Merged Economics, politics and the election

[ahhell]

ANyway, the main economic issue will be inflation.

Frankly, I don't like tariffs, period. I theink the days when they coul protect jobs in the uS< if they ever did...are over.
Protectionism a bad idea that ,sadly, has followers on both sides of the political spectrum.

Problem with Price COntrols is they simply don't work very well.

Its not that they don't work very well, it that the evidence strongly suggest they make things worse. In some cases, they make the thing they are meant to improve worse. Rent control is the classic, pretty much always results in reduced housing availability.

 

[psionl0]

Problem with Price COntrols is they simply don't work very well.

Maybe not economically but if they get you more votes then they are a success (we can deal with shortages at a future election).

 

[dirtywick]

what about insulin

 

[3point14]

when an idiot is calling you communist, don’t do what an idiot would confuse with communism. that is unfortunately a monumental task

Given that 'Communist' seems to mean, in the USA, 'a financial or taxation policy I don't like', I suspect it's impossible.

 

[Ziggurat]

It's been happening over decades. What matters is income vs spending power. True income. You think this is simply something that has been happening over the last few years?

Not at all. But the last few years of inflation have been particularly bad.

The median household income in the United States in 2024 is estimated to be $67,789 , while the median household income in 1980 was $17,710.

The average cost of a new car in 2024 is $48,644 while the average cost of a new car in 1980 was $7,574.

So while income increased 3.8 times the cost of a car increased 6.4 times.

You are mixing median and average. Don’t do that. Compare median to median, or average to average.

Then there are rising medical costs. Or the cost of fuel. A gallon of gas today is around 8 times the price it was in 1980. Please, please tell me how the average person is suppose to keep up?

You seem to think I’m challenging the existence of a problem. I’m not. I’m suggesting that the root cause of the problem isn’t what you suggested.

 

[catsmate]

Over here you have a personal exemption of €1,270 (£1,000 in old money) on capital gains in a year. I.e. you're not paying the first €1,270 of capital gains tax, such gains are taxed at 33%, so roughly the first €4,000 of gains are untaxed.

The structure, rates, exemptions and other details have changed over the last fifty-odd years; my first CGT payments were at 20%.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Problem with Price COntrols is they simply don't work very well.

Depends how you do them.

The Housing Market in places like Singapore are essentially price controlled, because the State is the biggest landlord, making it nearly impossible for private landlords to charge more rent for similar properties.

States can use their size, reach and purchasing power to provide the basics of Everything at-cost, making it really hard for others to overcharge for anything but niche products.

 

[Hlafordlaes]

As for price gouging, I'd prefer tax penalties tied to increases in gross margin that are, say, over 75% attributable to a price hike alone, similar to oil price windfall profits. More broadly, food prices, one of the two key worries for consumers, are also inelastic in many underserved areas, basically making grocery shopping like going to an expensive convenience store. This is best dealt with on a state level using zoning and tax policies to encourage better distribution. If, and I have no idea of the US case, the bulk of grocery shopping is dominated by only a handful of chains, breaking up monopolies by region can be a positive measure, medium term.

As for rent prices, however, there is a market dynamic in play of using housing now as any other traded asset on the stock market, leading to occasional false restriction of supply and overpricing. Again, monopoly legislation prohibiting any one group from owning a high share of housing in a given regional market seems the best measure.

On the political side, it has been decades since campaigns were run using well-designed, long-term policy. The remedy is political, and that involves breaking up media monopolies, such that competition in the marketplace of ideas becomes more a feature of campaigns. It would also help with the kind of misinformation that relies on repetition via multiple channels.

 

[Tero]

It's all about corporations for Trump. The Trump crowds just get a guarantee of "no money for foreigners." Other than the cost of the concentration camp. For millions.

Now we are in a democratic term. Inflation did happen. Big corporations, two or three of whom control any particular product category (phones, diapers, toilet paper, baby food). Would they hesitate to raise prices? No. It will be blamed mostly on the current president. They want the republican elected, so that he can reduce corporatre tax. Once he is elected, will they reduce prices? (After their taxes are cut). No. Corporations never lower prices.

Corporations have paid 20-30% tax in recent times. It is apparently worth the trouble to buy as many senators and presidents as you can for even 5%. And then also have someone like Trump who defund the IRS so they can't collect tax.

