Price controls

[pulmonarymd]

Aug 25, 2024 12:36:11 GMT -5 jerseygirl said:

Will tariffs or increased taxes on business help? One more or worse than other? Both would impact (increase costs) on the population but would one help or hinder new or existing businesses in the US?
In general I think better business profits help workers in that business If a business is failing or unprofitable it’s bad for the people investing and working for that company

What I do know is that lowering taxes will increase the deficit. Happens every time. Tariff costs are passed on to consumers, so that hurts inflation. Cutting business taxes shifts the tax burden to individuals, or increases the deficit. Businesses should pay taxes, just like everyone else. But to act like there are no trade offs with any decision is aomplistc at best, and ignorant at worst. You are complaining about paying $2k for a 144k medication, something you can clearly afford. You also complain about your taxes in NJ. You can pay less in tax by moving, but that has trade offs too if you go to one of the red state tax utopias

[seriousthistime]

Aug 25, 2024 11:36:44 GMT -5 jerseygirl said:

I had meant for this post to discuss price controls but responses focused on the cost of the medicine

I’m uneasy with the discussions in politics starting about price controls to counteract inflation
In general inflation is too much money chasing too little goods
Price controls would seem to inhibit growth not stimulate
I

In general I agree with the bolded part.  It explains worldwide inflation after the pandemic, and difficulties with the supply chain. 

Another thing is that as businesses increase the hourly wages for their employees, their costs rise and then their prices rise and consumers pay for it.  But to me, it is an acceptable problem. Unemployment is low, so inflation will be higher than than when unemployment is high and fewer people are chasing after the goods.  That is not a good place to be in, as far as I'm concerned. 

What about farm subsidies?  They keep the farmer happy and can lead to lower prices at the grocery store.  But they don't always do that, farmers need not reduce their prices but just make more profit when subsidies are factored in, producing farm goods at a lower price (thanks to subsidies) but not reducing the prices they charge. And the way oil companies and others are keeping prices high at the gas pump while booking record profits?  Seems something is needed.  People need to be able to afford gas to drive to work.  

[pulmonarymd]

As to what are excess profits, hard to say. But by taxing businesses, it doesn’t matter, as tax revenues will rise. That could either lower the deficit(good), or lead to a tax cut for individuals(not as good if we are still deficit spending)

[thyme4change]

Aug 25, 2024 13:29:02 GMT -5 jerseygirl said:

What or who decides is an ‘excess’ profit? If a company is selling goods at an excessive cost resulting in ‘excess’ profits, the free market usually will have another company stepping in to this niche to undercut or people stop buying
Industries also have differences. In the food industry profits are generally much lower than say software
Price controls hinder the marketplace working out the costs

What is your solution?

Maybe the food manufacturers should have programs and foundations where you can apply for free groceries. Of course that doesn’t solve inflation - because it does nothing about supply, demand, pricing or profit.

[pulmonarymd]

Foundations paying for mediations also skews the market. If foundations get a discount, others are paying more to ensure profitability. If they pay full price, more people will qualify for assistance. So much for the free market

[phil5185]

Maybe Richard Nixon knows the answer?

[moon/Laura]

jerseygirl - Seemed like a fully sarcastic comment to me but..... but it's gone.. and if you don't like something, don't quote it because then YOUR post and any other points you want to make are gone too.

[nidena]

What bothers me about the cost of medicine is how the advertising has creeped into EVERYTHING.  Used to be, medicines gained traction through the pharma reps that sought out the doctors.  Now, oodles and oodles of meds are being hawked on TV, regular websites, and all the social media platforms as actual posts.  I can't scroll reddit w/o seeing an advertisement (for *something*) after every second thread.  How much of their price is ballooned so they can advertise?

[Opti]

Aug 29, 2024 10:16:05 GMT -5 nidena said:

What bothers me about the cost of medicine is how the advertising has creeped into EVERYTHING.  Used to be, medicines gained traction through the pharma reps that sought out the doctors.  Now, oodles and oodles of meds are being hawked on TV, regular websites, and all the social media platforms as actual posts.  I can't scroll reddit w/o seeing an advertisement (for *something*) after every second thread.  How much of their price is ballooned so they can advertise?

