Washington Post columnist Catherine Rampell slammed Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris‘ proposed price controls after they were unveiled this week, warning that the plan was something straight out of the failed Soviet Union or modern day Venezuela. Rampell — who is so left-wing that she wants Democrats to officially make their agenda: Make America Minnesota Already — wrote that it was “not hard to figure out where this proposal came from.” “Voters want to blame someone for high grocery bills, and the presidential candidates have apparently decided the choices are either the Biden administration or corporate greed,” Rampell wrote. “Harris has chosen the latter.” Harris said in a statement from her campaign this week that she would create the “first-ever federal ban on price gouging on food and groceries — setting clear rules of the road to make clear that big corporations can’t unfairly exploit consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and groceries.” Rampell noted that since the campaign gave no details about the plan, they are most likely using as a template a recent bill from Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), which is similar to a bill that then-California Sen. Harris co-sponsored with Warren in 2020. The bills would ban any “grossly excessive price” during any “atypical disruption” of a market, thus empowering the Federal Trade Commission to ban any price it wants to using any metric is chooses to. She continued: It’s hard to exaggerate how bad this policy is. It is, in all but name, a sweeping set of government-enforced price controls across every industry, not only food. Supply and demand would no longer determine prices or profit levels. Far-off Washington bureaucrats would. The FTC would be able to tell, say, a Kroger in Ohio the acceptable price it can charge for milk. At best, this would lead to shortages, black markets and hoarding, among other distortions seen previous times countries tried to limit price growth by fiat. (There’s a reason narrower “price gouging” laws that exist in some U.S. states are rarely invoked.) At worst, it might accidentally raise prices. That’s because, among other things, the legislation would ban companies from offering lower prices to a big customer such as Costco than to Joe’s Corner Store, which means quantity discounts are in trouble. Worse, it would require public companies to publish detailed internal data about costs, margins, contracts and their future pricing strategies. Posting cost and pricing plans publicly is a fantastic way for companies to collude to keep prices higher — all facilitated by the government. Rampell said that Harris’ economic advisers were “either too confused or lazy” and they did not know “the history of these kinds of policies and apparently haven’t thought very hard about what would make markets more competitive or improve the lives of voters.” Tickets for “Am I Racist?” are on sale NOW! Buy here for a theater near you. She implored Harris to drop the policy because she was worried that keeping it will better enable Republicans, who she claimed only had “gibberish” ideas, to label Harris a “communist.” During a subsequent CNN interview, Rampell said that these failed policies have been tried in “Venezuela, Argentina, the Soviet Union, et cetera,” and that they cause “a lot of harm.” WATCH: WATCH: The Washington Post’s Catherine Rampell blasts Kamala Harris and PA Democrat Senator Bob Casey’s price control proposals: “Well, first of all, nobody can explain what price gouging means. It’s like that old line about pornography: I know it when I see it, in the sense… pic.twitter.com/2f0hqdl1cr — Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) August 16, 2024

Mainstream publications urged Democrat presidential nominee Kamala Harris to reverse course after her economic policy agenda contained extreme measures that were akin to policies found in the failed Soviet Union or modern day Venezuela. The Washington Post Editorial Board published an op-ed on Friday titled: “The times demand serious economic ideas. Harris supplies gimmicks.” In it, the Post complained that Harris “squandered the moment” on promoting “gimmicks” that do not work, like price controls. In blaming big business for the inflation crisis that the Biden-Harris administration has caused, Harris vowed to “target companies that make ‘excessive’ profits, whatever that means,” the Post wrote. “(It’s hard to see how groceries, a notoriously low-margin business, would qualify.) Thankfully, this gambit by Ms. Harris has been met with almost instant skepticism, with many critics citing President Richard M. Nixon’s failed price controls from the 1970s. Whether the Harris proposal wins over voters remains to be seen, but if sound economic analysis still matters, it won’t.” The Post warned that Harris’ plan of giving $25,000 in down payment assistance to first-time home buyers “stimulates the demand side, which risks putting upward pressure on prices.” Her plan would add trillions of dollars to the national deficit over a decade, the Post added, according to a nonpartisan budget watchdog. The op-ed concluded by saying that even by “the pandering standards of campaign economics,” Harris’ policy ideas were “a disappointment.” Tickets for “Am I Racist?” are on sale NOW! Buy here for a theater near you. CNN published a news article written by an economic reporter titled: “Harris’ plan to stop price gouging could create more problems than it solves”. Gavin Roberts, the chair of Weber State University’s economics department, told the left-wing news network the price controls that Harris is pursuing lead consumers to “buy goods more than they would if prices had risen” and that the best course of action for the government would be to do nothing at all. Her policies are “more likely to maintain that status quo,” he said, because it would eliminate the competition needed to keep prices lower. Obama economist Jason Furman agreed, saying that Harris’ policies were “not sensible” and that he hopes “that it ends up being a lot of rhetoric and no reality.” He said that there was “no upside” to the policies that Harris was proposing. Related: Ted Cruz Blasts Kamala Harris’ ‘Soviet-Style’ Economic Agenda: ‘An Absolute Train Wreck’

