20 ms·
Unchecked corporate pricing power is a factor in US inflation
- endo_bunker 4y agoCorporations always raise prices when they can. The question is why they are able to raise prices now to levels they couldn't before, and as always the answer is a mix of government-created moats and monetary inflation.
- ClumsyPilot 4y agoThis accusation is just so blatantly unsubstantiated and biased.
- madoublet 4y agoThe explanation is a little more complicated and varies by sector but is far from unsubstantiated.
- pwinnski 4y agoThe "explanation" confuses correlation with causation. It is true that during the pandemic, with two stimulus checks from Trump and one from Biden, average savings increased, and many companies saw that as an excuse to raise prices to try to drain that savings. But that savings was not evenly distributed, and the timeline doesn't quite work. It's a word-association fallacy.
- cool_dude85 4y ago>The question is why they are able to raise prices now to levels they couldn't before, and as always the answer is a mix of government-created moats and monetary inflation. The study authors have a different answer about why than you do, though. What they are claiming is that in concentrated markets (like most markets are), shocks like the pandemic allow for firms to raise prices beyond their increased costs, and so increase profits. They have a very interesting graph of after tax profit margins showing that firms in the US are more profitable now than they have been for 70 years, in fact.
- nverno 4y agoThey point out a correlation. But would all companies (or enough to drive global inflation) have been able to raise prices beyond their increased costs without the massive monetary expansion? Seems unlikely, at least to the extent they have.
- autoexec 4y agoIt's because companies had an excuse ready and people were desperate. Normally when companies jack up prices too fast people get offended and stop paying, but the pandemic left people needing for things to feel normal and they were desperate for the things they had been denied. That combined with the supply chain problems, which gave companies their first excuse, meant that people spent themselves into record amounts of household debit, but they didn't blame the higher prices on the companies. Then as inflation increased, companies used that as an excuse too. "We have to raise prices because of inflation! It's not our fault your wages aren't keeping up!" and people believed it even as companies were making money hand over fist and pulling in record profits.
- falcolas 4y agoI'd add "a lack of harm to their business when they did raise prices". Before, I believe there was a fear of backlash from the public if prices (and profits) went up too much. But when Covid lockdowns forced temporary price increases, companies didn't see the backlash. And so they just continue to do it, knowing the average consumer has no choice in many cases.
- bthallplz 4y agohttps://archive.is/DhKkn https://archive.is/DhKkn
- Sporktacular 4y agoWait, let me just sign up for a subscription to FT...
- blakesterz 4y agoThe study [0] says it's mainly 3 things. (1) Rising prices in systemically significant upstream sectors due to commodity market dynamics or bottlenecks create windfall profits and provide an impulse for further price hikes. (2) To protect profit margins from rising costs, downstream sectors propagate, or in cases of temporary monopolies due to bottlenecks, amplify price pressures. (3) Labor responds by trying to fend off real wage declines in the conflict stage. So they say that the sellers’ inflation generates a general price rise which may be transitory, but can also lead to self-sustaining inflationary spirals under certain conditions. [0] https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1348&context=econ_workingpaper https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1...
- fundad 4y agoWe have no windfall tax and badly need one.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- voisin 4y agoWouldn’t (1) be mitigated somewhat if there was more competition in those sectors? Competition should bring windfall profits back in line, but not when many sectors reflect duopolies or oligopolies. I think rather than pricing regulation we just need better antitrust enforcement.
- elcritch 4y agoExcept windfall profits, free money for those upstream the chain due to low Fed rates, and weak regulatory environments have all encouraged massive centralization. Those M&A have devastated so many markets and companies, IMHO.
- HideousKojima 4y agoIs it a weak regulatory environment, or is it simply one designed to favor industry incumbents and prevent new competitors?
- humanrebar 4y agoWasn't the Fed citing rapid rises in wages as a reason to hike interest rates? Wouldn't that imply that at least for wages, corporate pricing power was overly checked, at least according to the Fed?
- sharemywin 4y agoThe fed has no power to fix that. If your only tool is a hammer everything looks like a nail.
- sharemywin 4y agofor the people that downvoted me your saying the fed has some power to fix "corporate pricing power" I'd like to know what that is? I'm not being sarcastic if there's a way I'd like to know.
