Everyone, stop staying “duh” to research outcomes. Research takes time to design, fund, run and analyze and it’s purpose is to scientifically prove something we all “felt” a while ago.
Our feelings don’t mean too much because they are often wrong, data backed fact means something. Start being happy about these validation posts and hold off on the pickachu face memes.
While the defence for science is nice (wasn’t attacked here), outrage is allowed on public discourse. I think most people are outraged for the lack of inaction of regulatory bodies at the sight of extreme price fixing when everyone and their mother had at least the gut feeling that it is all bullshit.
We share that frustration, but anger/frustration at a post like this hurts that cause. It’s a moment for amplification that the CEOs need to be held to account and not for anger at a new tool that can help make it more likely that good people act - and good people do act - they just aren’t as loud. Ultimately we don’t focus on them because anger is what catches and hold our attention.
I don’t know. I am conflicted.
Too many times studies arrive (years) late, because they take time, and never make an impact outside of the academic world… Similarly, global warming studies are depressing in that they are exceptionally pedantic (and good) science that leads to nowhere, because in the end that’s not what the institutions care about. We’re missing grass-roots movements that would be springed-forward by social media. The outrage just needs chanelling into action. People are annoyed by studies.
Having the same team that did the study actually put forth a petition for regulation (while putting a bit less time into being pedantic and less focus on having 1300 corporations) would probably be a better use of everyone’s time. But I assume they don’t stand by their findings that strongly, and assume it’s not their fight (even though they are academically spear-heading it). Quick google found nothing.
In a perfect world, studies into peoples’ gut feelings (presumably also shared by anti-monopoly regulation institutions’ leaders) would be launched immediately, take months and be more focused (instead of looking at a 1300 corporations), have results and court callings for comment and explanation would be sent out. But we’re far from that. There is no [actually working] “criminal justice system” for the “free” market so far…
Studies such as the one in the thread are nice archival information though. Definitely maybe a step forward (if not forgotten quickly).
data backed fact means something
What does it really mean here? You really think anyone will actually take action based on this data? You think it will convince anyone that didn’t already know it was the case? You think companies are magically going to stop overcharging us?
No, companies will keep lying, politicians will keep lying, and consumers will keep getting screwed.
And the “science” don’t need to take long. When companies claim they are raising prices due to increased costs while simultaneously recording record profits, it is obvious what’s going on. Yeah, economists will make excuses, but that is only because they work for the wealthy.
Anti-trust suits, windfall profits taxes, and perhaps some good ol’ French Revolution justice.
I mean, I literally have the data. It’s not like my business doesn’t keep records. Anyone could have just asked me.
It doesn’t take research to understand that overwhelming demand + lots of cash-on-hand yields inflation.
Literally everyone expected inflation after COVID.
“Greedflation” is just a manipulative way to describe the mechanism of inflation itself, which is price rising to the natural limit the market will bear.
This is all extremely well-understood.
Meanwhile companies are posting record profits from from raising prices above the cost inflation… Greedflation
What’s really manipulative is describing any of this as “natural”. People also expected complete stock market collapse during the pandemic but when it comes to rich people’s money, various parts of the government spring into action, and that was completely averted. Turns out what “the market will bear” is pretty damn high when industries are dominated by 2-3 large companies at most, the government fully supports them, many of the goods (e.g. food) are essential, and consumer spending is helped along with credit.
There are many things that can be done to resolve this, like the government breaking up these conglomerates. It’s down to greed, pure and simple. In fact, you basically admit this when you say it’s the price rising to the limit that the market will bear, but you sprinkle in “natural” and “the market” to abstract away the fact that these massive corporations are putting the squeeze on people.
