Staff Reports
Kamala Harris’s absence from the media has been a notable phenomenon since she unceremoniously snatched the 2024 Democratic nomination from Joe Biden. With the assistance of deep-pocketed donors, Nancy Pelosi’s backing, and the unseen hands of party bosses, her rise has left many scratching their heads. The reasoning behind her media blackout is painfully obvious: the woman is a train wreck of a candidate. Any time the term “extreme leftist” is thrown at her, the only logical move is to hide away like a turtle retreating into its shell.
The Washington Post recently delivered a laugh-fest with an opinion piece highlighting Harris’s disastrous policy proposals, specifically suggesting that when called a “communist,” an insightful response might be to refrain from advocating for price controls. Harris’s announcement of a federal ban on corporate price-gouging in groceries is essentially a blueprint for catastrophe, drawing explicit parallels to the Soviet Union’s failings. Her plan is reminiscent of the very reasoning the Soviets employed, which led to shelves bare of essentials and a populace in perpetual hunger.
This Washington Post Opinion Piece Had a Hilarious Headline About Kamala Harris
https://t.co/j4R7quw9g6— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) August 16, 2024
As one sharp observer pointed out, Harris’s economic strategy could quite literally turn bread lines into a new fashion statement for urban progressives. Proposals for sweeping government enforcement of price controls could result in the kind of scarcity that only a centrally planned economy can deliver. Prices would no longer reflect the basic economic principles of supply and demand but would be dictated by Washington bureaucrats attempting to play god. Imagine the FTC dictating how much milk a Kroger in Ohio could charge—common sense would surely suggest this isn’t the path to prosperity.
The fallout from such a government overreach would be dire, inevitably leading to shortages, black markets, and hoarding. History has shown that countries attempting to stifle price growth through heavy-handed measures have not only failed dismally but frequently exacerbated the very issues they sought to fix. Planned price gouging laws in some states are rarely enforced, largely because it’s understood that free markets respond better when allowed to operate without meddling from the government.
Far worse than just enforcing price limits, Harris’s proposal potentially stifles competitive pricing. By preventing companies from offering discounts to bulk purchases, she places a straitjacket on the market that would cripple retailers. Companies would be required to publish their internal pricing strategies, creating a playground for collusion that invites further price inflation, all while the government stands ready to regulate and control. In the end, electing Harris—and her radical running mate, for that matter—could lead to an economy where the only things in abundance are regulations and empty shelves, ironically making “weird” the only normal in a dystopian landscape.
