I was thinking of a comment on this.
And thought, well, no, here, not there.
“So, Senator Warren, when was it that you ran out of eggs?”
I was thinking of a comment on this.
And thought, well, no, here, not there.
“So, Senator Warren, when was it that you ran out of eggs?”
This has been made worse by California adding a law on housing chickens that added to producer costs. This affected the whole nation because retailers required farmers to follow those regulations since they didn’t want to be caught with unsanctioned eggs (autocorrect wanted to use unsanctified here, probably a better word). Then bird flu came along and the had to kill millions of chickens, adding to the problem of supply and demand.
Fauxahontas doesn’t understand reducing efficiency through regulations drives up prices.
She’s a direct descendant of Sitting Bull and her tribal name is Lying Cow.
Would the chicken still be a chicken if it didn’t lay eggs?
Thanks MG. I did wonder what the regulations were.
For accessing Twitter via a browser there’s a useful Chrome extension – Breakthrough Twitter Login Wall – which allows you to scroll down without being blocked by a popup which tries to make you register.
Or you can:
1) click login with user/password
2) dismiss the login dialog
3) continue scrolling
(It’s been a while since I scrolled a twatter thread far enough to trigger the popup, so not 100% sure that still works.)
BiW
Yes, that worked just fine, but not even needed any longer – at least on mine – when the popup now pops up, you can just close it normally (rather than have to pretend to log in). Changed two or three months ago or so?
Gravely then said old Nokomis:
“Bring not here an idle maiden,
Bring not here a useless woman,
Hands unskilful, feet unwilling;
Bring a wife with nimble fingers,
Heart and hand that move together,
Feet that run on willing errands!”
In those days she talked sense.
@Boganboy
Almost anywhere you go in the States, your egg carton will have “CA SEFS COMPLIANT” on it.
“This has been made worse by California adding a law on housing chickens that added to producer costs. This affected the whole nation because retailers required farmers to follow those regulations since they didn’t want to be caught with unsanctioned eggs (autocorrect wanted to use unsanctified here, probably a better word). ”
But Tim tells us in a competitive market a rise in costs doesn’t result in a rise in prices, because if the producers had the power to raise prices they already would have done.
Or economists are full of sh*t and know nothing about the real world of business.
You chose.
Correct. So, costs rise, profit margins compress – or disappear. Suppliers at current prices therefore leave the market. Demand stays the same, because prices have not risen as yet. But supply equals demand at a price. So, supply curtailed demand the same, prices will rise until they match at the new and higher price.
Producers cannot raise prices because costs have risen. But some producers going bust will lead to consumers increasing prices to gain access to the now lower supply.
Producers do not have that agency to increase prices in a competitive market.
“Producers do not have that agency to increase prices in a competitive market”
Yet business are putting up prices left right and centre because of increased costs, and the prices are sticking. As you have pointed out, the profit margin in the economy has been maintained. Not raised, so no profiteering, but maintained despite rising costs. Stick your head out of the window and see whats happening in the real world, not the text books.
Epur si muove.
It’s the *why* that is important. Folk have more pieces of money because money printing. Therefore producers are *able* to put their prices up when measured in pieces of money.
The producers raise their prices because costs have risen argument presupposes that the businesses have market power – they can determine their prices. If they can do that then capitalist greed will mean they will already have put up their prices. So, the greedflation argument fails on the grounds that it would already have happened.
That producers can, now, put up their prices it clearly true, because producers are putting up their prices. But why? Because there are more pieces of paper around.
The distinction is vital to work out why the inflation is happening.
” the greedflation argument fails on the grounds that it would already have happened.”
Who mentioned greedflation? I certainly didn’t. The argument is over whether producers can raise prices in response to a general rise in costs. You were categorical when Spud accused companies of being greedy that they couldn’t raise prices, if they had such pricing power they would already have used it. Now you say they can raise prices in response to a general rise in costs IF there’s lots of money floating around. You seem to have caught Spud-itis – a different argument on different days.
My point is very simple – I look at what is happening to the companies I deal with, and they are all putting their prices up constantly. Ergo they can put up prices regardless of any theory that says they can’t.