> Three big banks, two big drugstore chains, three cellular providers Costs associated with banking, drugstore purchases, and cell service make up an tiny prop

> Three big banks, two big drugstore chains, three cellular providers Costs associated with banking, drugstore purchases, and cell service make up an tiny proportion of total spending. Compare that to housing, education, and healthcare, which are the main drivers of inflation despite having many more than four players of comparable size. People say healthcare and housing is expensive because you need it to live. You need food to live too, but food is so cheap as to be basically free in the US. (Food as in rice and beans, not Uber Eats.) I'm not saying central planning is bad necessarily, but can it be a coincidence that healthcare, housing, and education are so expensive and also hugely "centrally planned"? The government determines how many apartments get to be in your city (and they usually decide on a laughably small number). The government decides who gets to practice medicine (and they make sure that the number is not very high [0]). They even decide to not let doctors in countries like India do radiology work in the US, just to boost American radiologist's pay. As for education, most people go to public colleges where the government literally decides the prices! Not only that, but they generously offer "need-based scholarships" to people, after determining their willingness to pay by getting their family income. So maybe central planning is the move, but it would be more compelling if the biggest expenses of American life didn't all seem to be caused by at-best incompetent central planning. [0]: https://www.washingtonian.com/2020/04/13/were-short-on-healthcare-workers-why-doesnt-the-u-s-just-make-more-doctors/ https://www.washingtonian.com/2020/04/13/were-short-on-healt...