loans and legal fees are “controlled” at the top end by certain standards, for example. I realize this isn’t the type of thing Harris is proposing.

Nor are price controls tantamount to communism. Nixon used them, maybe Eisenhower?, and FDR in addition to some pre WW2 instances. None of those led to, or meant that at the time, communism in the US existed.
I was reading articles and one was about Zyn. @Cortez88 I thought you two both would laugh at this quote from the communications director at the state freedom caucus network (whatever that is): “a man with nicotine, protein, caffeine, and creatine coursing through his veins is an unstoppable force” 🤣🤣🤣. That’s probably true lol. Won’t last long but for that time
 
I’m not in support of Harris’s proposed price controls, but they exist in some areas and do not wreck the systems. Pay day loans and legal fees are “controlled” at the top end by certain standards, for example. I realize this isn’t the type of thing Harris is proposing.

Nor are price controls tantamount to communism. Nixon used them, maybe Eisenhower?, and FDR in addition to some pre WW2 instances. None of those led to, or meant that at the time, communism in the US existed.
Karl Marx Deal With It GIF by Amy
 
None of those led to, or meant that at the time, communism in the US existed.
That was never my claim. My claim was that price controls do not work as intended.

Capital seeks it's highest return. Price controls limit that return, and capital flows elsewhere, resulting in lowered supply relative to demand.
 
That was never my claim. My claim was that price controls do not work as intended.

Capital seeks it's highest return. Price controls limit that return, and capital flows elsewhere, resulting in lowered supply relative to demand.
Majority of dems will never understand anything other than emotion.
 
  • Love
Reactions: DANC
That was never my claim. My claim was that price controls do not work as intended.

Capital seeks it's highest return. Price controls limit that return, and capital flows elsewhere, resulting in lowered supply relative to demand.
I understand they don’t work in the vast majority of cases.

I’m just trying to point out that not every stupid or bad economic, fiscal, or tax policy is “communist” like one of the Tweeters equated.
 
It's not that I'm afraid of it. But it's a symptom of a system that isn't doing what it's supposed to do. Admittedly, that may be difficult for somebody in your position to see. But to anybody who doesn't live in your world, the notion that a contractor who properly installed a machine in 2011 would pay $15K to a guy who stuck his arm in it in 2019 would sound absurd. And that's because it is absurd.

Also, in this case, I'm pretty sure that everybody who was sued wouldn't have said it was another defendant's fault. Every single one of us -- any rational person, really -- would've said it was the plaintiff's fault. That said, I'm sure that isn't always the case. I certainly understand finger pointing and that many cases wouldn't be as cut-and-dried as this one was.

Ultimately, I fault the courts for not doing a better job at weeding out frivolous lawsuits like this. But if they aren't going to do it, then we need to pass better laws to raise the costs for lawyers who try to bring them. It needs to be discouraged -- and driving up the risks is probably the best way to discourage it.

from 30k feet up, the alternative is living in a place where you can't sue your employer when you arm gets whacked off at work. see china. trust me, we'd all rather live in a society with a few too many frivolous lawsuits rather than none at all.
 
from 30k feet up, the alternative is living in a place where you can't sue your employer when you arm gets whacked off at work. see china. trust me, we'd all rather live in a society with a few too many frivolous lawsuits rather than none at all.

I understand. But it certainly seems to me that it has become a racket. I think we can and should do better about weeding out the frivolous stuff and obvious attempts to just get somebody to cough up money to go away - and I think we can do it without becoming China.

I admire WalMart for having a company policy that they don’t settle. In their situation, that makes eminent sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: manichi
I understand they don’t work in the vast majority of cases.

I’m just trying to point out that not every stupid or bad economic, fiscal, or tax policy is “communist” like one of the Tweeters equated.
Gotcha. I thought by quoting me, you were saying I was using the communism moniker.
 
I understand. But it certainly seems to me that it has become a racket. I think we can and should do better about weeding out the frivolous stuff and obvious attempts to just get somebody to cough up money to go away - and I think we can do it without becoming China.

