[Winstonm]

kenberg, on 2024-August-28, 06:16, said:

This sounds as if we may be in agreement, at lest mostly. I don't even know what Lysine is, let alone knowing anything about the market, but I gather it's different from bulky rolls. You can go to a different store for bulky rolls, or if they are too high priced everywhere you can skip eating bulky rolls. That probably suffices to slow down price gouging on bulky rolls. I suppose some sort of bizarre bulky roll collusion is possible but it seems unlikley.

I do think that the problem of having few if any grocery strores in some neighborhoods does affect prices.

Limited supply does negatively effect prices, but to think there is a lot of competition is also misguided. In the US, a handful of giant conglomerates own most of the grocery stores, companies like Walmart, Kroger, Albertson, Cotsco, and a few others. It is much more likely, though certainly not guaranteed, that a few CEOs could agree to hold prices higher than if each store were individually owned and reliant on sales for the owner's own bread and butter.

[Winstonm]

johnu, on 2024-August-28, 04:05, said:

Most Americans love socialism, e.g. Social Security, Medicare, price controls on medications/drugs, Affordable Care Act, farm subsides, etc. Americans also hate price gouging, as 37 states and DC have anti price gouging laws.

I realize you are mostly kidding but I still wish to point out that socialism is based on societal control of production as well, so nothing about the USA is really socialism, not even social security.

[shyams]

kenberg, on 2024-August-28, 06:16, said:

This sounds as if we may be in agreement, at lest mostly. I don't even know what Lysine is, let alone knowing anything about the market, but I gather it's different from bulky rolls. You can go to a different store for bulky rolls, or if they are too high priced everywhere you can skip eating bulky rolls. That probably suffices to slow down price gouging on bulky rolls. I suppose some sort of bizarre bulky roll collusion is possible but it seems unlikley.

I do think that the problem of having few if any grocery strores in some neighborhoods does affect prices.

At the risk of redundancy across the past few posts (mine + that of others),

a. "Price Fixing" -- hrothgar's example. When two or more producers/sellers collude to ensure the price of a product is artificially high. The act of collusion is 100% illegal in all economies and is (like hrothgar's example showed) a crime with heavy prison sentences for the executives involved. (I hope) This is extremely rare in most developed economies.

b. "Price Control" is a Federal/State Government mandate that states (e.g.) "potatoes shall only be sold for $2.00 or lower per pound". While such actions may(?) be helpful in the short run, their adverse impact over time can be very severe.

c. "Price Gouging" is an action whereby the seller takes unfair advantage of short-term market imperfections to (figuratively) extort money from the buyers. Despite laws against gouging, it is known to happen especially in the USA in the past 3-4 years.

I would not be surprised if the Washington Post deliberately focused on retailers (in "that" Opinion column aimed at attacking Harris's initiatives). The retailers may not be the gougers instead I suspect those most benefiting from price gouging are "Big Food" (i.e. the 7-10 massive corporations that control ~80% of branded food products on retail shelves).

Your Federal/State Govts. should ensure the relevant authorities investigate it in a focused manner. Perhaps an example prosecution will tamp down on gouging to whatever extent it exists (I believe it certainly does) in the USA. It should be obvious that price gouging is much harder to prove than collusions that lead to price fixing.

[hrothgar]

shyams, on 2024-August-28, 07:53, said:

The act of collusion is 100% illegal in all economies and is (like hrothgar's example showed) a crime with heavy prison sentences for the executives involved.

Mick went away for a few years.

In an amusing development, he learned to play bridge in prison.
George asked me for recommendations for books to send him

As I recall, "Right through the Pack" was one of the ones that he ended up with...

[Winstonm]

hrothgar, on 2024-August-28, 08:36, said:

Mick went away for a few years.

In an amusing development, he learned to play bridge in prison.
George asked me for recommendations for books to send him

As I recall, "Right through the Pack" was one of the ones that he ended up with...

I think Bridge in the Menagerie may have been a better choice.

[kenberg]

shyams, on 2024-August-28, 07:53, said:

At the risk of redundancy across the past few posts (mine + that of others),

a. "Price Fixing" -- hrothgar's example. When two or more producers/sellers collude to ensure the price of a product is artificially high. The act of collusion is 100% illegal in all economies and is (like hrothgar's example showed) a crime with heavy prison sentences for the executives involved. (I hope) This is extremely rare in most developed economies.

b. "Price Control" is a Federal/State Government mandate that states (e.g.) "potatoes shall only be sold for $2.00 or lower per pound". While such actions may(?) be helpful in the short run, their adverse impact over time can be very severe.

c. "Price Gouging" is an action whereby the seller takes unfair advantage of short-term market imperfections to (figuratively) extort money from the buyers. Despite laws against gouging, it is known to happen especially in the USA in the past 3-4 years.

