It’s because this is a manufactured inflation (imo) that companies have created by greedy price gouging.
To imply that we should be rejoicing at the fact that companies are starting to drop prices slightly (even though the average person is struggling to afford GROCERIES) is quite frankly, disgusting.
No, we should be taking this as what it is: the world’s smallest W. Take it, have a beer or a smoke if you’ve got them, and go back to being angry tomorrow.
I could have sworn that this was the version I read, but they may have deleted it and posted a different article on the same topic.
We did it, y’all! Get the Champagne on ice and gather the townsfolk because America hath slain the beast known as inflation. (Or, at least, it’s hit a turning point.)
Huzzah! Maximum employment and price stability? Let’s party.
But wait — what’s that I hear? Not the riotous cheers of American consumers dancing in the streets. Not a chorus of workers singing about the strongest labor market of their lifetimes, and no — I can’t even pick up on the sound of what I’m sure is an army of economists demanding sainthood for Jay Powell.
Instead, the single best economic news of the past decade is but a murmur of chit-chat, barely audible against a clamor of politicos shouting about President Joe Biden’s age.
So would you rather respond to that article or the posted one? Because the article you’re citing was written with a humorous bent, which I thought would bring some levity. But instead I see it’s taken seriously, so I suppose it was right to go down.
And it was the CNN article for those keeping score, not Yahoo.
Corporate price gouging has not been a primary driver of U.S. inflation, according to research published on Monday by economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
While markups for motor vehicles and petroleum products did rise sharply during the 2021-2022 inflation surge, markups across the entire spectrum of U.S. goods and services have been relatively flat during the post-pandemic recovery, the bank’s latest Economic Letter showed.
“As such, rising markups have not been a main driver of the recent surge and subsequent decline in inflation during the current recovery,” wrote the bank’s research chief Sylvain Leduc and colleagues Huiyu Li and Zheng Liu.
Where is the research in the article? It’s basically citing one paper, and not really telling what its title is so you can’t just review it to make sure it’s valid and not missing something.
Thanks for linking, it was just suspect that it wasn’t linked in the Reuters article (I know it Reuters, but even then if it’s a claim that might be challenged they should link to the research).
The source reporting on the study should lend itself to the veracity of the information. I think there’s a bit of shooting the messenger going on. I trust Reuters as a reliable source of information, and if the study were lacking I feel it would be noted. The study was published in May, so I would hope if there were holes in the report they would have surfaced by now.
It’s because this is a manufactured inflation (imo) that companies have created by greedy price gouging.
To imply that we should be rejoicing at the fact that companies are starting to drop prices slightly (even though the average person is struggling to afford GROCERIES) is quite frankly, disgusting.
No, we should be taking this as what it is: the world’s smallest W. Take it, have a beer or a smoke if you’ve got them, and go back to being angry tomorrow.
From where did you glean that someone thinks you should be rejoicing?
I could have sworn that this was the version I read, but they may have deleted it and posted a different article on the same topic.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/might-just-missed-earth-shattering-095630768.html
The article we’re responding to here is a Reuters article that states the facts. You just linked to a poorly written CNN op-ed hosted on Yahoo
This was the original article that was uploaded, that I read. I assume they took it down and posted the Reuters article in its place.
So would you rather respond to that article or the posted one? Because the article you’re citing was written with a humorous bent, which I thought would bring some levity. But instead I see it’s taken seriously, so I suppose it was right to go down.
And it was the CNN article for those keeping score, not Yahoo.
There’s recent research showing that may not be the case entirely, though that’s not to say price gouging isn’t happening in places.
https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/corporate-greed-not-blame-price-pressures-fed-study-shows-2024-05-13/
Why are you being downvoted? Is there something I’m missing with the generally accepted reliability of the source or the methodology in the research?
Where is the research in the article? It’s basically citing one paper, and not really telling what its title is so you can’t just review it to make sure it’s valid and not missing something.
One Google away:
https://www.frbsf.org/research-and-insights/publications/economic-letter/2024/05/are-markups-driving-ups-and-downs-of-inflation/
Thanks for linking, it was just suspect that it wasn’t linked in the Reuters article (I know it Reuters, but even then if it’s a claim that might be challenged they should link to the research).
The source reporting on the study should lend itself to the veracity of the information. I think there’s a bit of shooting the messenger going on. I trust Reuters as a reliable source of information, and if the study were lacking I feel it would be noted. The study was published in May, so I would hope if there were holes in the report they would have surfaced by now.
https://www.frbsf.org/research-and-insights/publications/economic-letter/2024/05/are-markups-driving-ups-and-downs-of-inflation/