Those readers in the Bacon’s Rebellion community who view the Washington Post as a mouthpiece for progressives need to read the comments of the paper’s editorial board regarding Kamala Harris’ economic plan. For those who do not subscribe to the Post, here is the summation: “Instead of delivering a substantial plan, she squandered the moment on populist gimmicks.”
Share this article
ADVERTISEMENT
(comments below)
Comments
Comments
71 responses to “By the Way….”
-
Harris is an empty suit manipulated by Obama and others. Her economic plan is nothing but more spending. The bread lines are on the way courtesy of democrats.
-
Subscribe to the WAPO….? Do not pass GO on that one.
-
Does this fit in the Blind pigs sometimes find an acorn
-
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
-
-
Bezos owns the Washington Rag. Price controls are bad for Amazon's bottom line. Not too hard to figure out.
-
Is once again publicly slighting Congressional Medal of Honor recipients also considered a “populist gimmick”? Asking for an ex-President…
-
Outlawing price gouging is not communism nor price controls. But the Right seems to be taking the position that they are perfectly comfortable with allowing price gouging… that certainly is counter to a populist position…
-
Remember 2020 when we actually had lines for food in the US…? Good times…
https://www.motherjones.com/food/2020/04/these-photos-show-the-staggering-food-bank-lines-across-america/ https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2e222a5af751f3328b1539770d640e432df06fb57cbde0c497b2a8810e90fff5.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/0cdaaff7e1d26f8d3c7714f918800db1df1d12a07fe29d2002806ee712d05c21.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7ad92d3a8fbc1331765c633d255e615823dd5b99f8415e6598ee3e9d69c04d0f.jpg
-
THey sure would be if the POTUS could decree them as grand "leader" on day 1, I'm sure!
But I don't think Harris is that "guy"…. of the 2 running…
-
She would keep Obama_Care/ACA while the other side would "repeal and replace" it, no contest!
-
As I recall from my youth, price controls worked well under Nixon. And adding federal money to the housing market won't push up prices.
A couple of my aunts and uncles had new houses in the 1960s. As I recall, they were pretty spartan in contrast to new starter homes today. How much could the price of a starter home be reduced if it didn't have all the bells and whistles found in most starter homes today? Would first-time buyers even want them?
-
People forget, that tax code actually supported First Time Homebuyers in 2008. A new updated law could put rules
on the price of the house to qualify for the credit. Buy a
big, expensive house, and you don't get the credit.The law could also allow deduction of the mortgage interest even if
you did not itemize..-
Sure, lots of things could be done. But what are the impacts? A number of economists have concluded that substantially increasing student aid for college students has contributed to the tuition increases that have exceeded inflation. Putting more federal funds into the housing market will most likely do the same.
My point on the demands that buyers make on housing amenities is that I doubt first time buyers would want the basic, stripped down, models that would enable builders to sell starter homes at lower, more affordable prices.
There was a big housing shortage after WWII. But look at what was built in response to the pent-up demand and reduced supplies — Levittowns & similar developments about the country. Many of these houses were around 750-800 sq. ft. with two bedrooms and a small lot. I suggest that if a federal housing program offered similar homes today, the demand would be quite low. People want more and more pushes up the costs and makes housing even more unaffordable.
-
I don’t disagree, EXCEPT, I’m making the point that if you LIMIT the benefit to low priced houses (and tuition), you CAN influence behaviors/decisions without giving a huge free ride to any/all. That’s what is offered. Folks don’t have to take it if they want bigger/better. I don’t disagree with what you are saying if the benefit is not limited. You can do it like the ACA – the benefit is limited, means tested AND “capped”.
-
“My point on the demands that buyers make on housing amenities is that I doing wars are first time buyers would want the rrbasic, stripped down, models that would enable builders to sell starter homes at lower, more affordable prices”
This has not been my experience. Eldest son had to pay nearly $600k for a basic townhouse near Centerville several years ago. Absolutely nothing fancy at all and they felt lucky to get it – bidding wars are not uncommon. IMO, the issue lies with a combo of AirBnBs, speculators, and corporate investors driving up the market and a reticence of Boomers to downsize.
-
…and a reticence of Boomers to downsize.
