Anonymous wrote:Here’s some information on Harris‘s plan to lower housing costs and address the housing shortage, especially for first-time home buyers:

Vice President Harris is set to announce a plan to lower housing costs and end the housing shortage through the construction of new units and down payment support to first-time homebuyers, according to Harris-Walz campaign officials.

Harris’s “urgent and comprehensive four-year plan” will call for constructing 3 million new housing units, a tax incentive for homebuilders to construct “starter homes” to sell to first-time homebuyers and a $40 billion innovation fund for local governments to build housing.
The plan would also include $25,000 in down payment support for first-time homeowners. Home renters who paid their rent on time for two years and are buying their first home would be eligible for the down payment assistance.

Source: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4830475-kamala-harris-housing-plan-construction-of-3m-units-25k-down-payment-support/

Here’s some information on Harris‘s plan to lower housing costs and address the housing shortage, especially for first-time home buyers:

Vice President Harris is set to announce a plan to lower housing costs and end the housing shortage through the construction of new units and down payment support to first-time homebuyers, according to Harris-Walz campaign officials.

Harris’s “urgent and comprehensive four-year plan” will call for constructing 3 million new housing units, a tax incentive for homebuilders to construct “starter homes” to sell to first-time homebuyers and a $40 billion innovation fund for local governments to build housing.
The plan would also include $25,000 in down payment support for first-time homeowners. Home renters who paid their rent on time for two years and are buying their first home would be eligible for the down payment assistance.

Sounds like part of one of those five year plans they had in the USSR back in the day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How will she go about it?

+1

No details?

It will be a big, beautiful plan. The best plan ever.

Also, details will be released in 2 weeks. /s

Anonymous wrote:Forcing lower prices will force many businesses to close, thereby forcing many employees to lose their jobs, and forcing empty shelves in stores everywhere.

The average net profit of chain grocery stores like Walmart, Kroger, Albertsons etc. is 1 to 3 percent. If you like price controls you will love bare shelves and the commissars controlling your life.

Who’s going to make something that makes no profit or loses money? Companies have to make a profit and have to make money for to stay in business and for their investors. The government takes tax dollars and is trillions in debt; any other business that operates like the government would be bankrupt decades ago. They would not have a business.

They aren’t looking at price control of food lion or Giant or Wegmans. They are looking at the huge conglomerates selling to these places which, yes, are making insane profits.

Last week, inflation on computer goods and food was destroying out economy. Today, you’re fine with it? What’s the difference? (Besides Harris coming up with a plan that addresses your concerns?)

Are you now saying the price of groceries, which play a big role in the CPI and inflation, should not be addressed. Are you rooting for Orange Man so hard that you are willing to pay 25% more for groceries? Because I am not.

Anonymous wrote:OP back. Can’t believe people asked me to post links. Read the article - the criticism is not good.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-economic-policy-2024/

1. Cry harder— on DCUM, you have to show your work. Especially if you are OP.

2. Either you didn’t read the article or you hoped we wouldn’t. One negative comment that is very heretic. Also some positive comments. Position in the either way about whether this is a plus or a minus.

Anonymous wrote:OP back. Can’t believe people asked me to post links. Read the article - the criticism is not good.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-economic-policy-2024/

Are we reading the same article? I see a negative quote from a right leaning think tank member and a positive quote from a more liberal economist. The article is very balanced and is not critical of the plan, although it does not more details are needed.

Also happy to see the push for new housing starts discussed in this article.

Anonymous wrote:How will she go about it?

+1

No details?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you determine when companies are price gauging?

Most of them have been, the past couple years. There's data.

Please tell us about this data and where it is.

Look in the "Biden Economy" thread...there have been a hundreds posts with the data.

All the "data" in that thread consists of comments that corporations are making record profits. That is not data that supports a thesis of price gouging.

That’s the definition of price gouging. Taking advantage of economic conditions (like big Ag monopolies) to earn enormous profits because there is no competition—whether that be due to monopolies or shortages after strom.

maGAtt: food inflation is killing us. Biden omits failed. We need Trump back to get prices down

Harris: here is a plan to get prices down by increasing competition in the marketplace (which is the most Adam Smith way to solve the problem)

MAGAtt: NO! Not like that!!

I’m puzzled as to why you want to protect companies that took advantage of COVID and having monopolies to raise food prices and continue ro post record profits, without lowering prices? That isn’t capitalism.

Anonymous wrote:Price gouging on groceries? Give me a break. How stupid!!

You good with a 25% increase in food prices because very few companies control segments of the marketplace, which those companies rake in huge profits? I’m not. This is exactly why antitrust laws were established. I’m assuming she will use those antitrust laws, as they were intended, to created more competition of food prices. Which is the definition of capitalism.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you determine when companies are price gauging?

Most of them have been, the past couple years. There's data.

Please tell us about this data and where it is.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/jan/19/us-inflation-caused-by-corporate-profits

Good prices still up 25% since COVID while companies pst record profits.

A lot of is because these companies have monopolies, or near monopolies. Capitalism would be breaking these huge companies up so that consumers have several options in each sectors and companies have to compete with each other on price and quality. Monopolies that aren’t competing on price and setting prices that allow for huge profits while some Americans go hungry are anti-capitalist (and antirust violation#).

You wanted her to talk about the economy. You asked for specific policy. Here you go. Unless you didn’t want economic policies.

PS— haven’t seen the policy, but would be it would be going after companies violating anti-trust laws. Which has certainly been done in the US- although more so with railways, electricity, etc. proce gouge away on OV purses. Food is a necessity and monopolies in food sectors should not be allowed to price gouge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, I think she just put her first foot wrong. Prices were up 1% on groceries this past year. This is bizarre - brings back memories of ‘70s price controls.

What do you think?

Y'all have been yapping about how inflation and the economy is the most important issue for you. Well, here you go.

+1. Y’all keep saying inflation in areas where consumers spend money, like food, is one of the most serious issues of this election (as Fox goes on and one about how much more the July 4 picnic costs than last year, and blames Biden). And that “real Americans” care more about food inflation than things like abortion. Are you now saying it’s NBD? Because I’m looking at a landscape where 2-3 giant food companies control a significant amount of our food supply and are making record profits while raising food costs well above inflation. And yes, I think it’s a big issue.

Forcing lower prices will force many businesses to close, thereby forcing many employees to lose their jobs, and forcing empty shelves in stores everywhere.

The average net profit of chain grocery stores like Walmart, Kroger, Albertsons etc. is 1 to 3 percent. If you like price controls you will love bare shelves and the commissars controlling your life.

Who’s going to make something that makes no profit or loses money? Companies have to make a profit and have to make money for to stay in business and for their investors. The government takes tax dollars and is trillions in debt; any other business that operates like the government would be bankrupt decades ago. They would not have a business.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you determine when companies are price gauging?

Most of them have been, the past couple years. There's data.

Please tell us about this data and where it is.

Here you go! https://www.ftc.gov/reports/feeding-america-time-crisis-ftc-staff-report-united-states-grocery-supply-chain-covid-19-pandemic

This article describes how nine companies responded to supply disruptions during the pandemic. It does not support an assertion of price gouging today.

A more recent study by the San Francisco Fed, dismisses price gouging (which it refers to a price mark ups) as a cause of inflation https://www.frbsf.org/research-and-insights/publications/economic-letter/2024/05/are-markups-driving-ups-and-downs-of-inflation/

"However, aggregate markups—which are more relevant for overall inflation—have generally remained flat, in line with previous economic recoveries over the past three decades. These patterns suggest that markup fluctuations have not been a main driver of the ups and downs of inflation during the post-pandemic recovery."