Everyone, stop staying "duh" to research outcomes. Research takes time to design, fund, run and analyze and it's purpose is to scientifically prove something we all "felt" a while ago.
Our feelings don't mean too much because they are often wrong, data backed fact means something. Start being happy about these validation posts and hold off on the pickachu face memes.
While the defence for science is nice (wasn't attacked here), outrage is allowed on public discourse. I think most people are outraged for the lack of inaction of regulatory bodies at the sight of extreme price fixing when everyone and their mother had at least the gut feeling that it is all bullshit.
We share that frustration, but anger/frustration at a post like this hurts that cause. It's a moment for amplification that the CEOs need to be held to account and not for anger at a new tool that can help make it more likely that good people act - and good people do act - they just aren't as loud. Ultimately we don't focus on them because anger is what catches and hold our attention.
What does it really mean here? You really think anyone will actually take action based on this data? You think it will convince anyone that didn’t already know it was the case? You think companies are magically going to stop overcharging us?
No, companies will keep lying, politicians will keep lying, and consumers will keep getting screwed.
And the “science” don’t need to take long. When companies claim they are raising prices due to increased costs while simultaneously recording record profits, it is obvious what’s going on. Yeah, economists will make excuses, but that is only because they work for the wealthy.
It doesn't take research to understand that overwhelming demand + lots of cash-on-hand yields inflation.
Literally everyone expected inflation after COVID.
"Greedflation" is just a manipulative way to describe the mechanism of inflation itself, which is price rising to the natural limit the market will bear.
What's really manipulative is describing any of this as "natural". People also expected complete stock market collapse during the pandemic but when it comes to rich people's money, various parts of the government spring into action, and that was completely averted. Turns out what "the market will bear" is pretty damn high when industries are dominated by 2-3 large companies at most, the government fully supports them, many of the goods (e.g. food) are essential, and consumer spending is helped along with credit.
There are many things that can be done to resolve this, like the government breaking up these conglomerates. It's down to greed, pure and simple. In fact, you basically admit this when you say it's the price rising to the limit that the market will bear, but you sprinkle in "natural" and "the market" to abstract away the fact that these massive corporations are putting the squeeze on people.
I didn't need a study to tell you that. In my industry the costs of all my goods are up roughly 30% since 2020, but my margins have gotten thinner at the same time so my revenue somehow managed to magically remain exactly the same. And it's no coincidence, I'm sure, that the manufacturers are the ones who determine the Minimum Advertising Price I'm supposed to be selling at.
If that 30% number sounds awfully familiar, you'll find it in the linked article. So, profits for megacorporations rose 30%, and my costs rose 30%, too. Gee, will you look at that. Those two numbers are the same. That's a fuckin' puzzler, isn't it?
So some asshole somewhere in that supply chain pyramid is making a lot of money off of this "inflation" excuse, and it sure as hell isn't me.
It's because there hasn't been any meaningful anti trust enforcement for decades. Every industry is basically an oligopoly at this stage, so they can set whatever price they want, because they know their competitors will do the same (because they face the exact same pressures from the exact same shareholders to increase profits).
If it was a free market, you could've found a different supplier, but obviously there was no alternative, or you would've done just that.
Oligopolies that run both horizontally and vertically up the supply chain.
This is what happens after decades of mergers and acquisitions in the name of diversification, and corruption of regulators and governments — a small number of multinationals, owned by an even smaller number of oligarchs, reach a point of control where it is relatively easy to collude with the handful of others that collectively own 90% of every market and sector, and operate as a functional monopoly.
It's the OPEC-ification of the entire global economy. It is of no surprise that fossil fuel oligarchs applied that model to everything, nor that the governments they own continue to enable their crimes. We're all hostages to the economic terrorists of capitalism.
free markets build monopolies, the only reason we are only at oligopoly is that we still have some regulation on the market (that inherently makes it not free btw)
In almost all cases I buy manufacturer direct. You are correct that there is no alternate supplier.
The only viable plan B is to start my own manufacturing company and make my own damn products, which is a capital expense I strongly suspect most players in my industry will not be able to afford. I certainly can't.
Ayyyy I got most of my price lists in for next year and it's like 5% across the board which is pretty typical. Some raw materials have come back down and ocean freight is reasonable again.
I got one of the last pricelists in today and it's like 30% increase over this year 😂 I'm gonna put in one more PO at '23 prices then I'm dropping their shit.
I’m sure you get to be the grief sponge from people upset about higher costs and lower quality, too. I had the hardest time getting Levi’s to honor a warranty for two pairs of jeans that fell apart after three months. The whole time I was getting more frustrated with the company while feeling terrible for their customer service meat shields who weren’t allowed to resolve it.