- fallingknife 4y agoYou are conflating two separate things. Employees having pricing power in the labor market and corporations having pricing power in the market for the goods they produce are different things and can both be present at the same time. If a company has to raise its wages, but is able to increase its prices by more than that, it can both pay its employees more and make higher profits at the same time.
- jppittma 4y agoBut only one of those is a case where the federal reserve starts to take action. The degree to which this 6% inflation is treated as an emergency vs the 10% unemployment after '08 is eye opening. It feels like this is really about disciplining labor, particularly in big tech. ALSO: if you're willing to put on your tinfoil hat, the SIVB collapse could have potentially reduced competition for top talent in tech in order to continue to drive down prices.
- fallingknife 4y agoIt's also the only one out of the two that is part of the Fed's mandate. Excessive pricing power of corporations is the domain of the FTC. To say they have been ineffective at addressing that would be an understatement, but no conspiracy there. Whan I put my tinfoil hat on I think that they bailed out the tech industry as returning the favor for the years of cooperation censoring opinions.the government doesn't like.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- PM_me_your_math 4y ago[flagged]
- CydeWeys 4y agoDid you know that most dollars in circulation were created by non-governmental actors like banks?
- sfe22 4y agoWho granted banks the ability to create dollars?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- CydeWeys 4y agoThat's literally just how banks (and economics) work. Been like this for thousands of years. Every time a loan is issued, dollars are created. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation
- thechao 4y agoI, too, stopped reading my Econ 101 text book at page 3! There are dozens of us!!! Inflation can be caused by directly printing money. In modern economies it's more related to things like reserve rates, treasury rates, overnight rates, demand shock, supply constraints, and trusts.
- fallingknife 4y agoThe first 3 factors you mentioned are directly related to printing money, though.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- myshpa 4y agoIn Europe it's the same. It is the same companies, everywhere. https://www.forbes.com/sites/bruceupbin/2011/10/22/the-147-companies-that-control-everything/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/bruceupbin/2011/10/22/the-147-c... https://www.ted.com/talks/james_b_glattfelder_who_controls_the_world https://www.ted.com/talks/james_b_glattfelder_who_controls_t...
- tristor 4y agoIt hasn't been updated in a long time (and there has been further consolidation), but a site someone built many moons ago to show this based on board of directors membership is https://theyrule.net/ https://theyrule.net/ The reality is probably less than 10000 people globally control more than half the wealth in the world, these people control that wealth both individually (billionaires) and professionally (fund managers and board members). This is a result of unequal outcomes from the rise of globalization and the Internet. The world is a more interconnected place, including in finance and business, which squeezes out smaller players and rewards more handsomely cooperation on a global scale. Nonetheless, all of the evidence, at least in the US, points to small business ownership as being one of the best pathways to financial independence and familial wealth. It is not necessary to create a globally recognized publicly traded company and to become a billionaire to set your family up for success in a way that is not open to most in the world, you can do this simply by finding a niche and excelling in either global niche markets or in your local market.
- tyingq 4y agoThe dichotomy where many of these same corporations raise prices at levels greater than inflation, while doling out employee "COLA" raises at rates far less than inflation, is pretty stunning.
- falcolas 4y agoA lot of companies don't even pretend to do COLA raises anymore. Purely performance based raises. "Your pay is not tied to any cost of living index." "Our costs have gone up so we're raising our prices." Sigh
- tyingq 4y agoI wonder what the likelihood is that this comes home to roost for them. It felt like things were headed that way in the early parts of the pandemic, both for lower wage workers and tech workers...when everyone was having trouble hiring.
- falcolas 4y agoLow. The likelihood is low. Even the government is more willing to fight inflation by harming workers than a company's profits. We'd need more unions - groups with some power over companies who will speak for worker's rights. And while they are starting to proliferate after decades of FUD, their power is also being cut off at the knees by laws that prevent strikes. It's critical that the jobs be filled, yet those who fill those jobs have no power.
- tyingq 4y ago>Even the government is more willing to fight inflation by harming workers I see that, though it's interesting that Social Security is getting an 8.7% COLA. Edit: Which is unusual, and new.