Stephen Nedoroscik stole our hearts during the 2024 Paris Olympics. The 25-year-old gymnast nailed his performance on the pommel horse, sealing the deal for Team USA to win their first medal in men’s gymnastics since 2008. Stephen wears glasses, and he and his girlfriend Tess McCraken have been referred to as Clark Kent and Lois Lane. He famously kept his eyes closed in the moments leading up to his epic pommel horse performance and many wondered why. Stephen Nedoroscik Shared His Reasoning With Jimmy Fallon The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon host spoke with Stephen about his performance, and he admitted he spent time “doing my breathing exercises” and “visualizing a lot.” Stephen explained that getting “into the zone” and making sure that he was ready to win was very important to him. Stephen said the athletes get to the facilities hours before the competition, and he had to “calm down” before it was his turn on the horse. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Stephen Nedoroscik (@stephen_nedoroscik) He closed his eyes to help visualize himself “spinning, twirling, and flipping.” Stephen Nedoroscik felt lucky on the day of the team competition because he got to go first. “Usually, you have a draw at a competition of what event you’re starting on, and we got really lucky for day one [because] our draw was pommel horse was first,” he told Jimmy. “So it’s a great example because I literally got to warm up last in the back gym and then immediately competed.” Stephen also went on to win a bronze medal in the individual pommel horse event. After his Olympic run, he shared a thank you to fans on Instagram. Stephen also left a tease that we’ll see him again in Los Angeles. “Thank you to everybody who has supported me throughout my journey. I am just a man shaped by those who surround me, I couldn’t have done it without any of you.” You can find the source of this story’s featured image here. The post “Pommel Horse Guy” Shares The Surprising And Wholesome Reason He Had His Eyes Closed In Viral Video appeared first on InspireMore.

'One of the most expensive boondoggles in history'

'It is a shameful situation'

Almost instantly upon being released to the public in 1964, the Ford Mustang became an American classic. Ford has always been a staple of the American automotive industry, so it's only right that they produced one of the longest-lasting and most beloved cars in the history of automobiles. Since the first batch of Mustangs hit the streets, the car has been undergoing changes. Yet... Source

