Staff Reports
Kamala Harris has finally emerged from her policy vanishing act, but her latest proposal has raised eyebrows and provoked laughter from the right. After borrowing a no-tax-on-tips idea from former President Trump, Harris has announced a brand new initiative aimed at “price gouging.” This move appears to be yet another instance of government overreach, as she promises to crack down on what she deems “excessive prices” and “excessive profits” — a terminology reminiscent of the Soviet Union.
The absurdity of this initiative has not escaped even the liberal media, as evidenced by a recent op-ed in the Washington Post that sarcastically suggested that if Harris is being called a “communist,” perhaps proposing price controls isn’t the best idea. This commentary underscores a broader issue: price controls may sound appealing in the quicksand of political rhetoric, but they are fundamentally flawed policies that could lead to disastrous outcomes.
WHEN EVEN THE WASHINGTON POST THINKS YOU'RE A COMMUNIST!
It is “hard to exaggerate how bad” Vice President Kamala Harris’s proposal to implement government-enforced price control on groceries is, according to a Washington Post essay slamming the plan as both vague and harmful,… pic.twitter.com/6XVjbffJR7
— Bill Mitchell (@mitchellvii) August 16, 2024
As voters grapple with rising grocery bills, it is clear that the blame game has begun. Harris has opted to target corporations instead of acknowledging the Biden administration’s role in inflating these prices. Her campaign’s promise of a federal ban on price gouging for food indicates a drastic shift in thinking. However, questions abound about what defines “excessive” and what enforcement agencies like the Federal Trade Commission will actually monitor. The notion of bureaucrats in Washington dictating prices to local grocery stores is an alarming proposition that invokes memories of past economic disasters.
In a world defined by supply and demand, Harris’s plan discards this foundational principle in favor of bureaucratic intervention. History is littered with examples showing that government-mandated price controls lead to shortages, black markets, and hoarding. Ironically, in this case, it could even lead to rising prices, the exact opposite of what Harris claims to address. Supermarkets, meanwhile, operate on notoriously thin profit margins — a fact that seems lost on her economic advisors, who either misunderstand market dynamics or are deliberately ignoring reality.
Ultimately, when the Washington Post is linking the term “communist” with your economic proposals, a serious reevaluation is needed. Harris has been in a position to address the inflation crisis for over three years. Instead, he continues to propose a path of least resistance, offering rhetoric aimed at demonizing corporations while neglecting the root causes of America’s current economic woes. Given the context, the latest proposal appears less like a genuine solution and more like a shiny distraction meant to distract from the administration’s failures. The American people deserve better than vague promises of “standing up to corporate greed” that mask a deeply flawed economic agenda.
