WaPo: 'It’s hard to exaggerate how bad this policy is. It is, in all but name, a sweeping set of government-enforced price controls across every industry, not only food.'
WaPo: “It’s hard to exaggerate how bad this policy is. It is, in all but name, a sweeping set of government-enforced price controls across every industry, not only food.”some pretty appalling economic policies this week. Among these was a plot to impose Soviet-style price controls on goods, including food.But we expect clarity on economic matters from someone who leans right like Gutfeld.
. . . . It’s hard to exaggerate how bad this policy is. It is, in all but name, a sweeping set of government-enforced price controls across every industry, not only food. Supply and demand would no longer determine prices or profit levels. Far-off Washington bureaucrats would. The FTC would be able to tell, say, a Kroger in Ohio the acceptable price it can charge for milk.
Vice President Kamala Harris’s speech Friday was an opportunity to get specific with voters about how a Harris presidency would manage an economy that many feel is not working well for them. Unfortunately, instead of delivering a substantial plan, she squandered the moment on populist gimmicks. Thankfully, this gambit by Ms. Harris has been met with almost instant skepticism, with many critics citing President Richard M. Nixon’s failed price controls from the 1970s. Whether the Harris proposal wins over voters remains to be seen, but if sound economic analysis still matters, it won’t.owner Jeff Bezos also owns Amazon, which in turn owns Whole Foods, both of which would be devastated by this dangerous plan, but it’s so bad that even CNN got some shots in at the idiocy.
Jason Furman, a top economist in the Obama administration, shared Roberts’ view that anti-price gouging laws could inadvertently harm consumers. “This is not sensible policy, and I think the biggest hope is that it ends up being a lot of rhetoric and no reality,” he told the New York Times. “There’s no upside here, and there is some downside.
She clearly won’t/can’t take responsibility for the “Biden-Harris” Administration’s profligate, multi-trillion-dollar spending binges, nor, its war on/stifling of American fossil fuel production — the two largest contributors to Harris-Bidenflation. So, she and her lackey-advisors reach into their neo-communist back of tricks to proffer this malodorous policy turd.I think the point here is that the inflation is intentional, that they wanted price spikes . . . .
Cnn Communism Kamala Harris Venezuela Washington Post
Canada Latest News, Canada Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Kamala Harris 2024 isn’t Kamala Harris 2020Kamala Harris is positioning herself as more of a moderate in 2024 than she was during the 2020 presidential race. Here are four key differences.
Read more »
Paul Harris’ Top Picks, August 8, 2024Top Picks from Paul Harris, Partner and Portfolio Manager, Harris Douglas Asset Management
Read more »
How a Harris-Walz administration could differ from Biden-Harris: Capitol GainsNow that Kamala Harris has tapped Tim Walz to be her running mate, voters can begin to predict which policies will become her priorities if she wins the...
Read more »
Why Harris-Walz could be 'slightly more friendly' on trade issues than Biden-HarrisThere are a number of areas where a potential Harris/Walz administration could differ from the current Biden/Harris administration. Trade is one.
Read more »
‘Crypto for Harris’ event disappoints: ‘Clown show,’ says Tyler WinklevossHarris' 'Crypto for Harris' campaign launch struggled, raising doubts about its influence on the crypto electorate.
Read more »
Trump Was Denied Additional Security Contrary To Secret Service Assertions, WaPo Reports'Those rejections — in response to requests that were several times made in writing — led to long-standing tensions that pitted Trump, his top aides and his security detail against Secret Service leadership, as Trump advisers privately fretted that the vaunted security agency was not doing enough to protect the former president.
Read more »