If you thought Bidenomics was rough, just wait for Kamalanomics.
Check out this headline from the wildly trustworthy Atlantic.
Yes, they actually published this headline!
Now, usually, the lefties have at least a few Krugmans or other lefty economists to push out fake models that make the Democrats' economic policies seem feasible on paper, but Kamala's price-fixing plan is so awful — so mind-numbingly ignorant — that The Atlantic is out here telling people to ignore all of the economists.
The whole story is not even defending Kamala's communist takeover of industry through price fixing. The author instead spends paragraph after paragraph talking about how price gouging during natural disasters and cataclysmic events is already illegal in a lot of places.
Price gouging in the popular imagination has a 'know it when you see it' quality, but it is actually a well-developed body of law. A typical price-gouging claim has four elements. First, a triggering event, sometimes called an 'abnormal market disruption,' such as a natural disaster or power outage, must have occurred. Second, in most states, the claim must concern essential goods and services. (No one cares if you overcharge for Louis Vuitton handbags during a hurricane.) Third, a price increase must be 'excessive' or 'unconscionable,' which most states define as exceeding a certain percentage, typically 10 to 25 percent. Finally, the elevated price must be in excess of the seller's increased cost. This is crucial: Even during emergencies, sellers are allowed to maintain their existing profit margins. They just can't increase those margins excessively.
They actually left this next paragraph in the article, which is ... surprising.
Price-gouging bans are broadly popular — except among economists. The reason is that, in the perfect world of simple economic models, allowing sellers to charge whatever they want during periods of heightened demand is actually a good thing: It signals to the rest of the market that there's money to be made on the product in question, which in turn leads to more supply. Accordingly, prohibiting gouging leads to less production of essential goods and services. Plus, letting prices rise helps ensure that the product will be sold to the people who value it the most.
And then they move to this:
A strong federal law would help not only the public but also the small-business owners who lack the ability to do anything but pass on big increases — and who become, unfairly, the face of ugly profiteering for many consumers. If properly designed, such a law would very rarely need to be used.
And therefore Kamala's plan to cap grocery prices is actually a good thing.
Sorry, this non-economist, along with your everyday American, knows that this is a load of hot garbage.
P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇
