this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024

398 points (98.3% liked)

politics

18870 readers

4062 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

398

Kamala Harris economic plan to focus on groceries, housing and healthcare (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

55 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Democratic nominee to draw contrast with Trump on tax and tariffs when she lays out details on Friday, aides say

Kamala Harris will announce plans to tackle high grocery costs by targeting corporations in the food and grocery industry, as she previews her economic agenda ahead of the November election.

She will also tackle prescription drug and housing costs, drawing a contrast with Trump on tariffs and taxes, according to a Harris campaign statement.

Harris is expected to lay out some details of her economic plan in a speech in North Carolina on Friday.

“Same values, different vision,” said one aide, describing how Harris’s economic agenda will compare with that of Joe Biden, who stepped aside as the Democratic presidential candidate last month.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 103 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Break up Kroger and Albertsons if you wanna help with grocery prices. They have no competition so they just keep jacking up prices.

Also digital coupons can go fuck themselves.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I don't know anything about those two chains. Do they have some niche that makes other groceries/super-markets non-competative?

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 month ago (1 children)

All of these are under the Kroger umbrella

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

And that’s just the Kroger brands

Alberstons owns another two dozen brands:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albertsons#Chains

And has shut down or renamed 4 more.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Kroger and Albertsons own a ton of "other grocery chains." Classic example of just simply buying up the competition

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

They are trying to merge, to boot. This FTC has stymied it so far, but you can bet your bottom dollar a Trump admin won't.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Grocery is a very low margin business, even at the conglomerate stores.

The food producers are the problem. Cargill is one example.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

Them too! Break up all this shit.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

No competition? Walmart is their competitors. So is Target.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago

Hey i need those things

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago

So far, I’m pleased with the advice her campaign seems to be taking. Maybe being “just outside the bubble” has helped her.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (3 children)

We live in capitalism. How do you mandate lower grocery prices in that?

(I guess we find out Friday?)

[–] [email protected] 80 points 1 month ago (17 children)

Having a strong and active FTC working to break apart (almost) monopolistic grocery store chains would be a good start.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 month ago

Even threatening them with that would be a tiny step in the right direction.

load more comments (16 replies)

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago

How do you mandate lower grocery prices in that?

You don't. Price controls don't work and usually backfire in the long run.
Instead, you modify the incentives which exist around prices via taxation. As a simplified example, if you want to prioritize lower prices on staples such as milk, vegetables or beef, then businesses which can show that their margins on those products are within a defined range pay 1% less on corporate taxes. The numbers and ranges would need to be discovered via both study and experimentation. But, by tying a savings for those business to their behavior, said behavior can be influenced. The prices can then be further manipulated lower in the logistical chain, either by direct subsidy or via similar manipulation of incentives to growers and distributors.

We live in capitalism.

Yes, but functional capitalism requires regulation to prevent monopolies, collusion and other activities which distort markets. And there are plenty of areas where capitalism fails and government (read:socialism) needs to step in to provide something which society needs, but for which the incentives do not exist to provide it in an efficient manner. Or for which the efficient providing of that thing creates moral hazards. There is a reason we don't privatize the military.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago

You break up monopolies

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Doesn't she currently know people in positions of power, that could get started, like, NOW.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Biden is currently focused on correcting issues with the Supreme Court

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments