The 100k protesters burning down Chicago next week will be a hard image for democrats to recover from. I feel sorry for any city this party of demons bring their circus to.

---

Look how happy this evil ghoul is when describing the powers of her pen.

https://twitter.com/Shawn_Farash/status/...jXpXA&s=19

That looks like something taken out of context.

---

Here is an example of why I cannot commit to Harris.  Today, she is proposing an anti-price-gouging law.  Now, anyone who believes in free markets knows that there is nothing wrong with charging absolutely as much as you can for a product or service.  That's the way the system is supposed to work.   Profits produce jobs, profits bring competition, profits are the life blood of a healthy economy.  We should tax profits, yes, but we should never tell people they cannot charge as much as they can for their product or service.  

If I have a hundred thirsty people in front of me, and I have 25 bottles of water, I should charge as much as I can get for that water, because I will take that money and buy more water, and someone else will see what I am doing and try to do the same thing.  That's the way a healthy economy works.  

I cannot get on board with the idea that the government should decide when a company is charging too much for their product.

This question deserves a better, direct answer.
I first read the question in terms of Hurricane's reply about hotel rooms during an evacuation.

We've had anti price gouging laws in Florida for a very long time.  They only apply to emergency situations.  Most states have similar laws.  They work.  The feds don't need to get involved with them.  

Kamala's people are talking about a new federal law against price gouging but it seems this law will be nothing like the state level laws.  In France, most businesses have to submit their prices to the government and give a reason every time they increase their prices.  The government can tell them their reason isn't good enough and prohibit the price increase.  That wouldn't work here. It barely works there.  I would strongly oppose that kind of plan.  

On the other hand, perhaps Kamala is talking about undoing some of the mergers we have seen food processors and many of our name brands conglomerate into. There's a high likelihood of price fixing too, at least in some of these places, and it should be investigated and punished. That would take years in the courts, and might not lower prices, but it is still worth doing.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

I think the dems are testing the waters with Communism.. Trying to guage out if the country is going to accept it in the next 4 years.

That’s my guess as well. They’re floating trial balloons to see how far they can push their agenda.

Edit: I don’t think they’re pushing straight up communism, but they do support strong central government policies.

This stuff makes more sense in the context of wef strategies.

---

Here is an example of why I cannot commit to Harris.  Today, she is proposing an anti-price-gouging law.  Now, anyone who believes in free markets knows that there is nothing wrong with charging absolutely as much as you can for a product or service.  That's the way the system is supposed to work.   Profits produce jobs, profits bring competition, profits are the life blood of a healthy economy.  We should tax profits, yes, but we should never tell people they cannot charge as much as they can for their product or service.  

If I have a hundred thirsty people in front of me, and I have 25 bottles of water, I should charge as much as I can get for that water, because I will take that money and buy more water, and someone else will see what I am doing and try to do the same thing.  That's the way a healthy economy works.  

I cannot get on board with the idea that the government should decide when a company is charging too much for their product.

This question deserves a better, direct answer.
I first read the question in terms of Hurricane's reply about hotel rooms during an evacuation.

We've had anti price gouging laws in Florida for a very long time.  They only apply to emergency situations.  Most states have similar laws.  They work.  The feds don't need to get involved with them.  

Kamala's people are talking about a new federal law against price gouging but it seems this law will be nothing like the state level laws.  In France, most businesses have to submit their prices to the government and give a reason every time they increase their prices.  The government can tell them their reason isn't good enough and prohibit the price increase.  That wouldn't work here. It barely works there.  I would strongly oppose that kind of plan.  

On the other hand, perhaps Kamala is talking about undoing some of the mergers we have seen food processors and many of our name brands conglomerate into. There's a high likelihood of price fixing too, at least in some of these places, and it should be investigated and punished. That would take years in the courts, and might not lower prices, but it is still worth doing.

"I don't even know what that means. I'm just looking for votes."

