The shelves are getting empty

[Robovski]

I wonder if lumber is finally going to come down in 2022...

Some of that will be down to what we negotiate with Canada.

 

[LordSunhawk]

One thing that is nearly impossible to get are clear plastic cups and lids here in AZ. A friend of mine runs a nutrition club where they sell teas and shakes and it's gotten to a crisis level for cups and lids.

 

[Bacle]

One thing that is nearly impossible to get are clear plastic cups and lids here in AZ. A friend of mine runs a nutrition club where they sell teas and shakes and it's gotten to a crisis level for cups and lids.

What's the general supply situation in AZ at the moment?

Are there other items that have become hard to get that are normally an easy find?

 

[Simonbob]

I wonder if lumber is finally going to come down in 2022...

Not likely. It's one of the industries where the Green types have worked hard to cripple it, they're not going to let go until they personally suffer, and often even then.

There's a lot of international transport in it too. Until that settles down, with everything fully reopened, it's not getting better.

I expect that even when things slowly unfuck themselves, the inflation will mean that prices won't go down.

 

[bintananth]

One thing that is nearly impossible to get are clear plastic cups and lids here in AZ. A friend of mine runs a nutrition club where they sell teas and shakes and it's gotten to a crisis level for cups and lids.

They're a dollar for a dozen where I live. Alternatively, cans of cheap Chicken Alfredo (my guilty pleasure) aren't even available at the dollar stores near me.

 

[History Learner]

The other day on Breaking Points they brought up the fact a lot of companies are bragging about using inflation as as excuse to hike prices behind what inflation would call for, and achieving record profits. There's certainly more evidence for this then the "unions" claim I've seen trotted out:

Corporations are using inflation as an excuse to raise prices and make fatter profits — and it's making the problem worse

Consumer prices are going up, but corporate profits are rising even faster.

Walmart, which announced third-quarter financial results this morning, was able to post better-than-expected earnings in part by offering fewer discounts to shoppers, but a lot of large firms have spent their recent quarterly calls bragging to investors about their ability to hike prices with relative impunity.

"What we are very good at is pricing," Colgate-Palmolive CEO Noel Wallace said. "Whether it's foreign exchange inflation or raw and packing material inflation, we have found ways over time to recover that in our margin line."

"We've been very comfortable with our ability to pass on the increases that we've seen at this point," Kroger CFO Gary Millerchip said in October. "And we would expect that to continue to be the case."

Corporations have a tendency to try and boost profit margins during periods of elevated inflation, The Wall Street Journal reported, and now is no different.

Roughly two-thirds of the largest publicly traded US companies have reported better profits this year than the same period in 2019, the WSJ found, citing FactSet data. Nearly 100 of those were performing at least 50% better this year than in 2019.

Former US Labor Secretary Robert Reich called this phenomenon a "symptom" of "the economic concentration of the American economy in the hands of a relative few corporate giants with the power to raise prices."

Inflation may be a problem for consumers, but the bigger issue is a lack of competition, Reich said.

"Corporations are using the excuse of inflation to raise prices and make fatter profits," he said.

American industries have gotten dramatically more concentrated in recent decades, diminishing the number of market competitors and increasing corporate price-taking power.

Corporate pre-tax profits as a share of total US output has also reached a multi-year high of 13.5% in the second quarter, which means that companies are taking an even larger slice of the economic pie. And that number is trending higher.

For example, consumer goods giants Unilever, Proctor and Gamble, and Colgate-Palmolive have remarkably similar portfolios of brands selling similar products, and each reported improved profits from higher pricing in the third quarter. Coca-Cola and PepsiCo also rolled out price increases around the same time.

This is not to say that there is illegal price-fixing going on, but having so few players in the game makes it a lot easier for companies to follow similar strategies.

Even the auto industry, which is pretty competitive compared with other consumer goods categories, is currently navigating its own version of the classic "prisoners dilemma" from economic game theory.

High demand and low supply has allowed most companies to boost profits by offering fewer discounts — a move automakers have wanted to do for decades — but the minute one company starts cutting deals to take market share, the others will soon face pressure to follow.

Input costs are indeed making it more expensive for businesses to provide goods and services, but the healthy profits that companies are taking in show that they're doing just fine as consumers increasingly see their buying power evaporate.

The remedy, Reich says, is not a higher interest rate from the Federal Reserve, which would likely slow down the economic recovery.

"This structural problem is amenable to only one thing: the aggressive use of antitrust law," he said.

 

[Simonbob]

When there's a lot of complex rules, it's much harder to start something small, and build it into real competion for big companies.

The solution is not more laws, it's just letting people start new companies that can compete.


And, yes, it's happening. Of course, when prices get to a certain point, people just stop buying. That's the point when things change, and fast.

Much like Uber and taxi's, the new innovation broke a bunch of monopolies (Inc Sydney, Australia, where I live.) and lowered prices, but only the disruption of something new could free things up, that way.


(There's times, like days ending in 'y', where I hate the Aust Gov)

 

[History Learner]

When there's a lot of complex rules, it's much harder to start something small, and build it into real competion for big companies.