I think they put their advertising dollars into the ads and cut way back on pharma reps to doctors. And some make sense to me like diabetes meds since its now such a common condition. 

[Opti]

Aug 27, 2024 18:26:59 GMT -5 phil5185 said:

Maybe Richard Nixon knows the answer?

I doubt it, he died 30 years ago.

Without actual policies to discuss all the guesses are just that, guesses. 

[obelisk]

Price controls by the government will always negatively impact the consumer either by lack of choice for certain goods or higher prices for premium products.  

[pulmonarymd]

So do tariffs. But Trump LOVES tariffs, so the GOP loves them too. Unfettered capitalism will lead to its own set of abuse and problems as well. The problem is people love easy solutions to complex problems, and complain about costs regardless of what is done

There are price controls on all plenty of goods. Look at the complaints about gas and milk prices. Now imagine if there were no price controls

[Opti]

In agenda 47 there are price controls. One is to cut gasoline and customer electric costs in half. That's not going to happen. No way OPEC or even domestic producers are going to let gas slide down to 20 to 30 for a barrel of oil in a post-Covid economy. Even though utility companies tend to be regulated by the state(s) its folly to think that can be administered in a 4-year term federally let alone driving out that amount of cost. And then you have Texas with its own antiquated power grid. This is a guaranteed failure where he would at best throw up his hands like healthcare, and say "who knew it would be this complicated?"

Almost everyone Donald. Almost everyone.

And I don't know who it was, maybe Jerseygirl talking about R& costs of creating a new drug and then bringing it to market. I forget if I put it in my post, but his price controls on prescription drugs are to demand Pharma companies which are largely global even if some are headquartered in NJ and the US, match the rates of best med prices in Europe. Except without socialized medicine, all the bargainers except Medicare are not federal govt entities but mostly corporations. x very large number.

I think some of this in the agenda is to sound good knowing the odds of failure are almost certain. Especially for a man who is only allowed to win one more term. But per scgal she's fine with this because its a Trump thing.

ETA - Crazy, why is my D being converted into a smiley face now? What's wrong with the phrase R&"D", research and development?

[scgal]

Aug 25, 2024 13:55:57 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

Aug 25, 2024 12:36:11 GMT -5 jerseygirl said:

Will tariffs or increased taxes on business help? One more or worse than other? Both would impact (increase costs) on the population but would one help or hinder new or existing businesses in the US?
In general I think better business profits help workers in that business If a business is failing or unprofitable it’s bad for the people investing and working for that company

What I do know is that lowering taxes will increase the deficit. Happens every time. Tariff costs are passed on to consumers, so that hurts inflation. Cutting business taxes shifts the tax burden to individuals, or increases the deficit. Businesses should pay taxes, just like everyone else. But to act like there are no trade offs with any decision is aomplistc at best, and ignorant at worst. You are complaining about paying $2k for a 144k medication, something you can clearly afford. You also complain about your taxes in NJ. You can pay less in tax by moving, but that has trade offs too if you go to one of the red state tax utopias

So you are in favor of high taxes?

[pulmonarymd]

Aug 31, 2024 7:30:57 GMT -5 scgal said:

Aug 25, 2024 13:55:57 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

What I do know is that lowering taxes will increase the deficit. Happens every time. Tariff costs are passed on to consumers, so that hurts inflation. Cutting business taxes shifts the tax burden to individuals, or increases the deficit. Businesses should pay taxes, just like everyone else. But to act like there are no trade offs with any decision is aomplistc at best, and ignorant at worst. You are complaining about paying $2k for a 144k medication, something you can clearly afford. You also complain about your taxes in NJ. You can pay less in tax by moving, but that has trade offs too if you go to one of the red state tax utopias

So you are in favor of high taxes?

Higher taxes, yes. As part of an overall strategy to close the budget deficit. The Trump tax cuts blew up the deficit, a fact conservatives conveniently forget. I got a large tax cut. It would have been smarter to give lower income people a tax cut at the same time we helped fix SS finances.

We also need to find a way to pay for the IVF policy that Trump wants. Can’t have unfunded mandates, you know

ETA: what do you think a tariff is?

