A crazy idea to address price gouging and inflation

[SapphireSpire]

We all feel the pain and inconvenience of price gouging and inflation but the last thing manufacturing and publishing monopolies would ever do is give up their intellectual property rights and geographical zones that protect them from competition so how can we stop them from literally impoverishing us? Socialism- no! Price caps- no! How about we ban markups? I mean, that's how they get us, by jacking up retail prices. So we ban all retail markups and require all retailers to sell everything at cost. Then the state issue reward subsidies as bonuses to retailers based on sales volumes and consumer satisfaction surveys. Who pays for these reward subsidies? Consumers would, as usual. Markups would go away but states would need to raise their sales taxes to fund the reward subsidies. However, that money would be more fairly collected and distributed. So even if prices don't go down a little, they certainly shouldn't go up, and after that we should see improvements for the quality of life of the poor and a much lower rate of inflation. But it's crazy, I know.

 

[Mycroft]

We all feel the pain and inconvenience of price gouging and inflation but the last thing manufacturing and publishing monopolies would ever do is give up their intellectual property rights and geographical zones that protect them from competition so how can we stop them from literally impoverishing us? Socialism- no! Price caps- no! How about we ban markups? I mean, that's how they get us, by jacking up retail prices. So we ban all retail markups and require all retailers to sell everything at cost. Then the state issue reward subsidies as bonuses to retailers based on sales volumes and consumer satisfaction surveys. Who pays for these reward subsidies? Consumers would, as usual. Markups would go away but states would need to raise their sales taxes to fund the reward subsidies. However, that money would be more fairly collected and distributed. So even if prices don't go down a little, they certainly shouldn't go up, and after that we should see improvements for the quality of life of the poor and a much lower rate of inflation. But it's crazy, I know.

Jesus...

You say no socialism and no price caps (I agree with this) and then you want government to control profit.

**** that.

 

[Ug make hammer]

Wait. You want to raise sales tax to compensate retailers for not raising prices.

Why not go the full Nixon and just ban price rises ... for a while? The idea is to be a circuit breaker not a permanent solution. And it wouldn't work on the supply side problem we have now: stores would just run out of product.

Rationing is worth considering. There's no telling how much of the current inflation is directly caused by consumers buying more than they need.

 

[SapphireSpire]

Wait. You want to raise sales tax to compensate retailers for not raising prices.

No, I want to cut prices by a lot and then raise sales taxes by some fraction of that to award retailers for being more fair and efficient.

Why not go the full Nixon and just ban price rises ... for a while?

Price fixing is a bad idea because it doesn't allow price fluctuations due to cost fluctuations.

The idea is to be a circuit breaker not a permanent solution. And it wouldn't work on the supply side problem we have now: stores would just run out of product.

Banning markups would work just fine because it would allow prices to fluctuate as costs fluctuate.

Rationing is worth considering. There's no telling how much of the current inflation is directly caused by consumers buying more than they need.

Rationing only helps distribute limited supplies across more consumers but it doesn't reduce the cost.

 

[SapphireSpire]

Jesus...

You say no socialism and no price caps (I agree with this) and then you want government to control profit.

**** that.

Normally competition controls profits. But the government has created a market system that permits out-of-control profits by minimizing competition, so they are responsible for controlling profits. The only alternative is to maximize competition by eliminating all protections from competition, including intellectual property and territorial exclusivity, but I know that would be a huge shock to the system so I figure profit control is a less painful compromise for everyone.

 

[Mycroft]

Normally competition controls profits. But the government has created a market system that permits out-of-control profits by minimizing competition, so they are responsible for controlling profits.

Then stop minimizing competition.

The only alternative is to maximize competition by eliminating all protections from competition, including intellectual property and territorial exclusivity,

Wrong. That's not the only alternative.

Encourage competition. (in other words, get the government out of the way) Protect intellectual property. And there should be no territorial exclusivity.

but I know that would be a huge shock to the system so I figure profit control is a less painful compromise for everyone.

Your solution just means more government control.

**** that.

 

[SapphireSpire]

Encourage competition. (in other words, get the government out of the way) Protect intellectual property. And there should be no territorial exclusivity.

That's not even a solution, it's a contradiction of terms. Intellectual property IS the government getting in the way in order to discourage competition by making it illegal. If they're going to do that, fine, but they need to also regulate profits or we're going to see poverty creep until random mobs of the poor and homeless are climbing through our windows and eating all our leftovers. Technology and art should not be property. Scientists, engineers and artists deserve recognition for their respective contributions but nobody deserves to own ideas. Property should be limited to physically tangible things like land, homes, cars etc.