---

This question deserves a better, direct answer.
I first read the question in terms of Hurricane's reply about hotel rooms during an evacuation.

We've had anti price gouging laws in Florida for a very long time.  They only apply to emergency situations.  Most states have similar laws.  They work.  The feds don't need to get involved with them.  

Kamala's people are talking about a new federal law against price gouging but it seems this law will be nothing like the state level laws.  In France, most businesses have to submit their prices to the government and give a reason every time they increase their prices.  The government can tell them their reason isn't good enough and prohibit the price increase.  That wouldn't work here. It barely works there.  I would strongly oppose that kind of plan.  

On the other hand, perhaps Kamala is talking about undoing some of the mergers we have seen food processors and many of our name brands conglomerate into. There's a high likelihood of price fixing too, at least in some of these places, and it should be investigated and punished. That would take years in the courts, and might not lower prices, but it is still worth doing.

"I don't even know what that means. I'm just looking for votes."

Future ticket?

---

Here is an example of why I cannot commit to Harris.  Today, she is proposing an anti-price-gouging law.  Now, anyone who believes in free markets knows that there is nothing wrong with charging absolutely as much as you can for a product or service.  That's the way the system is supposed to work.   Profits produce jobs, profits bring competition, profits are the life blood of a healthy economy.  We should tax profits, yes, but we should never tell people they cannot charge as much as they can for their product or service.  

If I have a hundred thirsty people in front of me, and I have 25 bottles of water, I should charge as much as I can get for that water, because I will take that money and buy more water, and someone else will see what I am doing and try to do the same thing.  That's the way a healthy economy works.  

I cannot get on board with the idea that the government should decide when a company is charging too much for their product.

This question deserves a better, direct answer.
I first read the question in terms of Hurricane's reply about hotel rooms during an evacuation.

We've had anti price gouging laws in Florida for a very long time.  They only apply to emergency situations.  Most states have similar laws.  They work.  The feds don't need to get involved with them.  

Kamala's people are talking about a new federal law against price gouging but it seems this law will be nothing like the state level laws.  In France, most businesses have to submit their prices to the government and give a reason every time they increase their prices.  The government can tell them their reason isn't good enough and prohibit the price increase.  That wouldn't work here. It barely works there.  I would strongly oppose that kind of plan.  

On the other hand, perhaps Kamala is talking about undoing some of the mergers we have seen food processors and many of our name brands conglomerate into. There's a high likelihood of price fixing too, at least in some of these places, and it should be investigated and punished. That would take years in the courts, and might not lower prices, but it is still worth doing.

Oh look, economic illiteracy on display again!

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

This question deserves a better, direct answer.
I first read the question in terms of Hurricane's reply about hotel rooms during an evacuation.

We've had anti price gouging laws in Florida for a very long time.  They only apply to emergency situations.  Most states have similar laws.  They work.  The feds don't need to get involved with them.  

Kamala's people are talking about a new federal law against price gouging but it seems this law will be nothing like the state level laws.  In France, most businesses have to submit their prices to the government and give a reason every time they increase their prices.  The government can tell them their reason isn't good enough and prohibit the price increase.  That wouldn't work here. It barely works there.  I would strongly oppose that kind of plan.  

On the other hand, perhaps Kamala is talking about undoing some of the mergers we have seen food processors and many of our name brands conglomerate into. There's a high likelihood of price fixing too, at least in some of these places, and it should be investigated and punished. That would take years in the courts, and might not lower prices, but it is still worth doing.

Oh look, economic illiteracy on display again!

Economic literacy ain't all its cracked up to be.
 

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

I totally understand profits and have the benefit taking advantage of rental increases and such (although I limited the impact to existing tenants), so I'm not complaining about the capital system, but I do think there are limits that should be considered so the consumer is not gouged.

Personally, the Publix price increases don't impact us because we can easily afford groceries at any cost and have alternatives if we so desire.  I can drive to Winn Dixie and Walmart but there are others (especially the aging who don't have modes of alt transportation) that rely on their local store, so they are bound by increases of a certain grocer.