New York Times columnist and PBS News Hour theoretical conservative David Brooks was shocked on Friday’s show that “a responsible Democratic candidate” would endorse Soviet-like price controls on food. Host Geoff Bennett invited Brooks to share his thoughts “On this matter of economic policy, the vice president is also proposing the first ever ban on price gouging for groceries. This is something I know you took particular issue with. It polls well with swing voters, but economists say the underlying reasons why prices are higher, it's a more complicated argument.”     Brooks cited fellow panelist Jonathan Capehart’s colleague, “Catherine Rampell, the Washington Post columnist and a News Hour contributor, said it's impossible to exaggerate how bad this policy is. And I agree with that. And Catherine had a good line: that if your opponent is calling you a communist, maybe don't lead with price controls.” He then cited his two main problems with the proposal, “price controls just create shortages. They create black markets. We’ve seen it happen in Venezuela. We have seen it happen in the Soviet Union. Price controls just don't work. What's worse about that, first, it's trying to address a problem that does not exist. Price — grocery prices, inflation has been less than one percent for the past year. It's over. We had a surge, but it's over. The problem does not exist.” If Brooks and Rampell are correct—and they are—then the media narrative that Kamala Harris is a moderate needs to be reconsidered. However, Brooks wasn’t ready to let that go, “But the real core problem is it expresses a level of economic illiteracy, which is, kind of, surprising in a responsible Democratic candidate.” Brooks then proceeded to mock the idea that only when Joe Biden came into office did so-called greedflation become a problem and did accuse the administration of having “overstimulated the economy, too many dollars chasing too few goods… The Fed has to clamp down on growth, raising everybody's interest payments. That's what caused inflation. That's solid, basic economics. Her greedflation plan is somewhere off — outside of normal economics.” Bennett then turned to Capehart and asked, “What about that, Jonathan, that the Harris policy, parts of it at least, speak to an economic illiteracy?” Capehart tried to have it both ways, “Well, I mean, I'd take issue with the use of the word “illiteracy.” But, you know, we will just have to agree to disagree on our word choices, David.” However, he also found that “Catherine Rampell raises a very good point. And her column, I found to be rather persuasive. And so now it's incumbent upon the vice president and her team to flesh this out a little bit — a little bit more.” He then tried to argue that the real economic illiterate in the race is Donald Trump, “I believe it was last night, talking about a tariff on all imports? And we don't talk enough about what that tariff on all imports would mean to the American consumer. And that would mean higher prices.” Higher prices would be bad, food shortages would be worse, and it is time PBS and the rest of the media stop hyping Harris’s “momentum” and start focusing on what she believes. If they did, maybe Brooks wouldn’t have been so surprised. Here is a transcript for the August 16 show: PBS News Hour 8/16/2024 7:29 PM ET GEOFF BENNETT: And, David, on this matter of economic policy, the vice president is also proposing the first ever ban on price gouging for groceries. This is something I know you took particular issue with. It polls well with swing voters, but economists say the underlying reasons why prices are higher, it's a more complicated argument. DAVID BROOKS: Yeah, I mean, she has some good policies in this package. I think the child tax credit is a good thing. She wants to deregulate housing, so we can get more homes. But the price gouging is just — well, Catherine Rampell, the Washington Post columnist and a News Hour contributor, said it's impossible to exaggerate how bad this policy is. And I agree with that. And Catherine had a good line: that if your opponent is calling you a communist, maybe don't lead with price controls. And so price controls just create shortages. They create black markets. We’ve seen it happen in Venezuela. We have seen it happen in the Soviet Union. Price controls just don't work. What's worse about that, first, it's trying to address a problem that does not exist. Price — grocery prices, inflation has been less than one percent for the past year. It's over. We had a surge, but it's over. The problem does not exist. But the real core problem is it expresses a level of economic illiteracy which is, kind of, surprising in a responsible Democratic candidate. The idea behind “greedflation” is that we had all these years of low inflation under Obama and under Bushes. And I guess people weren't greedy then. And then Biden gets in, and suddenly, magically, they all get greedy and start price gouging. And they do it at Kroger's, and Harris Teeter, and at H-E-B. Suddenly, there's this mass of price gouging. And she thinks she can prosecute it. That's not why inflation surged. Inflation surged because we had a pandemic which screwed up supply chains and productivity. Then the Biden administration overstimulated the economy, too many dollars chasing too few goods. Obama administration official Larry Summers and Jason Furman said at the time, this is going to cause inflation. Lo and behold, it did. The Fed has to clamp down on growth, raising everybody's interest payments. That's what caused inflation. That's solid, basic economics. Her greedflation plan is somewhere off — outside of normal economics. GEOFF BENNETT: What about that, Jonathan, that the Harris policy, parts of it at least, speak to an economic illiteracy? JONATHAN CAPEHART: Well, I mean, I'd take issue with the use of the word “illiteracy.” But, you know, we will just have to agree to disagree on our word choices, David. But Catherine Rampell raises a very good point. And her column, I found to be rather persuasive. And so now it's incumbent upon the vice president and her team to flesh this out a little bit — a little bit more. But if we're going to talk about economic illiteracy, can we talk about Donald Trump in his proposal that he talked about at his press conference, I believe it was last night, talking about a tariff on all imports? And we don't talk enough about what that tariff on all imports would mean to the American consumer. And that would mean higher prices. But the former president doesn't talk about that. So I think whether you're talking about the vice president's plan on price gouging and whether she'd be able to get that done, or we talk about the former president's plan for tariffs on all imports, let's have this robust conversation, which I think we will have, because the vice president still has to flesh out other pieces of her economic agenda.

You Don't Hate the Media Enough: After Oct 7 Attacks NYT Reporter Doxxed Members of Jewish WhatsApp Group

We're NOT Doing This Again! AP Gets Ratioed Into ORBIT for Asking If MPox Will Be the Next Pandemic