I would not be surprised if the Washington Post deliberately focused on retailers (in "that" Opinion column aimed at attacking Harris's initiatives). The retailers may not be the gougers instead I suspect those most benefiting from price gouging are "Big Food" (i.e. the 7-10 massive corporations that control ~80% of branded food products on retail shelves).

Your Federal/State Govts. should ensure the relevant authorities investigate it in a focused manner. Perhaps an example prosecution will tamp down on gouging to whatever extent it exists (I believe it certainly does) in the USA. It should be obvious that price gouging is much harder to prove than collusions that lead to price fixing.

I dida little online checking and found that indeed UK grocery prices are significantly lower than USA grocery prices. That could be evidence that some trickibess is going on. I am still skeptical.I suppose somene somewhere as looked int this and perhaps has thoughts on the explanation. Price gouging? Maybe. I'm cautious.

[shyams]

kenberg, on 2024-August-28, 11:53, said:

I dida little online checking and found that indeed UK grocery prices are significantly lower than USA grocery prices. That could be evidence that some trickibess is going on. I am still skeptical.I suppose somene somewhere as looked int this and perhaps has thoughts on the explanation. Price gouging? Maybe. I'm cautious.

This post makes no sense at all.

* Grocery prices are typically not comparable across nations.
* Your survey of prices in the UK should have given you no signal or indication of gouging or otherwise in the USA. Yet you seemed to have found such a signal.
* You are presuming that I compared UK and USA prices to make my assertion. To which, I say "seriously??".

[kenberg]

shyams, on 2024-August-28, 12:29, said:

This post makes no sense at all.

* Grocery prices are typically not comparable across nations.
* Your survey of prices in the UK should have given you no signal or indication of gouging or otherwise in the USA. Yet you seemed to have found such a signal.
* You are presuming that I compared UK and USA prices to make my assertion. To which, I say "seriously??".

I looked at several sites. One compared prices in Aldi's in London with prices at Aldi's in New York. The acknowledged that in some cases it was hard to compare but they would try to find comparable items and compare the prices. As near as I could tell, they had no agenda other than to do an honest comparison. Other sites were similar, with similar results.

I was in no way saying that you based your opinion on a comparison of UK and USA prices, it was all my own idea. I am skeptical of price gouging as being a major cause of high grocery prices so I thought I would see if there was a comparison with other countrues available, I expected to find that some things would be cheaper here, other things cheaper there, many things about the same price. It's true that some things were found to be cheaper here, but as a whole the prices appeared to be significantly lower in the UK.

That was surprising to me so I thought I would post it. I realize it doesn't prove anything. But it did make me say Hmm. I was surprised. That's all.

[johnu]

Winstonm, on 2024-August-28, 07:47, said:

I realize you are mostly kidding but I still wish to point out that socialism is based on societal control of production as well, so nothing about the USA is really socialism, not even social security.

Convicted Felon Trump and his cult of traitors and insurrectionists love to throw around words like socialism, Marxists, communists without having a clue what they are talking about. Sometimes they just complain about being woke, without having an idea what that means either. What they are really saying is that they don't like it, they don't understand it, and they are afraid of it.

A sad note is that most QOP think the Nazis were socialists because their official party name was National Socialist German Workers' Party. Of course, Nazis were neither socialist nor pro-worker. Because the QOP label for liberals and progressives is socialist, they equate the "Socialist" in the Nazi party name to conclude that socialists are Nazis.

[barmar]

kenberg, on 2024-August-25, 12:14, said:

I thought about it and decided to log on to X. It turns out that I do have an account. I found the post that mycroft linked to. And the umerous replies to that post. Then I tried to log out. Most apps (if apps is the right word) have an easy to find log out place to click. None that I could find on X. Hopefully I get automatically logged out after a while. I don't think I will be back.

I don't think X logs you out automatically. I practically never use it (maybe once or twice a year), but whenever I connect I'm still logged in.

But I fount the logout pretty quickly. Find your name at the bottom left of your home page. Click on "..." next to it to open a menu, and there's a "Log out @username" choice.

[kenberg]

barmar, on 2024-August-28, 17:02, said:

I don't think X logs you out automatically. I practically never use it (maybe once or twice a year), but whenever I connect I'm still logged in.

