Kamala Harris spent weeks avoiding hit discussions, press conferences, and actually making any daring policy disclosures. But, on Friday, she unveiled her financial plan, and it was such a crisis that someone tells me it’s up to the floor for Kamala.
Advertisement
A Harvard scholar who served in the Obama administration is now also criticizing Kamala’s cost control strategy, in response to a liberal blogger at the Washington Post.
According to Jason Furman,” This is not practical plan, and I think the biggest desire is that it ends up being a lot of speech and no reality.” ” There’s no back here, and there is some downside”.
Furman, the former head of the National Economic Council under Obama, even told the papers that Harris ‘ guidelines are difficult because they deter innovative firms from entering the market to satisfy consumer demand.
The plan is basically Soviet-style price settings disguised as a national ban on price-gouging. It tries to persuade the people that Harris has the solution to the problem by shifting the blame for prices away from the Biden-Harris president’s economic policies to corporate greed.
Recommended: Kamala Humiliates Herself Unveiling Her New Economic Policy
The Harris plan said in a statement following the announcement that” there’s a big difference between good sales in competitive markets and excessive prices related to the costs of doing company.”
Advertisement
Catherine Rampell, a columnist for the Washington Post, previously criticized Kamala’s policy proposal in a Thursday night row.
” It’s difficult to exaggerate how bad this plan is”, she wrote. ” It is, in all but name, a broad set of government-enforced price controls across every industry, not only meal. Prices and income levels had no longer be determined by supply and demand. Far-off Washington officials do. The FTC would be able to specify the appropriate milk price at, let’s say, a Kroger in Ohio.
At best, this may lead to scarcity, dark areas and stockpiling, among other distortions seen preceding times countries tried to limit price rise by stablecoins. ( There’s a reason narrower “price gouging” laws that exist in some U. S. states are rarely invoked. ) At worst, it may accidentally , increase rates.  ,
That’s that, among other things, the policy would ban companies from offering lower rates to a major client such as Costco than to Joe’s Corner Store, which means quantity deals are in trouble. Worse, it would require public firms to submit detailed inside data about expenses, margins, contracts and their upcoming sales strategies. The government’s facilitation of expense and costs plans allows businesses to coerce to keep costs higher.
Advertisement
” If your opponent claims you’re a’ communist,’ maybe do n’t start with an economic agenda that can ( accurately ) be labeled as federal price controls”, Rampbell concluded.
Helen Raleigh, an immigrant who once lived in communist China, even blasted the plan in a blog on X/Twitter.  ,
” Government-imposed cost control is a bad plan because it makes the economy worse by causing shortfalls”, she wrote. ” Everyone who survived socialism/communism knows this: if the store shelves are empty, it does n’t matter how low the government claims the price of bread is”.
