3 ms·
I want to point out that the argument has never been “greedy laborers” in the pejorative sense. The argument has been that laborers need to rationally account f
by ghayes 3y ago
I want to point out that the argument has never been “greedy laborers” in the pejorative sense. The argument has been that laborers need to rationally account for future inflation, which itself contributes to inflation.
The reason that corporate profits aren’t often mentioned is simply that people had expected competition to naturally curtail profits, since in a competitive market, manufacturers should happily lower prices (a bit) to capture more market share and thus more profits. The fact that doesn’t seem to be happening is why this cycle is interesting and why we are now talking about it.
- hansjorg 3y agoYes, and that expectation seems either naive or ideologically blinkered to me. Especially after so many decades of consolidation with antitrust being a thing of the distant past. Seems to me it can't be merely a gathering of facts and deliberations that have now made it allowable to talk about a profit-price spiral without being heckled or laughed out of the room. It will be interesting to see if this shift in the discourse on inflation could precipate a change in the discourse on antitrust in the US as well.