I admire WalMart for having a company policy that they don’t settle. In their situation, that makes eminent sense.

agree but not sure that place exists or ever could. your either giving judges free rein or your (likely) allowing a single political party to decide what moves forward. the former is messy and wasteful but the latter is beyond Western comprehension.
 
Price controls never work, but we don't teach basic economics in schools anymore so it's an easy sell to the ignorant.

Blame higher prices on greedy businesses engaging in "price gouging" while ignoring the causes of the higher prices and the predictable results, then introduce price controls as a way to fix it.

282768cb2a76edbfcdbd8c7e0ab51830.jpg

 
I understand. But it certainly seems to me that it has become a racket. I think we can and should do better about weeding out the frivolous stuff and obvious attempts to just get somebody to cough up money to go away - and I think we can do it without becoming China.

I admire WalMart for having a company policy that they don’t settle. In their situation, that makes eminent sense.
walmart settles cases daily crazed. wage and hour claims alone they've settled a ridiculous amount of cases
 
I’m not in support of Harris’s proposed price controls, but they exist in some areas and do not wreck the systems. Pay day loans and legal fees are “controlled” at the top end by certain standards, for example. I realize this isn’t the type of thing Harris is proposing.

Nor are price controls tantamount to communism. Nixon used them, maybe Eisenhower?, and FDR in addition to some pre WW2 instances. None of those led to, or meant that at the time, communism in the US existed.
In Nixon's case, it did cause an economic calamity that manifest itself in the Ford and Carter terms.

You can support Communist principles and not be a full blown Communist. But I don't think Kamala knows that. Her ideas of debt forgiveness and money giveaways are vote buying, pure and simple.
 
I understand they don’t work in the vast majority of cases.

I’m just trying to point out that not every stupid or bad economic, fiscal, or tax policy is “communist” like one of the Tweeters equated.
Technically she isn’t a communist. She’s just trying to implement polices that would lead to food shortages and deaths. What a lovely person she is 🙄
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Yup. I pointed this out a week or so ago. Democratic leadership at the highest levels is highly, highly insulated from the real world. Most have never earned an honest paycheck in their lives. At best they put in a couple years at a White Shoe law firm (or Civil Rights firm in Obama's case) before jumping into politics.

Obama and Harris are both the children of academics. Those who specialize in theory and lack in all manner of practicality. Uncle Joe spent 50 years on the tax payer dime. They're not like you and me Dbm. In fact they disdain you and me. But they'll gladly accept their salary paid off our backs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC and dbmhoosier
This isn’t sound policy, it’s populism


This is an absolutely awful idea.

It’s yet another great example of something that is going to sound good to a lot of people, but would actually create a perverse outcome.

It’s truly as if they don’t even give a moment’s thought to any secondary effects. Or maybe they do, and figure they can just deflect the blame on others, and use that as another opportunity to ride to the “rescue.”
 
This is an absolutely awful idea.

It’s yet another great example of something that is going to sound good to a lot of people, but would actually create a perverse outcome.

It’s truly as if they don’t even give a moment’s thought to any secondary effects. Or maybe they do, and figure they can just deflect the blame on others, and use that as another opportunity to ride to the “rescue.”
It says something about the populous that they feel comfortable floating this idea out there in the first place.
 
It says something about the populous that they feel comfortable floating this idea out there in the first place.
Well, as political messaging, populism works. It always has.

A lot of people will see any opposition to this as greedy people trying to keep lower income people out of home ownership so they can afford a bigger house and a faster boat.

Americans aren’t unique. Politicians have been successfully peddling this nonsense for a long time.

Knowing Trump, I wouldn’t be surprised if he tried to outbid her.
 
Well, as political messaging, populism works. It always has.

A lot of people will see any opposition to this as greedy people trying to keep lower income people out of home ownership so they can afford a bigger house and a faster boat.

Americans aren’t unique. Politicians have been successfully peddling this nonsense for a long time.

Knowing Trump, I wouldn’t be surprised if he tried to outbid her.
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT