Comment

Comment on What does a federal ban on price gouging look like?

Price controls are the only viable solution if monopolies aren’t broken up and if collusion is rampant effectively removing competition. While I know of no direct evidence of collusion between grocers, the effects seem quite clear to me when nearly every grocer seems to be taking in record profits while many groceries are still 2-5 times higher than just five years ago.

Also, if this issue is the litmus test for some people on whether they would vote for Trump over Harris, those people should have their head examined. While Harris lacks some specifics here, Trump has nothing — plus he’s a lying, misogynistic, sociopathic convicted felon — so yes, I agree, Harris is the obvious choice.

source

Sort:hotnew top

ryathal@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
Kroger and Albertsons don’t actually compete in any markets in the US, that takes collusion.

source
- spizzat2@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
  How do you define “compete”?
  
  Here they are on opposite corners of the same intersection.
  
  source
  - ryathal@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
    There are about 600 stores they want to divest where there was actual competition between them. The two control about 5000 stores between them.
    
    source
Artisian@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
I’ll note that grocers record profits are orders of magnitude less than the price increases. Maybe somebody is getting rich off of the price increases, but I’m pretty sure Walmart is not.

source
- LastWish@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
  "Hey, our wholesale costs went up 300%, so we raised it 400% because fuck you, we’re all doing it and you don’t have any other options " is still price gouging and collusion.
  
  source
  - Artisian@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
    Agreed, that would be.
    
    But the most they could have done is 308% instead of that 300%, and I think they managed to get lots and lots of small stores to do it at the same time.
    
    source