- falcolas 4y agoWell, Social Security isn't for workers... Opinion time: One might even say Social Security is primarily used by the cohort with the most time to dedicate to political ventures. Bluntly, it's a bribe for the Baby Boomer generation to remain loyal to their politicians.
- coderustle 4y agoBe still my heart
- balderdash 4y agoIt’s a factor, but a. How meaningful is it? Does it explain 50% or 5% of price increases B. How sustainable? With regards to b, It seems like there were two elements at work, 1. People were generally flush with money and could absorb cost increases, and 2. There was a frenzied period of price hikes/volatility, where everything was in motion and I think most people just said “it’s crazy eggs and steak are this expensive, but it is a few extra bucks I can afford right now, and things will eventually calm down” The combination of the above led to consumer price inelasticity allowing companies to increase price without effecting volume. I suspect that to change in the coming couple of years as consumer balance sheets and employment weaken, and consumers decide to have two egg omelettes instead of three or buy chicken instead of steak.
- autoexec 4y ago> . People were generally flush with money I have a very hard time believing that most people in the US simply have too much money. I suspect that most people are struggling, and were struggling even before the pandemic and that people's standard of living is declining, their debit is climbing, and they are just a few missed paychecks away from disaster. I think that as the pandemic situation improved, people were simply desperate for a sense of normalcy and for the things they'd gone without and they spent more than they could afford, even going farther into debt. It wasn't "but it is a few extra bucks I can afford right now, and things will eventually calm down" it was "this is more than I can afford, but I need it, and I deserve it, and the world is burning anyway so fuck it". I think to a lesser extent that mentality is still going on, but people are suffering heavily under the increased costs of rent, food, and everything else. Evictions and bankruptcies are increasing and homelessness is rising (https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/2022-AHAR-Part-1.pdf https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/2022-...) and has been for years. I can't say to what extent greed is the cause of inflation, but I'm pretty confident it's a bigger factor than how much money most Americans are comfortably sitting on.
- celeritascelery 4y agoThe federal reserve created 20% of all money ever created in the first year of the pandemic [1][2]. Which is absolutely mind blowing to me. The total cost of Covid stimulus was over 5 trillion dollars. That doesn’t mean all individuals are well off, but there is no doubt that the economy is flush with extra cash. And since the number of physical goods had not changed, that meant inflation. Which honestly nullified any advantage people got from stimulus (which were temporary). [1] https://www.cityam.com/almost-a-fifth-of-all-us-dollars-were-created-this-year/ https://www.cityam.com/almost-a-fifth-of-all-us-dollars-were... [2] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WM1NS https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WM1NS
- intalentive 4y agoIs this hockey stick a factor? https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WM1NS https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WM1NS In the “modern economy”, “modern economists” seem to say it’s not a factor. But gosh, just look at it.
- grumple 4y agoNot even a little. Read the notes, they significantly changed what they were measuring in 2020. It added savings accounts and money market accounts in 2020.
- hartator 4y agoOf course not. 5x the money supply in 3 years couldn’t have caused price inflation. /s
- formerly_proven 4y agoUh that's an accounting change iirc - they included some category worth 10 trn in M1 on that cut-over day, 10 trn/day slope is not an actual change in money supply. Edit: > Before May 2020, M1 consists of ... (3) other checkable deposits (OCDs), consisting of negotiable order of withdrawal, or NOW, and automatic transfer service, or ATS, accounts at depository institutions, share draft accounts at credit unions, and demand deposits at thrift institutions. > Beginning May 2020, M1 consists of ... (3) other liquid deposits, consisting of OCDs and savings deposits (including money market deposit accounts). > Seasonally adjusted M1 is constructed by summing currency, demand deposits, and OCDs (before May 2020) or other liquid deposits (beginning May 2020), each seasonally adjusted separately. This means the balance of all savings accounts was added to M1 beginning may 2020. If you want to look at "money printed", look at M2. AIUI the definition of M2 was not changed that date and you can indeed see some ~2 trn covid stimulus spread out over a few months in M2.
- refurb 4y agoThat's true, but post-2020, the money supply went up 25% in the span of 20 months.
- Xeoncross 4y agoWhen the government decides to print trillions and trillions out of thin air, if the economy isn't forced into an artificial suppression by the same government - then prices reflect the diluted value of the money supply. An item that costs $1, costs $2 when you double the amount money for the same amount of assets.
- refurb 4y agoIt's pretty impressive how the headlines are always about supply chain constraints and corporate profits but never about money supply.
- Xeoncross 4y agoIt's easier for the readership to understand corporate greed as the negative draw of the article than the more complex system that led to it. Headlines are crafted for maximum consumer reach.
- ClumsyPilot 4y agoits pretty impressive how role of private banks in managing the money supply is never examined. When government is creating new money its always wrong, and when banks create new money its always okay. Nor is there ever a proposed formula for what the 'correct' money supply should be. The big critics seem to only be able to come up with Gold standard/bitcoin. They do not propose how money supply should expand when GDP grows. They also never talk about relationship between velocity of money and interest rate, and the fact that if velocity of money is low, then the debt of everyone in the economy pile up to infinity, and cause collapse. They do not address the perverse incentives we have to park vast amounts of money unproductively, instead of investment in the real economy.
- refurb 4y agoits pretty impressive how role of private banks in managing the money supply The private banks ability to create money is limited by government regulations.
- 4y ago
- macinjosh 4y agoMainstream economists try to explain why mainstream economists were wrong about inflation being transitory. They would rather do _anything_ but admit it was a mistake to create all that money during the pandemic.
- shrubble 4y agoWe have limited competition and call it a free market, when really it is a duopoly or oligopoly in many cases. In cloud, 66% of the market is held by 3 players. In USA broadband you have the incumbent cable provider, the incumbent telco and maybe the 5g fixed wireless, which is from a different telco. In other parts of the economy you will see the same pattern.
- kube-system 4y agoUtilities are often explicitly authorized monopolies. It's hard to leverage the free market for these types of services because of the physical impact they have.
- rented_mule 4y agoThis is why monopoly regulation exists, but it is not always employed. There is only one terrestrial internet provider where I live. There is zero oversight of their pricing (they just increased prices 20+%) or service. The only alternative is satellite, but that isn't much of an option because we get weather that takes it out for weeks at a time multiple times each winter (e.g., 10 feet of snow fell in the last week of February / first week of March). There is spotty cell coverage for ~20% of the town and none for the rest. So, no competition and no regulation.
- DrThunder 4y agoHere's an idea... maybe, just maybe the fed shouldn't inject the economy with a bunch of money no one earned???? It's almost like printing money out of thin air and sticking it in to people's bank accounts, means everyone suddenly has more money and then businesses raise prices to level everything out. WEIRD. I'm glad we saved all the wfh white collar workers. They totally needed money on top of the money they were making from the job they didn't lose during the pandemic.
- rileymat2 4y agoEven with hindsight , if you assume the massive lock down happens, we have no idea what happens to the economy in the initial months without the stimulus. Politically, people can disagree with the lockdown, or later stimulus checks and later rounds of PPP. But I have trouble critiquing the initial response in quickly getting money into the economy.
- DrThunder 4y agoThe issue is the lockdowns didn't ever need to continue after the initial 2 week phase. There was no consideration for anything other than we need to obliterate covid by all means necessary. Even when they were presented with data that contradicted the need for lockdowns they decided to double down with more restrictions. The initial 2 week response was understandable, everything after was not.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- costanzaDynasty 4y agoAt my last job, non tech, one of the most popular products I was selling in the decade and a half that I worked there went from $.99 to $2.49. My pay stay the same or went down slightly every year. Yesterday I was at the store and saw another popular product priced at $5.69. It was $4.29 when I left a year ago. The life and times of a Fortune 50 company.
- substation13 4y agoIf it is simply pricing power then... why now? If companies could raise prices 20% all along, why did they wait till now to do so? Why not in 2019?
- mrguyorama 4y agoSo you apparently haven't paid attention at all to all the shrinkflation that has happened over the past 20 years?
- pwinnski 4y agoIf you consider "motive, means, and opportunity" then your question seems to be, essentially, "the motive should have been there in 2019, why now?" and the answer is that the means have become stronger through increased corporate concentration, and the opportunity is greater because the pandemic and political climate provides an excuse. Not that shame was a huge pressure in 2019, but it's even less of one now. Some percentage of people, even here on this very site, will argue with these conclusions, and say it's the pandemic, or wage pressure, or anything but pricing power, and that percentage of people is higher today than it has been in the past. The pandemic and political environment provides an excuse that wasn't handy in 2019. The political environment provides cover. The naked greed has always been there (the motive), but the means and opportunity are stronger today than before.
- paulddraper 4y agoBecause corporations only became greedy in 2023. /s It's all pretty silly. I can go to the store and buy a TV for half of what it cost me 5 years ago, even with inflation. Companies push prices down as well as up.
- 93po 4y agoThe prices of items where people spend 90% of their money are up. Obviously tech prices decrease over time, this has been true since the advent of bronze weapons and tools. Healthcare, housing, education, food, child care, vehicles, gas, insurance, utilities - all up.
- jmyeet 4y agoThis is why corporate taxation is so important as well as the real solution to rising inflation. We have the additional factor that the banking sector may not be able to withstand further interest rate hikes due to bad risk management. Protecting the banking system is pretty much the only thing that could prompt lawmakers into action (eg a windfall profits tax) but these aren't ordinary times. But this will never happen. It's not even a partisan issue. Particularly since the awful "money = speech" decision [1], both sides of politics are bought and paid for by unchecked corporate power (eg [2]). Corporate consolidation makes this worse. Terms that might otherwise be illegal like "price gouging" and "price fixing" have been replaced by sanitized legal versions like "price leadership", which is basically the same thing. One company raises prices. The other follows suit. And for some reason corporate profiteering is fine but workers getting paid more isn't [3]. Weird. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC [2]: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/sinema-manchin-davos-filibuster-high-five-b2264713.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politic... [3]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tU3rGFyN5uQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tU3rGFyN5uQ
- unmole 4y ago> This is why corporate taxation is so important as well as the real solution to rising inflation. How does corporate taxation reduce inflation?
- jmyeet 4y agoBecause it creates an incentive to invest in the business. Maybe even higher wages (God forbid). Think of it this way: you can either do a $1 billion share buyback or invest $1.3 billion in the business. If we had a 75% profit tax then it would be $1 billion in buybacks or $4 billion in the business. Additionally, higher interest rates really benefit no one. Higher taxes fills government coffers and allows income distribution to those most in need. Lastly, interest rates are indiscriminate. They hurt every business and borrower. Taxes only impact profitable businesses to make them slightly less profitable.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- paulddraper 4y agoAh, 2023, the year corporations finally became greedy.
- hcurtiss 4y agoThis is all so silly. I work in the lumber business. We always, every day, at all times, sell our lumber to the highest bidder. But for the first ~3 weeks of the pandemic, our sawmills ran flat out -- more production than ever. Notwithstanding that fact, we saw unprecedented pricing -- because demand was radically outpacing supply. A true "super cycle" driven, I believe, by robust federal stimulus. That's since corrected significantly as interest rates have cooled home building and repair/remodel. But the idea that we made a bunch of money during the pandemic because we were greedy and jacked up prices is hilarious. We are just as greedy today as we were a year ago -- and making very little. We always sell to the highest bidder. I have no idea how we'd even do it otherwise -- a lumber lottery? All of this reporting about corporate greed is truly dumb.
- draw_down 4y ago[dead]
- superkuh 4y agoMaybe for lumber. But the grocer CEOs are literally on record on a recorded phone conference explicitly stating that yes, they use inflationary periods to cover intentional price jacking because the customers won't revolt. https://pluralistic.net/2021/11/20/quiet-part-out-loud/ https://pluralistic.net/2021/11/20/quiet-part-out-loud/ https://pluralistic.net/2023/03/11/price-over-volume/ https://pluralistic.net/2023/03/11/price-over-volume/
- hcurtiss 4y agoI admit I don't know much about the grocery business. But you make it sound like those phone conferences were recorded surreptitiously, when in reality they were just their public earnings calls. And, by my read, they were saying that the consumer was willing to pay more and, in an effort to preserve their margin given increased supplier pricing, they were increasing store pricing. None of that strikes me as surprising. How else are they to set their pricing, other than to charge what people are willing to pay? At some point, large margins will cause more participants to enter the market, driving down pricing. Without that price signal, supply would never increase, leading either to increased prices or shortages. This is all Econ 101. I agree that a monopoly position can compromise market dynamics, and maybe that's the case with grocers, but I don't see that in the articles you link.