Eh with how this conversation has been evolving lately I'd say this is the worst time to be pessimistic about the possibility of regulation. Is a good time to be loud and angry about it tho
Oh no, this is such a shock. No shit they were lying about inflation. Those bastards were reporting record highs while the average Joe was struggling to pay rent.
The "bird flu" was nowhere significant enough to cause the price spike on its own. It was an attempt to determine "what the market will allow". And it turns out people can do without eggs quite comfortably.
They just went too far too fast and found out they aren't the staple they thought they were. They also didn't have enough market penetration when some stores had protected supply lines and did not raise their egg price.
The beginnings of a list:
"The biggest perpetrators were energy companies like Shell, Exxon Mobil, and Chevron, which were able to enjoy massive profits last year"
If you can find any way to go electric, use petrol less, ride a bike, walk, use a train, avoid a plane, etc, go for it. Prolly the petrol corps won't notice your individual actions, but the carbon you'll keep out of the atmosphere might just help to keep our planet's ecosphere viable.
That’s why oil should have the cost of climate change and healthcare from pollution added to it. If oil was as expensive as the true cost, we’d have ditched it decades ago.
I drive electric and in my home state of Georgia, USA they have an ad valorem tax of 239 dollars or there abouts for people that drive Evs and plug in hybrids.
My theory is that they're missing out on the taxes I would normally pay if I bought gas and need to recoup their losses.
My theory is that they're missing out on the taxes I would normally pay if I bought gas and need to recoup their losses.
I don't think you need to refer to that as a theory. Taxes on fuel for motor vehicles go towards road maintenance. Vehicles that drive on the roads but don't burn gas or diesel, don't pay their share of the road maintenance costs. That's why states want to tax EVs.
I'm biased because I'm a scientist, but verifying observations and assumptions through empirical methods is typically a good thing. A lot of people believe "common sense" things that are completely wrong, e.g., that lightning never strikes twice, evolution has some sort of goal in mind, to never go to bed angry, etc.
They will raise it to whatever people will pay. Always. I don't understand why anyone would even consider what they claim they did it for. They did it for more money, which is exactly what I would do if I ran a for profit business too. If I wanted to help people out of the goodness of my heart, I'd volunteer at a food bank, not start a grocery chain.
So you're telling me it doesn't cost twice as much to make and ship charcoal. It doesn't cost three times as much to grow a head of lettuce? Those sneaky snooks who make house paint have some 'splaining to do too.
In a market that expects infinite growth in a finite reality, I can assure you that I'm not the least bit surprised that companies are using "inflation" as an excuse to gouge their customers for what increasingly little they have
The Nordics I think figured out a solution to this,
You might be familiar with all the classic arguments decrying rent controls for causing supply shortages as people refuse to give up their RCd housing,
Well up in northern Europe they don't have rent control, they have rent hike control, basically you can only raise rent by a given percentage at most per year, in the US, we could tie that percentage cap to the percent change change in federal interest rates, pass some of that market rally back to the consumers since a rate drop leads to a mandatory profit margin drop to match.
Catharsis may feel nice but prioritizing feeling validated over addressing the problems you want to feel so valid about just leaves you feeling valid about a still festering wound.
This exists in a few places in the US under the term "rent stabilization" but it is not tied to interest rates or inflation and exactly who qualifies gets a little murky. Considering that housing is a basic human necessity I think some form of rent stabilization should exist everywhere. Market forces have their place but they are often disadvantageous to lower incomes and should be curtailed when we're talking something that people can't do without.
Well see that's why I tied it to be directly related to the federal interest rate, as a balance to create class interests for both courses of action.
Basically it'd be a way to ensure the fed doesn't get pressured too much to pursue bad interest rate policy like never raising it over 20 years until it's too late and everyone's mad about it.
Bread and circuses only work when people can afford the bread and circuses. But capitalism demands growth at the cost of all else. The only way out of this mess is when it eats its own tail I imagine. Some say the inevitable collapse of society should be hastened for the greater good. Obviously that’s far too simple a statement, but I’m not well versed on it. Someone hit me with your 2 cents.
I just don't understand why they lie about it at all? To avoid losing long term customers?
Raising the price of goods to increase profits isn't illegal. It's just risky for the business if they lose customers to other places with lower prices.
Sorry, ReplayWeb.page won't work in this browser as Service Workers are not supported.
Please try a different browser.
(Service Workers are disabled in Firefox in Private Mode. If Using Private Mode in Firefox, try regular mode)
Mexican food scales like there's no tomorrow. The price per pound of rice or beans for a small bag is drastically higher than the price per pound of rice for a 50 lb bag.
The meat they use is historically cheaper cuts cooked until they're falling apart. If you can afford to buy non perishables in bulk you can make pretty damn cheap Mexican food as well