| ▲ | JKCalhoun a day ago |
| "A Trump official tasked with dealing with affordability tried to hide this complaint…" Why? Unless there was some kind of payola, this is doesn't make sense. |
|
| ▲ | janalsncm a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| According to TFA, Pepsi hired lobbyists immediately prior to the complaint being hidden. |
|
| ▲ | nitwit005 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| There often is a payment in the form of campaign contributions, and mysteriously cushy jobs after retirement from politics. But, beyond that, while logically voters should vote against politicians that favor businesses over them, they often appear to do the opposite. They simply gain the label of "business friendly". |
|
| ▲ | anigbrowl 20 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Game recognize game |
|
| ▲ | WolfeReader a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Capitalism as it is taught: lots of companies competing with each other, resulting in better goods at affordable prices! The customer wins! Capitalism in practice: a relative handful of rich people cooperating with each other to extract as much money as possible from the middle and lower classes. You can see which version of capitalism this document supports. The "fiscally conservative" aspect of the Republican party (and the Democratic party to a lesser degree) don't want people to think of capitalism-in-practice; they want happy consumers who think that competition is still a thing. Since this document clearly goes against that narrative, it must be suppressed. |
| |
| ▲ | janalsncm a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Corporations are a funny kind of alien intelligence. Producing a better product or a lower price is just one way to ensure their survival. Another is to manipulate the rules of the market itself, including the rule enforcers. | | |
| ▲ | OgsyedIE a day ago | parent | next [-] | | It's the product of an evolutionary process. You could scrap capitalism entirely and still get cartel formation, since you have agents with varied traits competing to gain the resources to be selected to reproduce [their continued existence, into the future]. A couple other ways of looking at it come from Bataille, Odum, Prigogine or Schmitt. | |
| ▲ | venturecruelty a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | You can also just pay your workers in scrip and then hire Pinkertons to kill them if they get uppity about it. It's hard not to become cynical when people seem almost willfully ignorant of the despicable history of capital in this country... | | |
| |
| ▲ | mistrial9 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > a relative handful of rich people no, not clear at all.. it is a system that filters. "rich people" go broke all the time, Britain too.. There are serious structural problems certainly but that does not describe them | | |
| ▲ | SpicyLemonZest a day ago | parent | next [-] | | I guess I'm not sure where you read a claim that rich people can never go broke into the original comment. They absolutely can. That's why they often - as they seem to have done here - cut side deals to protect their revenue streams at the expense of competition. There's a VP at Walmart who stands to lose a lot of money if people start buying their Pepsi elsewhere, and a VP at Pepsi who stands to lose a lot of money if their products are less visible in the nation's Walmarts, so they've agreed to cooperate and mutually reduce the risk that their orgs perform poorly. | |
| ▲ | autoexec a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | billionaires only tend to "go broke" when they commit massive amounts of crime, mostly against other rich people. | | |
| ▲ | lanfeust6 a day ago | parent [-] | | Dynastic wealth also tends to dissipate significantly in a generation or two, as heirs fail to generate the same level of wealth and just spend it (plus it's divided). | | |
|
| |
| ▲ | lanfeust6 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | "Capitalism is when Walmart offers a discount on Pepsi, at razor-thin margins, and somehow this is maximally extracting from the middle and lower classes" Pepsi is exchanging profit for market-share. Be serious. Everyone else is just charging the standard price. Market failures ought to be accounted for with regulation (they often are, that's what Liberalism is for), but this is not one. The unessential garbage fuelling our obesity crisis has no place in the conversation about the affordability crisis whilst policy-makers and armchair experts are mulling a sugar tax, which would just raise the price. Notwithstanding, profit margins at grocery stores are not large in the first place. The reason profits are breaking records is that population is also breaking records, and customers are spending more on boutique animal alternative or organic boxed products. Margins on produce are as thin as ever. Canned black beans and soup are not making their billions. | | |
| ▲ | DangitBobby a day ago | parent [-] | | Did you forget about the "creative" methods that Pepsi used to (illegally) ensure other retailers could not offer low margins on Pepsi? | | |
| ▲ | lanfeust6 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | I didn't. I didn't contend whether the actions were kosher, I contended the ridiculous idea that they "raised prices everywhere". | | |
|
| |
| ▲ | zdragnar a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Ah yes, only capitalism suffers from corruption. | | |
| ▲ | WolfeReader 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Good job calling me out for saying that "only capitalism suffers from corruption". If only I had actually said that. | | |
| ▲ | zdragnar 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | It's an obvious implication by specifically calling out capitalism when discussing the difference between theory and practice. |
| |
| ▲ | a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
|
| ▲ | hasbot 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This reality doesn't fit the narrative Trump pushes that all price increases are Biden's fault. |
|
| ▲ | xrd a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| American monopolists don't want to get on Trump's bad side, so they give him fake peace prizes and gold trophies. Trump's people don't want to get on the bad side of monopolists because people like Elon Musk and Munger's son won't dump hundreds of millions of dollars into keeping them in office (and out of jail). Notice how I didn't mention you or me in either of those two agreements. That's because we aren't even noticed. It makes perfect sense if you understand for whom Trump's people are working. It isn't much different than the democrats, but we should note that Lina Khan was appointed by Biden. And, Matt Stoller has another great article about attempts by Biden to correct the financial system with nominations like Omarova. Republicans couldn't get past calling her communist which is patently ridiculous. Drain the swamp indeed, MAGA. |
|
| ▲ | a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [deleted] |