But I fount the logout pretty quickly. Find your name at the bottom left of your home page. Click on "..." next to it to open a menu, and there's a "Log out @username" choice.

Thanks, but as near as I can see it doesn't work for me. I got on my homepage and I did not see a ... exactly n the homepage but there wasa ... over on the left side. I clicked on that, various things came up, but not a logout. I did find a way to get a premium account and I also found a way to delete my account. I will search a little more fo the logout but the delete acount option looks appealing. I opened an account years ago and I have never used it for anything.


This problem is part of a larger problem Now that I see doctors more often than in the past I find I must use their patient portals. Each doc uses a different portal, each with its own issues. I cope, but it's a pain. They can of course write me off as stupid, so maybe I am, but stupidity comes in degrees I am not the only one who finds these apps frustrating, and since a good number of us who are old bu still reasonably functional, (eg I don't get lost when I go out for a walk, I can hold a conversation, I don't bump into things when driving, I can still run a double squeeze on occasion) then if we can't handle these apps then maybe, just maybe, the techies need to give some thought as to why this is. Or they can, and apparently do, write us off as stupid.

Anyway, thanks. But on my screen, the word logout, or some suitable variation, just does not appear.

[kenberg]

I have a question.

After the debate, I could see that there was smething seriously wrong with Joe Biden. The question: Can anyone watch or listen to Trump without concluding there is something seriously wrong with him? I thought Trump was bad from the get-go, but I am asking about people who voted for Trump in the past. I know a few and while I have not done a survey I am getting the idea that many of them, while not jumping over to Harris, are findng that Trump has somehow somewhere crossed over into someting that they cannot support.

Any thoughts?

[Winstonm]

kenberg, on 2024-August-29, 08:17, said:

I have a question.

After the debate, I could see that there was smething seriously wrong with Joe Biden. The question: Can anyone watch or listen to Trump without concluding there is something seriously wrong with him? I thought Trump was bad from the get-go, but I am asking about people who voted for Trump in the past. I know a few and while I have not done a survey I am getting the idea that many of them, while not jumping over to Harris, are findng that Trump has somehow somewhere crossed over into someting that they cannot support.

Any thoughts?

I read about a lady who voted Trump twice who now is doubting him. I don't think this kind of person will vote Harris but they may decide not to vote at all. That would be a win for Harris.

[akwoo]

Most Americans think Communism means race-mixing.

[kenberg]

Winstonm, on 2024-August-29, 14:35, said:

I read about a lady who voted Trump twice who now is doubting him. I don't think this kind of person will vote Harris but they may decide not to vote at all. That would be a win for Harris.

Yes, I am seeing some of that. I am not sure how many. There are just so many things, one right after another. PBS had a short inteview with a military man of some substantial rank, I think someone who could have voted for DT. He described what happened at Arlington National Cemetery as unacceptable. And it is not like there really is any doubt about what happened. The US Army put out a note about it.

"Participants in the August 26th ceremony and the subsequent Section 60 visit were made aware of federal laws, Army regulations and DoD policies, which clearly prohibit political activities on cemetery grounds," the statement said. "An ANC employee who attempted to ensure adherence to these rules was abruptly pushed aside. Consistent with the decorum expected at ANC, this employee acted with professionalism and avoided further disruption. The incident was reported to the JBM-HH police department, but the employee subsequently decided not to press charges. Therefore, the Army considers this matter closed."

Trump's campaign people of course described the woman who was shoved aside as having mental issues. No. Trump is the one with mental issues. It's clear.

Such things with Trump have become daily, or almost hourly. Sex insults about Harris. Claims that the crowd meeting at the airport did not exist. One thing after another. He lies, he insults, he threatens. He really believes he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and suffer no consequences. And his followers have given him reason to believe this. But finally, finally, I think many are walking away. I sure hope so.


I have said it before and I will say it again. I get along fine with conservatives, we sometimes agree, sometimes not, but we are fine. Trump is not a conservative. He is, for starters, an embarrassment to the country. He needs to become history.

[johnu]

 Winstonm, on 2024-August-28, 07:45, said:

Limited supply does negatively effect prices, but to think there is a lot of competition is also misguided. In the US, a handful of giant conglomerates own most of the grocery stores, companies like Walmart, Kroger, Albertson, Cotsco, and a few others. It is much more likely, though certainly not guaranteed, that a few CEOs could agree to hold prices higher than if each store were individually owned and reliant on sales for the owner's own bread and butter.

