• @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
          cake
          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