The solution is not more laws, it's just letting people start new companies that can compete.

How can they compete in the existing market conditions? That's why you need laws and regulations. If the argument is that laws and regulations prevent new businesses, what's the evidence?

And, yes, it's happening. Of course, when prices get to a certain point, people just stop buying. That's the point when things change, and fast.

Much like Uber and taxi's, the new innovation broke a bunch of monopolies (Inc Sydney, Australia, where I live.) and lowered prices, but only the disruption of something new could free things up, that way.

(There's times, like days ending in 'y', where I hate the Aust Gov)

I can't speak to Australia, but in the U.S. what ended up happening with Uber/Lyft is they undercut the taxis and then immediately started raising prices.

 

[PsihoKekec]

Not likely. It's one of the industries where the Green types have worked hard to cripple it, they're not going to let go until they personally suffer, and often even then.

It's not just that, China is buying lumber all over the world, like it's going to run out, thus driving up the prices. Russia, of all places, put limitations on lumber exports, there are calls within the EU to do the same, but politicians are too beholden to Chinese money and have no problem allowing China to kill off yet another branch of industry..

 

[Bigking321]

the argument is that laws and regulations prevent new businesses, what's the evidence?

It's fairly common knowledge that the larger businesses throw their support behind many new laws and regulations because they know they can absorb the hit fairly easily but their smaller competition can't.

A example of this would be the bigger companies supporting the 15 dollar minimum wage. Wal-Mart is fine with it because they know they can outlast their competition in local areas then charge whatever they want with their technically not a monopoly.

 

[Simonbob]

How can they compete in the existing market conditions? That's why you need laws and regulations. If the argument is that laws and regulations prevent new businesses, what's the evidence?



I can't speak to Australia, but in the U.S. what ended up happening with Uber/Lyft is they undercut the taxis and then immediately started raising prices.

The price of getting an environmental impact statement can hit millions, and any attempt to set up a new factory, or, given the example of my own sister, new house, starts in the thousands. And, yes, even though it's stupid as hell, you can need one pretty much any time the Gov wants. The rules are that lax.

The Minister for the Environment for NSW can wave you through the need, if he wants. All others?

That's not counting the time it takes to get approved, let alone constructed.

Then there's town planning, that adds a quarter million and 2 years to the average cost and time for all properties in Sydney.


There is NO small company who can expand unless they happen to please the Greens who run our bureaucracies. A new cafe? Sure, they like coffee. Ugg Boots? Perhaps. If you're patient enough, and get the right guy. And, God help you if you want to make it a global supplier, because nobody else can.

Car parts, or computer parts? No. No way in hell. There's at least 50 different ways to prevent people doing anything useful like that.

This is what is described as "Over-regulated".





Oh, and as for Uber, I drove for them for a while. Fun job, at the time. It was literaly 40% cheaper than taxis in Sydney, at the start. But, the company had multiple lawsuits running at different Gov agencies, because they(said Gov agencies) wanted to do all sorts of things to "balance" things. One of the things they implemented? They added a dollar to the cost of every Km that an Uber drove a patron, and that dollar, less the Gov percentage, went to the taxi industry as "compensation".


I don't know what's happening there, now, but I'll tell you right now. The Australian Govenment is a crippling burden on the nation, and that's before they simply closed and bankrupted bunch of small companies with their COVID response.

 

[Sobek]

Mark your calendars boys, the supply chain collapses on January 22nd

 

[Arlos]

I don’t understand why? I thought the vaccine didn’t stop you from getting Covid and passing it on and merely made the disease less dangerous for the vaccinated person? What’s the point of doing this then?
I am confusedm

 

[DarthOne]

I don’t understand why? I thought the vaccine didn’t stop you from getting Covid and passing it on and merely made the disease less dangerous for the vaccinated person? What’s the point of doing this then?
I am confusedm

Control. It’s about control. That and pushing the idea of automated transport, I suspect.

 

[Zachowon]

Control. It’s about control. That and pushing the idea of automated transport, I suspect.

Automatic transport will fail so hard that even the rich will run out of goods if they try.

Also, there is no way the can enforce that, and there is no way it wont get shot down by SCOTUS

 

[Scottty]

Also, "fully vaccinated" seems to be a moving goalpost.

 

[Typhonis]

Also, "fully vaccinated" seems to be a moving goalpost.

You know I'm surprised that THAT hasn't gone to court yet? The fact they keep moving the goal posts?

 

[Sobek]

Because the courts will ask "experts" to weigh in and the "experts" are biased, if I had to guess.

 

[ATP]

Also, "fully vaccinated" seems to be a moving goalpost.

Not at all,you would be safe...after 666 shot.And it should made Earh safe from bad humans.Except those enlinghtened,who have divine rights to rule,of course.

 

[Terthna]

Automatic transport will fail so hard that even the rich will run out of goods if they try.

Also, there is no way the can enforce that, and there is no way it wont get shot down by SCOTUS

All reasonable arguments as to why they shouldn't be doing this; unfortunately, it's become rather obvious that they rejected reason a long time ago. They're going to have to learn the hard way now.