[jerseygirl]

Trump tax actually increased revenues going to the government.
Like a lot of people in states with high property taxes, we and YDS paid more taxes
I’m really thinking increasing taxes on companies reduce their competitiveness . I’ve seen it directly with companies in low tax country buying a profitable US company that had to pay a higher tax rate. Also the tax cuts allowed companies to bring back profits to the US with associated tax that increased government revenues

At a proposed tax rate of 25 - 28% US corps will become less competitive . Increasing taxes on capital gains if moving towards regulate income rates backfires. Fewer people sell stocks cause it would cost more in taxes or move their capital. Without a good economy the US has more difficulty to pay for government projects or helping lower income people

Below is article re tax cuts bringing in more revenues
www.heritage.org/taxes/commentary/the-numbers-are-trumps-tax-cuts-paid

Track record on tariffs helping the economy or prosperity isn’t good. Increasing price controls also has poor record on economy
Any tax cuts on individuals will go to many higher income people since the great majority of federal taxes are paid by high income people. Top 1% pay about 46% of federal taxes

www.ntu.org/foundation/tax-page/who-pays-income-taxes

Although a tax cut could be finely tuned to more middle class but will economy benefit much? ?
Making taxes higher on already highly taxed upper income people or corporations can backfire. NY and CA are losing high income people and corporations to lower tax states

[pulmonarymd]

So we are condemned to deficit spending forever since we can’t raise taxes. Medicare, Medicaid, SS, defense, and interest on the debt are at least 60% of government spending. You co hi of cut everything else and not balance the budget. Do what is the solution?

[jerseygirl]

Put emphasis on growing the economy instead of hindering the economy
Examples are many - Apple, Microsoft , Tesla etc are bringing in huge amounts of tax revenues while bringing high paying jobs to many who also pay more taxes than those in lower paying jobs
Interesting election cycle - what policies will grow or inhibit economy ? Increased tax revenues will help Medicare etc
No politicians will ‘touch’ Medicare even though everyone knows it’s in big financial trouble on a relatively few years

[moon/Laura]

Aug 30, 2024 17:40:53 GMT -5 Opti said:

ETA - Crazy, why is my D being converted into a smiley face now? What's wrong with the phrase R&"D", research and development?

Because pretty much everywhere, a ": D" (minus the space between) is the shortcut for a big grin. Type it in lower case if you don't want that to happen.

[Opti]

Aug 31, 2024 11:00:57 GMT -5 moon/Laura said:

Aug 30, 2024 17:40:53 GMT -5 Opti said:

ETA - Crazy, why is my D being converted into a smiley face now? What's wrong with the phrase R&"D", research and development?

Because pretty much everywhere, a ": D" (minus the space between) is the shortcut for a big grin. Type it in lower case if you don't want that to happen.

TY I don't write R and D often nor do I use the shortcuts except smiley face.

I was typing & though. Is that something? (On the other hand, my typing sucks right now and auto correct is changing my typed meaning more than average lately.)

Weird, it continues, I wonder how it is coded.
& D
& "D"
"&"

[Opti]

Aug 31, 2024 10:09:25 GMT -5 jerseygirl said:

Put emphasis on growing the economy instead of hindering the economy
Examples are many - Apple, Microsoft , Tesla etc are bringing in huge amounts of tax revenues while bringing high paying jobs to many who also pay more taxes than those in lower paying jobs
Interesting election cycle - what policies will grow or inhibit economy ? Increased tax revenues will help Medicare etc
No politicians will ‘touch’ Medicare even though everyone knows it’s in big financial trouble on a relatively few years

Are you sure about Tesla? His workers in Texas are treated pretty badly. Like Amazon packer badly with probably somewhat better pay.

Plus, Tesla has tax write-offs and enticements, I'd need to see the annual report to see if they paid any tax revenues net or whether it was even close to what a usual company pays. The details, the specific year matters. Do you have stock in any of the above and do you read the financial parts of the annual report? I was surprised what I saw one year in a big Pharma annual report. Assuming means you are often wrong. And to a degree you might not expect. The bigger the company, the better the tax lawyers and the more able they are to manage losses and gains to their advantage taxwise.