👍👍
-
-
I suggest that if a federal housing program offered similar homes today, the demand would be quite low.
Maybe not. We built a 4,500 sq foot home for retirement, lived in it for 5 years, got tired of the cleaning and upkeep, ditched it for 1,100 sq ft, dumped all the crap we collected over 55 years of marriage, and wonder why we didn't do this in the first place.
-
-
-
Developers don't build what passsed for a starter home when I bought my first house–a 3-bedroom, 1-bath, brick rancher. Not enough profit in them.
-
If developers don't build them, then form a cooperative with Habitat for Humanity or similar and let the govt create a public/private partnership with a revolving fund to get the ball rolling. At some point, we have to reconcile the reality that the private sector is not going to do it and what the private sector won't do , the govt needs to consider and a middle ground might well be a public/private approach like we do for schools, roads, parks, libraries, and other infrastructure to serve citizens.
-
An admirable plan. The laws controlling such a program will need to be very carefully crafted and have high penalties for violating them. Otherwise it will take about ten minutes for someone to find a way around the rules, buy a "starter home", lavishly upgrade it and then flip it for a huge profit, thereby making it a "regular" house at "regular" price.
And I hope to God the government doesn't try to squeeze an affordable housing program into the existing Public-Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act (PPEA) laws, which to me seem to result in a lot of money being handed over to the second "P" by the first "P". Sometimes far more than under a conventional design, bid, build project.
-
they're currently kicking more than 500,000 off of Medicaid that no longer qualify… so there ARE examples of them doing it right.
-
-
-
-
-
It is, unfortunately, the kind of populist pablum that will be attractive to many. Free stuff wins votes. "No tax on tips" is similar dreck. I watched her speech and could see the cuts that will soon be in the ads.
-
She'll never get very far with it other than jawboning. OTOH, apparently if she wanted to invoke 20% tariffs by executive order, she can do that. Go figure.
-
Well, I think the law does give the president some power in that regard, and Biden has imposed some tariffs in this term (Chinese solar?). Not something I know much about. You and others are perfectly correct that those moves just raise prices for everybody. If you are looking for a candidate who will prevent future inflation, neither of these two will. The worst of the fever seems to be over….for now.
-
Which one will listen to reason and change course if advised by people with credible economic backgrounds?
-
No contest. Inflation will be worse under Harris, everyone knows it including her which is why she is trying her ridiculous policies. One big reason I will offer is Trump will move back to a more rational energy policy. Another is regulations which drives up prices. Let’s not forget inflation we have just experienced, which has slowed down but under no circumstances reversed itself, is caused in large part to Bidenomics. Harris also wants to raise corporate taxes, what is that going to do with prices? Taxes is just another expense similar to raw material or labor, you either pass it on, or find other ways to cut costs, like move production elsewhere.
Now I am not suggesting there would have been no inflation under Trump. Yes, tariffs will be inflationary and some of our inflation was caused by bottlenecks that would have happened under Trump. I am only asserting inflation is higher than it should have been, and will be higher if Harris wins.
-
Tariffs are taxes. All taxes raise prices for everybody.
-
-
-
-
“Populist”…?! Don’t have any idea where she got that idea!
-
what a HOOT! 😉
-
-
I'm pretty sure price controls are more socialist / communist than populist
-
Outlawing price gouging is not communism nor price controls. But the Right seems to be taking the position that they are perfectly comfortable with allowing price gouging… that certainly is counter to a populist position…
-
You mean price gauging…
and please define it as cackle didn't -
You mean price gauging…
and please define it as cackle didn't-
okay to charge hundreds of dollars for $35 of insulin?
-
okay to charge hundreds of dollars for $35 of insulin?
-
No… price gouging… probably similar to how it is defined by the 37 states that have anti-price gouging laws… including Virginia…
https://www.ncsl.org/financial-services/price-gouging-state-statutes#:~:text=Thirty%2Dseven%20states%2C%20Guam%2C,or%20deceptive%20trade%20practices%20law.
-
Price gouging… probably similar to how it is defined by the 37 states that have anti-price gouging laws..
Let's hope so.From the link: Thirty-seven states, Guam, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the District of Columbia have statutes or regulations that defining (sic) price gouging during a time of disaster or emergency.