There was this video posted yesterday,

Kroger Admits To MASSIVE Price Gouging

And there was this:

Court hearing exposes role of supermarket's price gouging in inflationary pricing

BTW, Krogers is planning to merge with Albertsons, although the FTC is challenging the merger because of monopoly considerations.

[barmar]

 kenberg, on 2024-August-29, 08:17, said:

I have a question.

After the debate, I could see that there was smething seriously wrong with Joe Biden. The question: Can anyone watch or listen to Trump without concluding there is something seriously wrong with him? I thought Trump was bad from the get-go, but I am asking about people who voted for Trump in the past. I know a few and while I have not done a survey I am getting the idea that many of them, while not jumping over to Harris, are findng that Trump has somehow somewhere crossed over into someting that they cannot support.

Any thoughts?

The difference is that Trump has been like this all along. He always rambles and goes off on weird tangents (like the Hannibal Lecter stuff). If they were willing to vote for him before, there's no reason why they shouldn't vote for him again. It's the "same old Trump".

On the other hand, Biden seemed like he's losing something. You can see why Biden supporters may feel iffy about voting for him now.

[shyams]

 barmar, on 2024-August-30, 15:36, said:

The difference is that Trump has been like this all along. He always rambles and goes off on weird tangents (like the Hannibal Lecter stuff). If they were willing to vote for him before, there's no reason why they shouldn't vote for him again. It's the "same old Trump".

On the other hand, Biden seemed like he's losing something. You can see why Biden supporters may feel iffy about voting for him now.

The last line should have read ... "You can see why a % of the Independents Biden supporters may feel iffy about voting for him now."

A fair number of you posting here would vote for a ham sandwich if it was the Dem nominee. Not just President, mind you. I'd say it applies to Senators, Congresspersons, State-level Legislators, County elected officials etc, etc.....

[pilowsky]

shyams, on 2024-August-30, 20:19, said:

The last line should have read ... "You can see why a % of the Independents Biden supporters may feel iffy about voting for him now."

A fair number of you posting here would vote for a ham sandwich if it was the Dem nominee. Not just President, mind you. I'd say it applies to Senators, Congresspersons, State-level Legislators, County elected officials etc, etc.....

Well it's not kosher, but any kind of sandwich would be more beneficial than 4 more years of Trump and his clown car of cronies.

[kenberg]

shyams, on 2024-August-30, 20:19, said:

The last line should have read ... "You can see why a % of the Independents Biden supporters may feel iffy about voting for him now."

For me, and I think for many, this election is different from others. Let me look back on three elections. 1960 I chose Kennebt over Nixon, 1968 I chose Humphrey over Nixon, 1972 I chose McGovern over Nixon. None of my choices qualify as ham sandwiches. I happily voted for Kenneby. Less happily, but ok, for Humphrey, I thought his independence had been smothered by being Johnson's Veep, and McGovern was more to the left than I was, but I voted for them. As to Nixon, I think Watergate had to be dealt with, his resignation was right, and maybe Ford's pardon was right. I wished Watergate had not happened, I wished Nixon could have served out his term. I didn't vote for him, but absent Watergate I was fine with him serving out his term,

Trump is a stand alone. Nothing like him in the past. It's not Stormy Daniels, Kennedy bedded probably fifty times the number of women I dated. Probably an underestimate. It's something else. Trump likes to speak of his instincts and his gut reaction. Actually, I think a bit that way myself. From the first I saw of Trump my gut told me this was someone I would not trust on anything ever. Man, my gut has never been so right. Not that politicians don't lie.Johnson ran on the pledge that he would not send American boys to do the job Asian boys should do and then, after the election, was pretty accurately described as setting his Vietnam policy by reading old Goldwater speeches. Except Goldwater would probably have made a better job of it. So politicians are less than straightforward, but Trump is in a class by himself. Everyone must kiss his butt. Republican office holders are still scared sh**less about acknowledging Biden won the 2020 election. I seriously doubt that many think Biden stole the election but Trump said that he did so they say that he did. And, of course, the woman who tried to enforce the rules against using Arlington as a political photo op had mental issues. And many many things in between. I believe that Johnson thought it was necessary to send troops to Vietnam. I will give him that much even though he lied about his intentions during his campaign. But Trump? He is a cult leader that demands absolute obedience to his will. Trump's focus is Trump.

How enthusiastic am I about Harris? Maybe roughly the way I was when I voted for Humphrey, another Veep. Back in the daysm before the Republican Party lost its soul, I think they could have come up with a candidate I might prefer over Harris. But Trump? You gotta be kiddin.