The US survived Covid economically better than most. I am more concerned about the country surviving and looking like what it was founded to be. 

[pulmonarymd]

Aug 31, 2024 10:09:25 GMT -5 jerseygirl said:

Put emphasis on growing the economy instead of hindering the economy
Examples are many - Apple, Microsoft , Tesla etc are bringing in huge amounts of tax revenues while bringing high paying jobs to many who also pay more taxes than those in lower paying jobs
Interesting election cycle - what policies will grow or inhibit economy ? Increased tax revenues will help Medicare etc
No politicians will ‘touch’ Medicare even though everyone knows it’s in big financial trouble on a relatively few years

Then we should elect democrats. The economy has had better growth rates under democrats than republicans. But why should facts matter. Clinton stated in his speech at the DNC that 51 million jobs were created in the last 50 years. 50 million were under democrats. Seems like they are the ones growing the economy

You benefit from Medicare. What are you willing to sacrifice to put it on better footing? If the answer is nothing, you are part of the problem. Closing the deficit will require everyone loses something. But that doesn’t get you elected.

[Opti]

Aug 31, 2024 9:39:26 GMT -5 jerseygirl said:

Trump tax actually increased revenues going to the government.
Like a lot of people in states with high property taxes, we and YDS paid more taxes
I’m really thinking increasing taxes on companies reduce their competitiveness . I’ve seen it directly with companies in low tax country buying a profitable US company that had to pay a higher tax rate. Also the tax cuts allowed companies to bring back profits to the US with associated tax that increased government revenues

At a proposed tax rate of 25 - 28% US corps will become less competitive . Increasing taxes on capital gains if moving towards regulate income rates backfires. Fewer people sell stocks cause it would cost more in taxes or move their capital. Without a good economy the US has more difficulty to pay for government projects or helping lower income people

Below is article re tax cuts bringing in more revenues
www.heritage.org/taxes/commentary/the-numbers-are-trumps-tax-cuts-paid

Track record on tariffs helping the economy or prosperity isn’t good. Increasing price controls also has poor record on economy
Any tax cuts on individuals will go to many higher income people since the great majority of federal taxes are paid by high income people. Top 1% pay about 46% of federal taxes

www.ntu.org/foundation/tax-page/who-pays-income-taxes

Although a tax cut could be finely tuned to more middle class but will economy benefit much? ?
Making taxes higher on already highly taxed upper income people or corporations can backfire. NY and CA are losing high income people and corporations to lower tax states

Heritage.org is not all that reliable in evaluating Trump policies. 

www.americanprogress.org/article/the-trump-tax-cuts-led-to-record-low-not-high-revenues-outside-of-a-recession/

There's a figure in the article shows that revenues actually dropped during most of Trump's term. Only because of inflation caused by Covid did revenues go up. Its a spike during the Covid times, 2020 to 2022, with a plunge down when we got into the more normal post Covid time, roughly second half of 2023 and forward.

[Opti]

Jerseygirl, the Heritage Foundation is heritage.org. They are so biased for Trump's campaign as they are the ones who wrote the Project 2025 doc. Per my reading, they have people placed in positions in Trump's campaign and I think according to one article in his transition team as well. What you posted from them is not an honest look at Trump's tax cuts, but a PR piece designed to not let you know the truth.

[Opti]

Aug 24, 2024 18:15:59 GMT -5 NoNamePerson said:

Aug 24, 2024 17:01:51 GMT -5 TheOtherMe said:

One of the considerations for my friend's wife when she was dying of cancer was a $30,000 per month cost of chemotherapy that she was told gave her a 50% chance of survival.  It wasn't covered by insurance because it was experimental.  Her oncologist was trying to get her into a study.

She did two doses of the chemo.  She had one decent week after the chemo, then got sick enough to spend two weeks in the hospital and recover a bit at home before the next dose.

After two doses, she said she had no quality of life and chose to stop it in part because of the cost.  

My mother was tentatively diagnosed with PSP and she would have been alive but not living. Big difference. Hard decision of DNR, feeding tube and oxygen. Meds were not a factor since no known cause or cure. 

Sorry. Its cases like this that make me believe some form of assisted dying would be the compassionate way to go. 