 

[acbytesla]

You are mixing median and average. Don’t do that. Compare median to median, or average to average.

Median is one form of average, Mode is another, Mean is another. There are in fact, more than a dozen methods used to determine average. Your comment is fair. That said, these are both median average.

My bad.

 

[acbytesla]

Problem with Price COntrols is they simply don't work very well.

And yet we have price controls on all kinds of things. The price we pay for certain medications. The price of milk is regulated. The price we pay for a KW of electricity is highly regulated in many parts of the country. I'm not saying it's the same on every product. It's not. Generally, I oppose price controls because they can have adverse effects. But in certain markets, they might be a good solution.

 

[Brainster]

And yet we have price controls on all kinds of things. The price we pay for certain medications. The price of milk is regulated. The price we pay for a KW of electricity is highly regulated in many parts of the country. I'm not saying it's the same on every product. It's not. Generally, I oppose price controls because they can have adverse effects. But in certain markets, they might be a good solution.

Price controls make sense where there is a government-permitted monopoly--like electric power.

 

[ahhell]

Evidence strongly suggests they always have negative consequences except for where an monopoly exists, which is usually because the government has fostered a monopoly, like utilities often are.

The extent of negative consequences depends on the extent of the limits. Rent control where the landlord can raise rent by some percentage each year is not going to cause the same degree of shortages that rent control that doesn't allow raising rent until someone moves or dies for instance. And of course they will generally create a black market for the the thing in question. It also depends whether the price control is a max or min. My understanding is that in the US there is a minimum price set for milk for instance. Its why government cheese was a thing.

 

[ahhell]

The funny thing is that inflation is mostly tamed, but I am afraid that voters may not realize it, because Joe Biden has been saying for awhile now that he expects prices to come down. That's not what happens; instead prices will rise less rapidly.

Its true, inflation is down, problem is prices are still up, the Biden administrations messaging has be **** on this. People don't care that prices aren't rising that fast anymore, they care that they have pay 30% more for stuff. It seems like the messaging has all been, "I don't know what you are complaining about, the economy is good by all these metrics." It should be more along the lines of, we know inflation sucked and you still hurt and here's how I'm going to help.

Granted, there's basically nothing they can do about prices that have already gone up unless they cause deflation which has its own issues. Really, the poblem is folks are just irrational and we give way to much credit and blame to the presidents for the economy.

 

[acbytesla]

Price controls make sense where there is a government-permitted monopoly--like electric power.

They also might make sense when there are other defacto monopolies or where it's clear that companies are not competing. It happens far more often than people realize. Where company executives call each other and agree not to compete on price.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

They also might make sense when there are other defacto monopolies or where it's clear that companies are not competing. It happens far more often than people realize. Where company executives call each other and agree not to compete on price.

in that case, it's better to nationalize the companies in question, at least temporarily.

 

[acbytesla]

in that case, it's better to nationalize the companies in question, at least temporarily.

How do you prove it, even if you know it's happening?

Guess what industry where two companies made agreements in the 1970s to control pricing and effectively drove out competition? Now there is a duopoly and little to no price competition.

 

[slyjoe]

what about insulin

Nobody answered this. I would like to know how price controls on insulin are a bad thing.

 

[ahhell]

Nobody answered this. I would like to know how price controls on insulin are a bad thing.

They reduce supply. The lower they are the more they do so. If they are floor instead of a ceiling they'd result in overproduction.

 

[CarbShark]

I hope you mean that she has a plan to entice developers to build millions of new homes?

You noted that laws already exist against price-gouging in states subject to natural disasters. Why is a federal law needed? Answer: Because it's a pretend solution to the inflation of the last four years.

Because all US consumers deserve that protection; because US retailers and manufacturers do better when there is consistancy in law regarding interstate commerce.

Inflation has been solved. This is a different issue.

Inflation was caused in part by supply chain interruptions from the pandemic and some of those are persistent.

Kamala and Joe have both been claiming that inflation is just due to corporate greed. We both know that's a load of BS

No that's definitely part of it.

And she's going to take care of it by limiting price increases when she feels it constitutes gouging. The WaPo had it right; it's just a gimmick.

Price gouging is a thing. That op-ed piece in the Washington Post got it wrong.