• @Fox
      link
      -65 months ago

      I’m not sure why you’d advocate for it if you’ve actually read the history, it’s a terrible idea that has failed spectacularly in the past

        • @Fox
          link
          35 months ago

          Talking about price controls which are not the same thing at all. Read about the Nixon shock, for example.

          • @Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            25 months ago

            Yeah, the relief doesn’t go to agribusiness and might stand a chance of benefiting individual humans, so both parties agree it’s always bad and they’ll never do it.

            • @Fox
              link
              1
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Sure, instead it’s true based on a simple observation that the president isn’t using executive power to set an upper limit (price control) on the cost of groceries. A subsidy might reduce the starting price of something but a grocery store can still charge whatever they want for it. Which I’m pretty sure is the whole point of this thread?

      • @mlg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        65 months ago

        I know about a ton of food subsidies that we’re pretty useful, dunno about groceries though.

        Any source?

        • @Fox
          link
          -1
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          I’m not talking about subsidies, I’m talking about the “president dictating prices”, i.e., price controls. Richard Nixon tried this in 1971, it was a failure and it set the stage for the stagflation of that decade.

          Ranchers stopped shipping their cattle to market, farmers drowned their chickens, and consumers emptied the shelves of supermarkets.

          https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitext/ess_nixongold.html