[obelisk]

Quality of life is more important to me than cost of living

[scgal]

Aug 31, 2024 9:56:16 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

So we are condemned to deficit spending forever since we can’t raise taxes. Medicare, Medicaid, SS, defense, and interest on the debt are at least 60% of government spending. You co hi of cut everything else and not balance the budget. Do what is the solution?

The US don't have a tax problem we have a spending problem. When the govt can spend hundreds of millions of dollars without asking if they can do it there is a problem. This goes on for both parties. Our country spends like a drunken sailor. You cannot tax your way out of the hole if the spending doesn't stop

[pulmonarymd]

Sept 9, 2024 9:33:16 GMT -5 scgal said:

Aug 31, 2024 9:56:16 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

So we are condemned to deficit spending forever since we can’t raise taxes. Medicare, Medicaid, SS, defense, and interest on the debt are at least 60% of government spending. You co hi of cut everything else and not balance the budget. Do what is the solution?

The US don't have a tax problem we have a spending problem. When the govt can spend hundreds of millions of dollars without asking if they can do it there is a problem. This goes on for both parties. Our country spends like a drunken sailor. You cannot tax your way out of the hole if the spending doesn't stop

I am sure you think cutting taxes is the answer though. It will magically fix the deficit. 

We need to control spending and increase taxes to close the deficit. Any other answer is just plain fantasy. But i bet you believe that fantasy.

[tallguy]

Sept 9, 2024 9:33:16 GMT -5 scgal said:

Aug 31, 2024 9:56:16 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

So we are condemned to deficit spending forever since we can’t raise taxes. Medicare, Medicaid, SS, defense, and interest on the debt are at least 60% of government spending. You co hi of cut everything else and not balance the budget. Do what is the solution?

The US don't have a tax problem we have a spending problem. When the govt can spend hundreds of millions of dollars without asking if they can do it there is a problem. This goes on for both parties. Our country spends like a drunken sailor. You cannot tax your way out of the hole if the spending doesn't stop

Yes it does.  We have the "tax-and-spend" Democrats and the "borrow-and-spend" Republicans.  The operative part is, of course, "and-spend."  There are two main differences though.  First, Democrats are more honest about it because they at least attempt to pay for part of their spending through tax increases.  Republicans refuse, and will continually increase deficits and the debt to pay for theirs.  Myself being an actual fiscal conservative instead of the hypocritical politicians claiming to be such, I have long been convinced that the debt will be what ultimately destroys this country, and Republicans are lining up to do it.  Second, most Democratic spending is intended to help people who actually need help.  Most Republican spending is meant to help people who don't.  If societal stability is at all a goal, I know which one promotes that.  

[scgal]

Sept 9, 2024 12:39:55 GMT -5 tallguy said:

Sept 9, 2024 9:33:16 GMT -5 scgal said:

The US don't have a tax problem we have a spending problem. When the govt can spend hundreds of millions of dollars without asking if they can do it there is a problem. This goes on for both parties. Our country spends like a drunken sailor. You cannot tax your way out of the hole if the spending doesn't stop

Yes it does.  We have the "tax-and-spend" Democrats and the "borrow-and-spend" Republicans.  The operative part is, of course, "and-spend."  There are two main differences though.  First, Democrats are more honest about it because they at least attempt to pay for part of their spending through tax increases.  Republicans refuse, and will continually increase deficits and the debt to pay for theirs.  Myself being an actual fiscal conservative instead of the hypocritical politicians claiming to be such, I have long been convinced that the debt will be what ultimately destroys this country, and Republicans are lining up to do it.  Second, most Democratic spending is intended to help people who actually need help.  Most Republican spending is meant to help people who don't.  If societal stability is at all a goal, I know which one promotes that.  

There is no difference the outcome is the same. This is the only time I will say the republicans are just as at fault at the Democrats You can say all you want about how this spending is better than that spending fine whatever I also feel that if you are going to tax people to death then their quality of life goes down. You know working to death to pay for someone or something else that would not affect them. The societal kum by ya stuff is all good and crap but in the end the person working who is trying to put the food on the table for their family is the one who is getting taxed to death. Don't start with the corporate tax I just lost a long standing job due to corporate tax in America.