I'm okay with that. But the rest of the time the market should decide the price of things.
Kamala Harris wants to control prices all of the time. She wants to control the supply/demand equation. She can couch it in terms of passing simple, "innocent" price gouging" laws, but she'll fool only a certain type of person. The type of person who will tout any proposal, law or regulation, as long as it is part of the democrat party line. The type of person who will go to any lengths to rationalize those proposals, laws, and regulations, including posting half-truths on certain blog comment pages…
-
Price gouging… probably similar to how it is defined by the 37 states that have anti-price gouging laws..
Let's hope so.From the link: Thirty-seven states, Guam, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the District of Columbia have statutes or regulations that defining (sic) price gouging during a time of disaster or emergency.
I'm okay with that. But the rest of the time the market should decide the price of things.
Kamala Harris wants to control prices all of the time. She wants to control the supply/demand equation. She can couch it in terms of passing simple, "innocent" price gouging" laws, but she'll fool only a certain type of person. The type of person who will tout any proposal, law or regulation, as long as it is part of the democrat party line. The type of person who will go to any lengths to rationalize those proposals, laws, and regulations, including posting half-truths on certain blog comment pages…
-
Price gouging… probably similar to how it is defined by the 37 states that have anti-price gouging laws..
Let's hope so.From the link: Thirty-seven states, Guam, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the District of Columbia have statutes or regulations that defining (sic) price gouging during a time of disaster or emergency.
I'm okay with that. But the rest of the time the market should decide the price of things.
Kamala Harris wants to control prices all of the time. She wants to control the supply/demand equation. She can couch it in terms of passing simple, "innocent" price gouging" laws, but she'll fool only a certain type of person. The type of person who will tout any proposal, law or regulation, as long as it is part of the democrat party line. The type of person who will go to any lengths to rationalize those proposals, laws, and regulations, including posting half-truths on certain blog comment pages…
-
Not all are based solely on emergencies. For instance, Louisiana (hardly a liberal hot bed) has this language:
“H.(1) Upon the declaration of an abnormal economic disruption by the governor by proclamation or executive order, and continuing for a maximum of fifteen calendar days, a person is prohibited from charging any other person a price for any of the following goods or services that is grossly in excess of the price generally charged for the same or similar goods or services in the usual course of business:
(a) Consumer food items.
(b) Repair or construction services.
(c) Emergency supplies.
(d) Medical supplies.
(e) Building materials.
(f) Motor vehicle fuels.
(g) Transportation, freight, and storage services.
(h) Housing.
(2) A declaration of an abnormal economic disruption by the governor may authorize all departments to exercise actions in direct response and specify that only certain goods or services are covered by the prohibition provided by Paragraph (1) of this Subsection.
(3) A price increase is not grossly excessive if the increase was attributable to any of the following:
(a) Fluctuations of pricing in applicable regional, national, or international commodity markets.
(b) Pricing set forth in any preexisting agreement, including stored and in-transit inventory.
(c) Additional costs imposed on the person by the supplier of the goods or services.
(d) Additional costs for labor, services, or materials used to provide the goods or services, including costs of replacement inventory, additional costs to transport goods or…”“Kamala Harris wants to control prices all of the time.”
I haven’t seen the draft legislation.
-
re: " “Kamala Harris wants to control prices all of the time.”
is that what she said or what her opponents say she said? 😉
-
“first-ever federal ban on price gouging on food and groceries — setting clear rules of the road to make clear that big corporations can’t unfairly exploit consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and groceries.”
Twist your personal interpretation to try to convince yourself she isn't saying what she is clearly saying if you want to, but deep down you know what she is talking about. She is talking about widespread price controls, not the prevention of a few instances of transitory price gouging.
-
-
But she has assured us it will include:
The “first-ever federal ban on price gouging on food and groceries — setting clear rules of the road to make clear that big corporations can’t unfairly exploit consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and groceries.”
There's no mention of such regulations being temporary, or applying only to emergencies and disasters. And it's not "big corporations" who typically price gouge during emergencies anyway, it's local resellers. -
what exactly are " clear rules of the road" for "price gouging" (as opposed to setting prices?)?
-
-
-
THey sure would be if the POTUS could decree them as grand "leader" on day 1, I'm sure!
