Harris Promises Poverty
|
The Election Of Harris Promises Poverty for Americans
By John Brochard, Ph.D
September 18.2024
Get Ready to Stand in Line for Groceries
Harris Promises Poverty
Kamala Harris and Tim Walz are the most radical nominees of any party in the United States’s entire history. Their election would bring about market and political chaos that would eclipse the Great Depression of the 1930s.
Should Harris obtain the keys to the white House you can be absolutely certain that she will increase the national debt at a rate exceeding that of Joe Biden, from ONE TRILLION every 90 days to, perhaps, a trillion every 90 days. After all, she is an absolute believer in what is called the NMT of money, which is the government can print whatever amount of money they want. She ignores that idea didn’t work well in Germany in the 20’s, Zimbabwe in the 80’s, Argentina, or Venezuela. After all,the USA has a much larger middle class she can rob.
Kamala and Tim intend to impose price controls to tame inflation on the theory that inflation is related to producers of materials’ greed to increase profits when we all should know it is related to the federal government expanding the supply of money and debt to finance its massive liabilities.
As Kamala’s chances of winning the election increase from the improbable to the possible, the motivation to inflate costs to extraordinary levels grows on the horizon. This surge in costs will, in turn, create a reason for even tighter controls and a more severe crackdown.
Should this woke, commie, whackjob be elected there will be a massive outflow of wealth from the USA with Bitcoin and gold climbing to unprecedented heights.
Harris’s proposed program sticks out from her previous shifts in position. She is committed to it, having repeated her support for price controls. Regardless of mentioning it during the debate with Trump, there has been no additional assessment or criticism of the proposition. This unconventional plan would not necessarily need congressional approval; it could be implemented through an executive order. Although it might face analysis from the Supreme Court, previous circumstances suggest that the program could be in place before any court decisions are made. The result of such a legal difficulty remains uncertain.
How would such a thing take place today? Look at the program SNAP, the new name for food stamps. For those who certify, the money enters into a special account managed by the federal government. The recipient is sent out an EBT (Electronic Benefits Transfer) card, which is utilized like a charge card in stores. It costs taxpayers some $114 billion a year, and works out as a big aid to Big Agriculture, which is why the program is administered by the Department of Agriculture.
Next time, however, merchants will not remain in a position to respond reasonably. Instead, they will face federal price detectives and district attorneys.
Harris Promises Poverty
Kamala is wrong that this will be the “first-ever” ban on price gouging. We had that in World War II, together with rationing tickets on meat, animal fats, foil, sugar, flour, foil, coffee, and more. It was a time of severe austerity, and people put up with it since they thought it was saving resources for the war effort. It was enforced the same as we saw with covid lockdowns: a huge network employing state and regional organizations, media, and private zealots prepared to rat out the rebels.
To put it into viewpoint, the charge for noncompliance a shocking $200,000 fine in today’s dollars, underscoring the seriousness and enforcement of the regulation.
Regardless of the authorities’ best efforts, technological restraints hindered reliable enforcement, enabling illegal trade to flourish. Bootleggers, in particular, drew intense examination and vilification from authorities channels, which represented them as the personification of the black market’s evils.
There is a nearly absence of public comment and debate about Kamala Harris’s requirement of price controls on groceries and incidentals, the most spectacular and frightening policy proposal I have ever seen.
The funds would only be redeemable at designated establishments, leaving those who shopped at alternative markets, such as local farmers’ co-ops, possibly out of luck. A minimum of, that’s how it would be at first, up until popular opinion turned against those who were perceived as taking advantage of the system, and the media started to inspect the rich for consuming more than their assigned share, along with the vendors who were viewed as profiteering
This is unreasonable. If the government is undoubtedly releasing a national task force to punish cost gouging, it will put every type of grocery seller at risk to farmers’ markets to big-box merchants. The threat of investigation will likely lead price controls, gouging remains unclear.
Roosevelt signed Executive Order 8875 on August 28, 1941, granting the government sweeping authority to manage the nation’s production and usage. The Emergency Price Control Act, enacted on January 30, 1942, empowered the Office of Price Administration to establish price ceilings and execute rationing of food and other essential products. As lacks intensified, extra items were brought under the OPA’s regulatory umbrella.
I want I could say that this is an over-the-top and fear-mongering warning. It is not. It is a really practical scenario based upon duplicated statements and promises plus the recent history of government management of the population. There is likely another wave of inflation coming. This time it will meet with a promise to utilize every coercive power of government to prevent boosts in costs on groceries and rents.
As for rental units, the only outcome will be less facilities, new charges, brand-new charges for what utilized to be complimentary, less service, and a considerably reduced incentive to construct brand-new systems. That will just cause a pretext for more aids, more public housing, and more government provision usually. We have experience with that and it is not good.
In 1942, the Supreme Court thought about the case of Albert Yakus, a meat vendor from Boston who dealt with criminal charges for breaking the optimum cost set for wholesale beef. The Supreme Court’s decision in Yakus vs. United States preferred the government over the meat seller. This judgment stands as a precedent.
There are fewer people alive now that recall nowadays but I’ve understood some. They adopted practices of severe preservation. I when had a next-door neighbor who just might not bear to throw away tin-foil pie pans because she had endured rationing. After she passed away, her kids found her large collection and it surprised them. She was not crazy, simply distressed.
This does not need to happen right after the inauguration. It could occur gradually as conditions get worse due to anti-gouging regulations and increasing inflation. If a presidency supports central planning and necessary financial thriftiness, it could continue for a total four-year term, with coercion heightening with time up until widespread deprivation is imposed, and people forget what it resembled to acquire groceries at regular prices using their own funds.
Harris Promises Poverty
You can sell how this all unfolds, and none of it is implausible. Just a couple of years earlier, governments around the nation canceled gatherings for religious holidays, limited the varieties of people who might collect in homes, and prohibited public wedding events and funerals. If they can do that, they can do anything, including the rationing of all food.
Harris Promises PovertyTransitioning that program to the general population would not be difficult. It would be a simple matter of expansion of eligibility. As scarcities grow, so too might the program till the entire population would be on it and it would be necessary. It could also be converted into a mobile app instead of a piece of plastic as a fraud-prevention measure. With everybody bring cellular phone, this would be an easy step.
Right away, naturally, people will reply that she is not for price controls as such. It is only a limit on “gouging” (which she otherwise calls “evaluating”) on grocery prices. As for rents, it’s only for larger-scale corporations with many units.
The next action is nationalizing housing and rationing of groceries since there will be ever fewer available.
In a nation where agriculture is more prevalent amongst the population, people depended different forms of exchanging goods and services.
Imposing price controls can lead to scarcities of impacted products, particularly throughout periods of increasing costs If the Federal Reserve chooses to decrease rates needlessly, although rates are already traditionally low there could be a 2nd wave of inflation in the coming year.
Don Boudreaux is appropriate: “A government that threatens to punish merchants for selling at nominal prices more than considered appropriate by federal government clearly means to manage costs. It’s not a surprise, for that reason, that economists regularly evaluate restrictions against so-called ‘rate gouging’ utilizing precisely the exact same tools they use to examine other forms of price controls.”
I have not begun to describe the effects of taxing unrealized gains, which by itself will bring about a market collapse and the end to venture capitalism in the USA. That I will write about soon.
Harris Promises Poverty
Imagine if citizens were truly familiar with this – what would be the outcome?
A lasting effect of the Covid period is a profound understanding of the level of their times of crisis. Sadly, this newfound awareness has had an exceptionally upsetting impact, and its repercussions for the years to come are threatening.