Same applies to gas prices.  Big oil has no problem recording record profits at the expense of the consumer.  Just thankful none of these cost increases really has any detrimental impact on any of us, but that's not a reason to ignore it and place some controls on certain consumer necessities.   I do find it ironic that people here were just complaining about grocery prices but when Kamala mentions something, all the sudden increases on groceries don't matter ..... people just call it inflation and complain once again, even though it's evident it's not increasing costs but increasing profits of certain suppliers.   Lol .... people complain about costs but not profits ... "isn't it ironic".

Prices are a product of supply and demand.  The best way to control prices is to increase supply.   Price controls lead to shortages, because if someone cannot make a profit selling a particular thing, they will not want to bother producing or selling that thing.  That's why price controls are very bad policy.

Not always. Prices are also dictated by a companies leverage in the region.   Some small towns or suburbs only have 1 choice locally.

Clarification (as perhaps I didn't in my prior posts): I'm not 100% against higher prices by certain stores, especially in wealthier suburbs where people would absolutely pay higher prices at Publix rather then to ever set foot in a Winn Dixie. I think I see gouging differently than those here OR even perhaps the way Kamala envisions it so I'm open to the many variables that exist --- example:  in PV there is a Winn Dixie 2 miles north of Publix on A1A.  If Publix wants to charge $12/pound for their brand turkey breast whereas Winn Dixie charges $8, so be it if people are willing to pay that.  I'm more focused on the smaller low income towns with a high population of 70+ year olds on a fixed income.  I see gouging as taking advantage of desperate circumstances to increase profits at the expense of the less fortunate (or in the case of hurricanes and such taking advantage of the desperate).

---

Prices are a product of supply and demand.  The best way to control prices is to increase supply.   Price controls lead to shortages, because if someone cannot make a profit selling a particular thing, they will not want to bother producing or selling that thing.  That's why price controls are very bad policy.

Not always. Prices are also dictated by a companies leverage in the region.   Some small towns or suburbs only have 1 choice locally.

Clarification (as perhaps I didn't in my prior posts): I'm not 100% against higher prices by certain stores, especially in wealthier suburbs where people would absolutely pay higher prices at Publix rather then to ever set foot in a Winn Dixie. I think I see gouging differently than those here OR even perhaps the way Kamala envisions it so I'm open to the many variables that exist --- example:  in PV there is a Winn Dixie 2 miles north of Publix on A1A.  If Publix wants to charge $12/pound for their brand turkey breast whereas Winn Dixie charges $8, so be it if people are willing to pay that.  I'm more focused on the smaller low income towns with a high population of 70+ year olds on a fixed income.  I see gouging as taking advantage of desperate circumstances to increase profits at the expense of the less fortunate (or in the case of hurricanes and such taking advantage of the desperate).

Would a doubling of the price of toilet paper in March 2020 have been a net positive or negative?

---

Oh look, economic illiteracy on display again!

Economic literacy ain't all its cracked up to be.
 

Certainly you would believe that.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Not always. Prices are also dictated by a companies leverage in the region.   Some small towns or suburbs only have 1 choice locally.

Clarification (as perhaps I didn't in my prior posts): I'm not 100% against higher prices by certain stores, especially in wealthier suburbs where people would absolutely pay higher prices at Publix rather then to ever set foot in a Winn Dixie. I think I see gouging differently than those here OR even perhaps the way Kamala envisions it so I'm open to the many variables that exist --- example:  in PV there is a Winn Dixie 2 miles north of Publix on A1A.  If Publix wants to charge $12/pound for their brand turkey breast whereas Winn Dixie charges $8, so be it if people are willing to pay that.  I'm more focused on the smaller low income towns with a high population of 70+ year olds on a fixed income.  I see gouging as taking advantage of desperate circumstances to increase profits at the expense of the less fortunate (or in the case of hurricanes and such taking advantage of the desperate).