- heisenbit 4y agoIT enabled a deeper vertical integration yielding direct access to consumers. Fewer parties buffer and arbitrage goods to optimize goods/price relationships. It was great while all the middlemen were cut out - now less so.
- treeman79 4y agoThe Federal reserve is essentially printing money. Tons of entitlement programs, unfunded spending, bail outs, etc. crazy amount of spending for Covid. The inflation act that was all about spending huge amounts of money for climate and other things. Exact opposite of reducing inflation. This is the primary source of inflation. Secondary is removing millions from workforce so that less things are produced. Articles like this are trying to shift blame away from the government.
- Nifty3929 4y agoCorporations charge more money because people will pay it. People will pay it because there is a lot more money now than before, without a corresponding increase in the amount of stuff/goods/services being produced. In the face of all this money, corporations can do a few things: 1. Change nothing, allowing the first customers to buy everything and leave shelves empty. 2. Ration, choosing which customers merit being sold to, or restricting the quantity that any particular customer can buy. 3. Raise prices until the pressure is equalized and people don't empty the shelves. The cost of inputs doesn't matter too much, except to the extent that they might actually reduce production if they aren't able to pass some/all of these costs on with higher prices.
- eatsyourtacos 4y ago>Corporations charge more money because people will pay it People pay for it because they don't have a choice. >Change nothing, allowing the first customers to buy everything and leave shelves empty The ridiculous economic rationalization. "Hey everyone, we increased the price by 30% so we keep more on the shelves by pricing out the lower/middle class!" You sound like you are just out of a micro economics class and think everything "has to work this way". What you don't realize is that your ENTIRE MINDSET is viewed on MAXIMIZING PROFITS for that SPECIFIC CORPORATION and not the overall welfare of society. You also assume EVENLY DISTRIBUTED WEALTH if you are disregarding the welfare of society. If I run a donut shop and can produce 100 donuts a day. According to you, the only way to run the business is to charge as much as possible to still sell ~100 donuts so I can make the most profit. What if by selling them at a reasonable price, everyone is able to afford them and we are still able to pay our workers and ourselves well? Gasp! Another solution presents itself which makes the overall society better off. It doesn't have to be about charging as much as possible, where that extra money will just go to the owner and not the workers anyway.
- danielmarkbruce 4y ago>> According to you, the only way to run the business 3 choices were given.
- toast0 4y ago
- randerson 4y agoWhile there are obviously multiple factors causing the current inflation, the war in Ukraine doesn't seem to get much attention as a major factor. One of the world's top suppliers of fertilizer has been crippled, and everything you buy at a grocery store has an indirect dependency on this. Russia withholding oil has reduced the worldwide supply of oil, affecting everything that needs to be transported. While I'm in overwhelming support of the US supporting Ukraine, I am surprised the US isn't doing more to broker a treaty of some sort purely in an effort to lower inflation.
- pc86 4y ago> I am surprised the US isn't doing more to broker a treaty of some sort purely in an effort to lower inflation Personally I'm glad we're not. Some things are more important than making as much money as possible, and democracy/self-determination is one of them. It's a terrible message to send if you say that democracy is important, unless you manage to hurt our economy then we'll support anything that gets us back to the status quo growth trajectory. I know that might be controversial and I'm certainly not suggesting that the US is consistent in it's application of these ideals, but at least today it's nice to see us not immediately roll over once there start being 2nd- and 3rd-order economic impacts.
- randerson 4y agoI agree. A better plan could be for our leaders to explain (especially to other nations) how Russia's special military operation is leading to inflation, to unite more countries against them. In the meantime, we should incentivize new local sources of nitrogen fertilizer.
- exabrial 4y agoYou spelled: "Unchecked spending power by Congress" incorrectly