But I don't think Harris is that "guy"…. of the 2 running…
Is once again publicly slighting Congressional Medal of Honor recipients also considered a “populist gimmick”? Asking for an ex-President…
-
"weird" is the right label…!
-
"weird" is the right label…!
-
A repeat of his public denigration of John McCain’s service, the Kahn, etc. The word in this case is not just “weird”, it is “abhorrent”… and, once again, no one on the Right on this site will hold him accountable.
-
and apparently also some correlation between the Right and Trumps love of personal attacks.
-
A reminder that this is where it should have ended… https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/53995d575845cd48b1ff98330c1017c20a8a88d7ea2248b453f26af1c4cedce0.jpg
-
Apparently a bunch of folks admire this….
-
-
-
That was pretty stupid.
Remember 2020 when we actually had lines for food in the US…? Good times…
https://www.motherjones.com/food/2020/04/these-photos-show-the-staggering-food-bank-lines-across-america/ https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2e222a5af751f3328b1539770d640e432df06fb57cbde0c497b2a8810e90fff5.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/0cdaaff7e1d26f8d3c7714f918800db1df1d12a07fe29d2002806ee712d05c21.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7ad92d3a8fbc1331765c633d255e615823dd5b99f8415e6598ee3e9d69c04d0f.jpg
-
That's a mighty nice Camaro LE sitting there waiting for free food…
-
They make the point at the Fredericksburg Food Bank that they don't "judge" by the type of car so yeah, they get high end cars , BMWs, Caddy's 75K pickups..
-
That’s Florida for ya…
-
She would keep Obama_Care/ACA while the other side would "repeal and replace" it, no contest!
How to wreck the economy and create shortages. We have a couple of poor choices. As Woody Allen once said something like, we're at a crossroads. One road leads to extinction and the other leads to annihilation. He hoped that we would have the wisdom to make the right choice.
Things are changing at the WashPost. Readership has fallen by half in the last several years. The woke staff revolted at new management, but only won temporary relief. There's a limit on how much money Bezos is willing to piss away on woke. He wants to be relevant.
Good ideas. You've covered some of the issues I was thinking about when I posted my response to your original comment on the subject.
I think a minimum time of ownership by the original purchaser would need to be included in such a program. Perhaps a monetary penalty for selling early (with some exceptions for hardship).
Good ideas. You've covered some of the issues I was thinking about when I posted my response to your original comment on the subject.
I think a minimum time of ownership by the original purchaser would need to be included in such a program. Perhaps a monetary penalty for selling early (with some exceptions for hardship).
Your enthusiasm for finding solutions to the affordable housing problem is admirable, and I think the ideas you laid out in your previous comment would have a good chance of success, especially if the program were limited by law and its scope could not be expanded.
Rising housing costs are one of the most impactful things that limit poorer people's opportunities to build better lives. This is largely because housing prices have grown at a rate quite a bit greater than the general rate of inflation.
But perhaps a pilot study might be in order before jumping in whole-hog to another government program. I understand f/k/a/ Fairfax's reluctance, because so many government run/led housing programs have failed so miserably in the past.
Certainly not since Bezos took over. It appears that from at least 1960 through the present they have never endorsed a republican for president. The closest they have ever come was deciding not to endorse either candidate in the Bush-Dukakis race.
I think they once endorsed John Warner for reelection to the senate, and I know they endorsed a few republican congress-critters from northern Virginia a long time ago (1980s and 90s).
They have a long history of being left-leaning, to put it mildly, in their political endorsements. Today I think it's safe to say they are 100% left, to put it mildly.
re: price controls. Isn't that a discussion on these pages about College costs?
something about prices increasing higher than inflation? 😉
😉
I hope Kackles and The Coach will tell us which food companies are excessively profiting from price "gagueing".
Odd that companies weren't greedily forcing up inflation during Trump's administration.
Kackles and the coach are a train wreak.
-
THe name-calling and personal attacks seem to be a "feature" of the GOP these days , eh?
-
Yeah, right. Just the GOP.
-
Pretty much. Just about EVERY day, every rally ,no? “DEI hire”? “cackles”? etc
-
-
Hadn’t even thought of that!
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.