Would a doubling of the price of toilet paper in March 2020 have been a net positive or negative?

I'm not sure anything was stopping them from doubling the price if they wanted to.

But suddenly increasing prices in an emergency is just going to frustrate shoppers, cause them to make extra trips searching for a lower price, cause a lot of bad will, and a similar number of customers go without. Basically everything stays the same except the stores make less money.

This would all be worth it if we were facing a long term shortage of TP. Customer and retailer expectations would adjust and it would be fine long term.

Additional TP was coming within a week. Letting the stores rake in that money during the shortage would have done no one any good besides the stores.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Would a doubling of the price of toilet paper in March 2020 have been a net positive or negative?

---

Certainly you would believe that.

I'm not sure anything was stopping them from doubling the price if they wanted to.

As usual you avoid the actual question with a garbage opinion.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

I'm not sure anything was stopping them from doubling the price if they wanted to.

As usual you avoid the actual question with a garbage opinion.

I answered it.
Negative, the shortage was temporary because long term supply and demand were unchanged.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

As usual you avoid the actual question with a garbage opinion.

I answered it.
Negative, the shortage was temporary because long term supply and demand were unchanged.

And everyone who couldn't find any to buy because of the hoarders disagrees with you.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Here is an example of why I cannot commit to Harris.  Today, she is proposing an anti-price-gouging law.  Now, anyone who believes in free markets knows that there is nothing wrong with charging absolutely as much as you can for a product or service.  That's the way the system is supposed to work.   Profits produce jobs, profits bring competition, profits are the life blood of a healthy economy.  We should tax profits, yes, but we should never tell people they cannot charge as much as they can for their product or service.  

If I have a hundred thirsty people in front of me, and I have 25 bottles of water, I should charge as much as I can get for that water, because I will take that money and buy more water, and someone else will see what I am doing and try to do the same thing.  That's the way a healthy economy works.  

I cannot get on board with the idea that the government should decide when a company is charging too much for their product.

This question deserves a better, direct answer.
I first read the question in terms of Hurricane's reply about hotel rooms during an evacuation.

We've had anti price gouging laws in Florida for a very long time.  They only apply to emergency situations.  Most states have similar laws.  They work.  The feds don't need to get involved with them.  

Kamala's people are talking about a new federal law against price gouging but it seems this law will be nothing like the state level laws.  In France, most businesses have to submit their prices to the government and give a reason every time they increase their prices.  The government can tell them their reason isn't good enough and prohibit the price increase.  That wouldn't work here. It barely works there.  I would strongly oppose that kind of plan.  

On the other hand, perhaps Kamala is talking about undoing some of the mergers we have seen food processors and many of our name brands conglomerate into. There's a high likelihood of price fixing too, at least in some of these places, and it should be investigated and punished. That would take years in the courts, and might not lower prices, but it is still worth doing.

Your starting to get it.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

I answered it.
Negative, the shortage was temporary because long term supply and demand were unchanged.

And everyone who couldn't find any to buy because of the hoarders disagrees with you.

In your scenario folks would also be going without.  Except they would blame the store instead of blaming their panicked neighbors.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The 100k protesters burning down Chicago next week will be a hard image for democrats to recover from. I feel sorry for any city this party of demons bring their circus to.

---

Look how happy this evil ghoul is when describing the powers of her pen.

https://twitter.com/Shawn_Farash/status/...jXpXA&s=19

The 100k protesters burning down Chicago next week will be a hard image for democrats to recover from. I feel sorry for any city this party of demons bring their circus to.

---

Look how happy this evil ghoul is when describing the powers of her pen.

https://twitter.com/Shawn_Farash/status/...jXpXA&s=19

That party is going to ingest itself, puke it up and ingest it again.. They created that hatred and they're  going to writhe in it.

Going to be beautiful and needed for the betterment of this country!!

