Well, maybe the analysts at the Fed made their determination prematurely. Maybe it’s a blind spot in their analysis. I don’t think companies planned it, necessarily. I’m sure they were as surprised as anyone that consumers were paying the higher prices, but the businesses were, nonetheless, more than happy to reap the rewards. I don’t think it’s that unbelievable. That’s why businesses exist, to make as much profit as possible. If consumers are willing to give them more money, they’ll take it. I certainly don’t expect them to turn down the extra profits.
I’m not sure the data backs up what the Fed is claiming. Regardless, data doesn’t necessarily tell the whole story, and if you look only at numbers, figures, and ratios, your analysis is likely insufficient.
Well, let’s assess. Do you agree that businesses and companies exist primarily to make as much profit as possible? If so, wouldn’t you also agree that it therefore makes sense for companies to seek to maximize profits at every available opportunity?
I think it’s way more complicated than that, and that the article disagrees with your unsourced personal opinions. I had hoped you’d have some collection of well sourced articles backing up the simplistic assertion of “line goes up” meme that directly counters the specific data in the article, but unfortunately I see you do not have any reliable data to support your position, much less refute what is in the article. I don’t see this going anywhere.
It is, but I wasn’t claiming to be offering an all encompassing theory of the universe, I was offering a premise for my argument. Saying, “it’s complicated” is not a refutation of my premise.
You’re correct it is a different article. It is reporting on greedflation.
Can you post the link for that article please?
The study discussed in the Reuters link is:
https://www.frbsf.org/research-and-insights/publications/economic-letter/2024/05/are-markups-driving-ups-and-downs-of-inflation/
Well, maybe the analysts at the Fed made their determination prematurely. Maybe it’s a blind spot in their analysis. I don’t think companies planned it, necessarily. I’m sure they were as surprised as anyone that consumers were paying the higher prices, but the businesses were, nonetheless, more than happy to reap the rewards. I don’t think it’s that unbelievable. That’s why businesses exist, to make as much profit as possible. If consumers are willing to give them more money, they’ll take it. I certainly don’t expect them to turn down the extra profits.
Well, you’re entitled to your opinions, I’ll stick with the data.
I’m not sure the data backs up what the Fed is claiming. Regardless, data doesn’t necessarily tell the whole story, and if you look only at numbers, figures, and ratios, your analysis is likely insufficient.
I disagree entirely. I would counter that your unsourced personal opinion does not counter data.
Well, let’s assess. Do you agree that businesses and companies exist primarily to make as much profit as possible? If so, wouldn’t you also agree that it therefore makes sense for companies to seek to maximize profits at every available opportunity?
Price gouging is an illegal practice that should have been stopped by the state.
The state allowed it to happen despite the law.
The state is captured by the rent seekers.
Everything is working as intended?
Also a lot of price gouging happened with things like food and rent.
I think it’s way more complicated than that, and that the article disagrees with your unsourced personal opinions. I had hoped you’d have some collection of well sourced articles backing up the simplistic assertion of “line goes up” meme that directly counters the specific data in the article, but unfortunately I see you do not have any reliable data to support your position, much less refute what is in the article. I don’t see this going anywhere.
It is, but I wasn’t claiming to be offering an all encompassing theory of the universe, I was offering a premise for my argument. Saying, “it’s complicated” is not a refutation of my premise.