• dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    129
    ·
    9 months ago

    I didn’t need a study to tell you that. In my industry the costs of all my goods are up roughly 30% since 2020, but my margins have gotten thinner at the same time so my revenue somehow managed to magically remain exactly the same. And it’s no coincidence, I’m sure, that the manufacturers are the ones who determine the Minimum Advertising Price I’m supposed to be selling at.

    If that 30% number sounds awfully familiar, you’ll find it in the linked article. So, profits for megacorporations rose 30%, and my costs rose 30%, too. Gee, will you look at that. Those two numbers are the same. That’s a fuckin’ puzzler, isn’t it?

    So some asshole somewhere in that supply chain pyramid is making a lot of money off of this “inflation” excuse, and it sure as hell isn’t me.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      65
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      It’s because there hasn’t been any meaningful anti trust enforcement for decades. Every industry is basically an oligopoly at this stage, so they can set whatever price they want, because they know their competitors will do the same (because they face the exact same pressures from the exact same shareholders to increase profits).

      If it was a free market, you could’ve found a different supplier, but obviously there was no alternative, or you would’ve done just that.

      • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        50
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Oligopolies that run both horizontally and vertically up the supply chain.

        This is what happens after decades of mergers and acquisitions in the name of diversification, and corruption of regulators and governments — a small number of multinationals, owned by an even smaller number of oligarchs, reach a point of control where it is relatively easy to collude with the handful of others that collectively own 90% of every market and sector, and operate as a functional monopoly.

        It’s the OPEC-ification of the entire global economy. It is of no surprise that fossil fuel oligarchs applied that model to everything, nor that the governments they own continue to enable their crimes. We’re all hostages to the economic terrorists of capitalism.

        • Benjaben@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          9 months ago

          Great comment, sincerely - completely nails it. My only nitpick (and only delivered cuz you clearly care) is I don’t think it should be called terrorism.

          Terrorism, as hate-fueled and damaging as it is, at least has an ethos, an organizing principle, a (generally twisted, but coherent) morality. These monsters have nothing so human to stand behind. As you know, it’s nothing more complicated than “fuck every life on earth but mine, for no reason more compelling than that I want even more stuff”. Terrorists actually compare favorably against that.

      • orrk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        free markets build monopolies, the only reason we are only at oligopoly is that we still have some regulation on the market (that inherently makes it not free btw)

    • xpinchx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      Ayyyy I got most of my price lists in for next year and it’s like 5% across the board which is pretty typical. Some raw materials have come back down and ocean freight is reasonable again.

      I got one of the last pricelists in today and it’s like 30% increase over this year 😂 I’m gonna put in one more PO at '23 prices then I’m dropping their shit.

  • notannpc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Literally anyone with a functioning brain already knew this. And yet, there will be no penalty for this bullshit.

    • spaduf@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Eh with how this conversation has been evolving lately I’d say this is the worst time to be pessimistic. Is a good time to be loud and angry about it tho

  • DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    9 months ago

    Oh no, this is such a shock. No shit they were lying about inflation. Those bastards were reporting record highs while the average Joe was struggling to pay rent.

  • ForestOrca@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    The beginnings of a list:
    “The biggest perpetrators were energy companies like Shell, Exxon Mobil, and Chevron, which were able to enjoy massive profits last year”
    If you can find any way to go electric, use petrol less, ride a bike, walk, use a train, avoid a plane, etc, go for it. Prolly the petrol corps won’t notice your individual actions, but the carbon you’ll keep out of the atmosphere might just help to keep our planet’s ecosphere viable.

    The Study itself: INFLATION, PROFITS AND MARKET POWER TOWARDS A NEW RESEARCH AND POLICY AGENDA - https://www.ippr.org/files/2023-12/1701878131_inflation-profits-and-market-power-dec-23.pdf - Jeebus, 32 pages!

    • chitak166@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      but the carbon you’ll keep out of the atmosphere might just help to keep our planet’s ecosphere viable.