There are supposedly 80,000 antifa related phones from US and international people there.

Going to be interesting to see what happens. They could destroy the city. The convention could be shutdown. Kamala already has the nomination so not sure what they could do to replace her but MSM saying her policy ideas are stupid is definitely interesting. They don't do that unless that is the plan they are being told to push.

Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk

---

The 100k protesters burning down Chicago next week will be a hard image for democrats to recover from. I feel sorry for any city this party of demons bring their circus to.

---

Look how happy this evil ghoul is when describing the powers of her pen.

https://twitter.com/Shawn_Farash/status/...jXpXA&s=19

That looks like something taken out of context.

Yeah. I agree.
https://twitter.com/Rasmussen_Poll/statu...u7Wgw&s=19

---

The 100k protesters burning down Chicago next week will be a hard image for democrats to recover from. I feel sorry for any city this party of demons bring their circus to.

---

Look how happy this evil ghoul is when describing the powers of her pen.

https://twitter.com/Shawn_Farash/status/...jXpXA&s=19

That party is going to ingest itself, puke it up and ingest it again.. They created that hatred and they're  going to writhe in it.

Going to be beautiful and needed for the betterment of this country!!

There are supposedly 80,000 antifa related phones from US and international people there.

Going to be interesting to see what happens. They could destroy the city. The convention could be shutdown. Kamala already has the nomination so not sure what they could do to replace her but MSM saying her policy ideas are stupid is definitely interesting. They don't do that unless that is the plan they are being told to push.

Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk

I was just in Chicago last week for a concert and my first time there. Amazing city. Glad I got to see it when I did.

---

That looks like something taken out of context.

Yeah. I agree.
https://twitter.com/Rasmussen_Poll/statu...u7Wgw&s=19

---

There are supposedly 80,000 antifa related phones from US and international people there.

Going to be interesting to see what happens. They could destroy the city. The convention could be shutdown. Kamala already has the nomination so not sure what they could do to replace her but MSM saying her policy ideas are stupid is definitely interesting. They don't do that unless that is the plan they are being told to push.

Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk

I was just in Chicago last week for a concert and my first time there. Amazing city. Glad I got to see it when I did.

The government can take patents just like they can take any other private property.  They have to provide just compensation and the process of figuring out how much that compensation should be usually takes years.  The government does not get to actually take the property until the compensation amount is settled on and paid.

So, Kamala is not talking about expanding government power or violating the constitution, but she is talking about using a wrench to cut down a tree, or whatever your preferred metaphor for using the wrong tool is.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The more liberal men who get a vasectomy, the better off this country will be. We may be onto something here.

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/18...J29MQ&s=19

---

Not always. Prices are also dictated by a companies leverage in the region.   Some small towns or suburbs only have 1 choice locally.

Clarification (as perhaps I didn't in my prior posts): I'm not 100% against higher prices by certain stores, especially in wealthier suburbs where people would absolutely pay higher prices at Publix rather then to ever set foot in a Winn Dixie. I think I see gouging differently than those here OR even perhaps the way Kamala envisions it so I'm open to the many variables that exist --- example:  in PV there is a Winn Dixie 2 miles north of Publix on A1A.  If Publix wants to charge $12/pound for their brand turkey breast whereas Winn Dixie charges $8, so be it if people are willing to pay that.  I'm more focused on the smaller low income towns with a high population of 70+ year olds on a fixed income.  I see gouging as taking advantage of desperate circumstances to increase profits at the expense of the less fortunate (or in the case of hurricanes and such taking advantage of the desperate).

Would a doubling of the price of toilet paper in March 2020 have been a net positive or negative?

---

Economic literacy ain't all its cracked up to be.
 

Certainly you would believe that.

Re: Doubling the price of TP ...... Yes, this is what I'm talking about .... doubling the price of a necessity item would constitute gouging.  This is a prime example that can't be shrugged off by Supply / Demand justification that the suppliers can simply take advantage of crisis situation.

---