4 ms·

Notably from January 11, 2022 Also, the argument makes no sense > corporations have always been greedy and there was no inflation in the 2 decades before covi

by nawgz 3y ago

Notably from January 11, 2022 Also, the argument makes no sense > corporations have always been greedy and there was no inflation in the 2 decades before covid Corporations have clearly achieved deregulation at a greater scale than ever before, both thru devices like regulatory capture to weaken regulatory instruments, and by achieving wealth and therefore power at scales comparable to first world nations. The past did indeed happen in the past, but our past - unlike the authors of that article - includes knowledge of a full year of ludicrous financials and outsized margins being published by corp after corp. What does any writing not from 2021 say? I already addressed that point quite nicely for the audience, I thought.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> ludicrous financials and outsized margins being published by corp after corp If you translate those financials into real terms, they're less ludicrous. Sometimes negative. Margin expansion absolutely contributed to inflation [1]. (On par with labor.) But this happened through wage suppression. > Corporations have clearly achieved deregulation at a greater scale than ever before, both thru devices like regulatory capture to weaken regulatory instruments What changed between 2021 and 2023 that gave them this power? There are solid cases made for care investments, to boost labour participation, and a variable corporate tax rate that kicks in when inflation is high. But they have to be based on sane, empirical arguments. [1] https://www.epi.org/blog/corporate-profits-have-contributed-disproportionately-to-inflation-how-should-policymakers-respond/ https://www.epi.org/blog/corporate-profits-have-contributed-...
- nawgz 3y ago
  > What changed between 2021 and 2023 that gave them this power? I think it's fairly evident that the rule of law and corporate oversight in the US was greatly weakened from 2016-2020, and at the start of 2021 an event some argue was essentially a failed coup occurred, yet the only punishments were issued to commoners and none of the instigators or would-be beneficiaries. Why would corporations not be emboldened at such a sight? I agree otherwise with what you've said, and indeed I am not nearly qualified enough to propose the vehicles to change economic outcomes - but it's clear that the narratives denying corporate profiteering's role in inflation are outdated.
  - MichaelZuo 3y ago
    Can you link to a few examples of substantive 'weakening' of the 'rule of law and corporate oversight in the US'?
    - meh8881 3y ago
      Net neutrality rules come to mind
      - MichaelZuo 3y ago
        Which parts specifically?
        nawgz 3y ago
        It is interesting to me to ponder why you carried on an alternate thread instead of the original one which you wished to challenge.
        MichaelZuo 3y ago
        Almost anyone on HN can see through this type of low effort passive-aggressive commenting. So this makes it even less likely me, or anyone else, well provide a substantive response.
        nawgz 3y ago
        The only low effort passive aggressive posting in this thread is from you - posting gotcha questions that aren’t gotchas and then tucking tail when sources come thru. You already were clearly at 0% probability of a substantive reply. Nice attempt at deflection tho - I see you’re learning from the republicans whose boots you love to lick
        MichaelZuo 3y ago
        > The only low effort passive aggressive posting in this thread is from you - posting gotcha questions that aren’t gotchas and then tucking tail when sources come thru. You already were clearly at 0% probability of a substantive reply. Nice attempt at deflection tho - I see you’re learning from the republicans whose boots you love to lick This does not increase your credibility, especially when hiding behind a pseudonym account made in 2020 replying to someone using their real name since 2014 on HN. So it seems like a losing proposition to continue digging a hole. But it's no skin off my back.

by nawgz 3y ago

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> ludicrous financials and outsized margins being published by corp after corp If you translate those financials into real terms, they're less ludicrous. Sometimes negative. Margin expansion absolutely contributed to inflation [1]. (On par with labor.) But this happened through wage suppression. > Corporations have clearly achieved deregulation at a greater scale than ever before, both thru devices like regulatory capture to weaken regulatory instruments What changed between 2021 and 2023 that gave them this power? There are solid cases made for care investments, to boost labour participation, and a variable corporate tax rate that kicks in when inflation is high. But they have to be based on sane, empirical arguments. [1] https://www.epi.org/blog/corporate-profits-have-contributed-disproportionately-to-inflation-how-should-policymakers-respond/ https://www.epi.org/blog/corporate-profits-have-contributed-...

nawgz 3y ago
> What changed between 2021 and 2023 that gave them this power? I think it's fairly evident that the rule of law and corporate oversight in the US was greatly weakened from 2016-2020, and at the start of 2021 an event some argue was essentially a failed coup occurred, yet the only punishments were issued to commoners and none of the instigators or would-be beneficiaries. Why would corporations not be emboldened at such a sight? I agree otherwise with what you've said, and indeed I am not nearly qualified enough to propose the vehicles to change economic outcomes - but it's clear that the narratives denying corporate profiteering's role in inflation are outdated.
- MichaelZuo 3y ago
  Can you link to a few examples of substantive 'weakening' of the 'rule of law and corporate oversight in the US'?
  - meh8881 3y ago
    Net neutrality rules come to mind
    - MichaelZuo 3y ago
      Which parts specifically?
      - nawgz 3y ago
        It is interesting to me to ponder why you carried on an alternate thread instead of the original one which you wished to challenge.
        MichaelZuo 3y ago
        Almost anyone on HN can see through this type of low effort passive-aggressive commenting. So this makes it even less likely me, or anyone else, well provide a substantive response.
        nawgz 3y ago
        The only low effort passive aggressive posting in this thread is from you - posting gotcha questions that aren’t gotchas and then tucking tail when sources come thru. You already were clearly at 0% probability of a substantive reply. Nice attempt at deflection tho - I see you’re learning from the republicans whose boots you love to lick
        MichaelZuo 3y ago
        > The only low effort passive aggressive posting in this thread is from you - posting gotcha questions that aren’t gotchas and then tucking tail when sources come thru. You already were clearly at 0% probability of a substantive reply. Nice attempt at deflection tho - I see you’re learning from the republicans whose boots you love to lick This does not increase your credibility, especially when hiding behind a pseudonym account made in 2020 replying to someone using their real name since 2014 on HN. So it seems like a losing proposition to continue digging a hole. But it's no skin off my back.