This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Inflation

Assuming there is sufficient competition of course.

Not necessarily the case.
the theory is if there is ( sufficient ) demand , supply will follow , however some theories are never 100% reliable

and of course in totalitarian governments , things rarely flow smoothly
 
the theory is if there is ( sufficient ) demand , supply will follow , however some theories are never 100% reliable

and of course in totalitarian governments , things rarely flow smoothly
Who wants totalitarianism, but the free market seems to have failed in certain areas recently.
 
Who wants totalitarianism, but the free market seems to have failed in certain areas recently.
we could debate 'free'

but it seems we are on the path to totalitarianism ( maybe even with a capital 'T' ), despite my personal preferences

free markets work fine unless you sacrifice some freedom for liquidity ( and safety )
 
Who wants totalitarianism, but the free market seems to have failed in certain areas recently.
The markets are not free. There is no true price discovery without extraneous regulatory influences any more. Everything is manipulated in some way.

Ergo, the failures have not been in "free" markets.

However some failures in truly free markets are necessary and a function of the same AKA creative destruction.
 
Yes and one of the ways of handling "fails" is government intervention.

Yes, and we have plenty of that. Governments have been intervening since the beginning of governments, with modern governments trying to regulate for safety and protection of its citizens.

Now, if you're talking about governments regulating what a business can charge to sell their products and/or services well that is a very messy scenario.

Are there any examples of a successful government regulating business pricing?

I know of the ones that haven't worked, fuel, medical, transport.

Ask yourself this, if someone spent their life saving to start a business, took many risks including working long hours, bank loans, paying for advice, and so on, only to be told that, let's say, an 8% profit is the limit, and the government needs proof that the business is within that range, meaning more red tape and paperwork and possible visits from a regulator that would have to be funded meaning a licensing fee, creating more expenses that have to be passed on. How beneficial is this for the business operator and the consumer? The cost has gone up due to government intervention and regulation, possible business starters have been priced out of the market, causing the rich to monopolize the market and reduce the number of competitors.

The best way to reduce price gouging is by protection competition, allowing easy access for start-ups, and for consumers to shop around and vote with their money.
 
the theory is if there is ( sufficient ) demand , supply will follow , however some theories are never 100% reliable

and of course in totalitarian governments , things rarely flow smoothly
Or croony capitalism like in current west countries place enough barriers to new entrants that they keep a usually convenient duopoly..with a cosy split market
Regulations fees and taxes disproportionate to market/income...so eliminating SME as per WEF plan...
 
The best way to reduce price gouging is by protection competition, allowing easy access for start-ups, and for consumers to shop around and vote with their money.
Agreed in general but with the exception of natural monopolies.

Spending a fortune to create an artificial market, such that companies can compete to reduce only those costs incurred in setting up that same market, is a crazy idea to say the least.
 
Back inJjanuary, there was discussion about the "rubbery figures" put out by the US BLS.
It seems that the latest figures may still be about as believable as a politician.
From Zero Hedge
It would seem that not only are here a lot of phantom jobs out there, but there are a lot of people working multiple jobs.
I guess at some point, these figures will start to go the other way as the BLS models kills more jobs on the down turn.
Mick
 
it has been noted above that some of the members of the government as well as some economists blame th profits of business as being a cause of inflation.
Perish the thought that some of their own policies might also contribute somewhat to inflation, but recent decisions by state and federal transport ministers to increase freight road user tax by 6% will not help.
From Evil Murdoch Press

This will of course add to freight costs which will be passed on to anything that moves, ultimately being magnifies along the way as it eventually ends up being paid by consumers.

Cost recovery? what a joke! What are the costs involved in a tax? The army of public servants ensuring compliance? Processing the paperwork?
I have spent the past two weeks caravanning around central and northern NSW , and I can inform the minister that the conditions of highways is extreely poor, and the arterial and regional roads even worse.
Like other non city road users, the truckers will be getting precious little for their outlay to the governments.
Mick
 

Another inflationary measure the hypocrites.

With the price of fuel these days the fuel excise revenue should be booming.
 
Too many public servants leeching off industry. All these idiotic costs for doing business that add little in value.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...