      This is only if nations stop burning oil even if it’s cheap.

      Nations aren’t going to stop burning oil until it’s too expensive.

    • mechoman444@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      9 months ago

      I drive electric and in my home state of Georgia, USA they have an ad valorem tax of 239 dollars or there abouts for people that drive Evs and plug in hybrids.

      My theory is that they’re missing out on the taxes I would normally pay if I bought gas and need to recoup their losses.

      • NABDad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        9 months ago

        My theory is that they’re missing out on the taxes I would normally pay if I bought gas and need to recoup their losses.

        I don’t think you need to refer to that as a theory. Taxes on fuel for motor vehicles go towards road maintenance. Vehicles that drive on the roads but don’t burn gas or diesel, don’t pay their share of the road maintenance costs. That’s why states want to tax EVs.

      • this@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I used to live in Texas and they did the same shit there. Tax EVs more because their owners weren’t “paying their fair share on the highway tax”

      • SoleInvictus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        9 months ago

        I’m biased because I’m a scientist, but verifying observations and assumptions through empirical methods is typically a good thing. A lot of people believe “common sense” things that are completely wrong, e.g., that lightning never strikes twice, evolution has some sort of goal in mind, to never go to bed angry, etc.

    • AlfredEinstein@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      The egg producers already have.

      The “bird flu” was nowhere significant enough to cause the price spike on its own. It was an attempt to determine “what the market will allow”. And it turns out people can do without eggs quite comfortably.

  • foggy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    9 months ago

    I want a well curated list of the worst offenders so I can figure out who to stop giving my money to.

    • Muffi@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      They will tell you it’s because of the increase in wages, and then refuse to believe the data when you show them that wages have stagnated.

  • Im14abeer@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    9 months ago

    So you’re telling me it doesn’t cost twice as much to make and ship charcoal. It doesn’t cost three times as much to grow a head of lettuce? Those sneaky snooks who make house paint have some 'splaining to do too.

  • Th4tGuyII@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    In a market that expects infinite growth in a finite reality, I can assure you that I’m not the least bit surprised that companies are using “inflation” as an excuse to gouge their customers for what increasingly little they have

  • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    The Nordics I think figured out a solution to this,

    You might be familiar with all the classic arguments decrying rent controls for causing supply shortages as people refuse to give up their RCd housing,

    Well up in northern Europe they don’t have rent control, they have rent hike control, basically you can only raise rent by a given percentage at most per year, in the US, we could tie that percentage cap to the percent change change in federal interest rates, pass some of that market rally back to the consumers since a rate drop leads to a mandatory profit margin drop to match.

      • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        That actually didn’t help much of anything

        Catharsis may feel nice but prioritizing feeling validated over addressing the problems you want to feel so valid about just leaves you feeling valid about a still festering wound.

          • DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I believe that would be called “redistributing the wealth” given how many stupidly wealthy people claim they couldn’t live on any less.

          • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            An environment that allows the indiscriminate murder of an entire class is one that is inherently too lawless to organize systemic improvements to the root causes of institutional problems.

            Like I said Catharsis feels nice but helps nothing.

    • sangriaferret@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      This exists in a few places in the US under the term “rent stabilization” but it is not tied to interest rates or inflation and exactly who qualifies gets a little murky. Considering that housing is a basic human necessity I think some form of rent stabilization should exist everywhere. Market forces have their place but they are often disadvantageous to lower incomes and should be curtailed when we’re talking something that people can’t do without.

      • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Well see that’s why I tied it to be directly related to the federal interest rate, as a balance to create class interests for both courses of action.

        Basically it’d be a way to ensure the fed doesn’t get pressured too much to pursue bad interest rate policy like never raising it over 20 years until it’s too late and everyone’s mad about it.

    • Damage@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Sorry, ReplayWeb.page won’t work in this browser as Service Workers are not supported. Please try a different browser. (Service Workers are disabled in Firefox in Private Mode. If Using Private Mode in Firefox, try regular mode)