Kamala Harris

Biden-Harris administration created inflation. Now Harris wants to fix with price controls

Nobody likes a price-gouger. The challenge is to correctly identify one.   

When a hurricane or tornado sweeps through an area, and the current inventory of building supplies suddenly becomes 50% higher—it’s price gouging. Americans pride themselves on being self-sufficient and prepared for whatever may come their way. But nobody stocks lumber, siding, windows, and shingles in their garage just in case they must deal with a natural disaster. Building suppliers are well aware of this and may take advantage of the emergency. It’s the reason why many states have some type of consumer protection laws.   

In 2018, the average resale price of a concert ticket for the Taylor Swift Reputation Stadium Tour was $157. The average resale ticket price of her current Eras Tour is $3,801. That’s more than a 2,000% increase. It’s not price gouging, though, because it’s not an emergency to see Swift perform live on stage. Rather, it’s classic supply and demand. Swift has reached superstar status. She has many devoted fans and relatively few concert venues.  

Let’s talk groceries. They’ve gone up 20% under the Biden-Harris administration. If Vice President Kamala Harris wins the 2024 presidential election, she plans to fix that with a federal ban on price gouging on groceries.  

Grocery stores have an average net profit of a thin 1.6%. Prices are high right now because of inflation. Inflation is high because of the current administration’s policies of unnecessarily flooding an already recovering economy with trillions of new dollars. People temporarily had more money and greater purchasing power. More goods flew off the shelves. Fewer goods remained. Prices rose for those fewer goods.  

It’s classic supply and demand. Caused by inflation. Caused by the Biden-Harris administration.  

Harris’ planned meddling with grocery store prices may force grocers to take a loss on some items and could cause stores to fail.  

The top four grocery providers in this country make up 50% of all grocery sales. They are Walmart, Inc., The Kroger Company, Costco Wholesale Corporation, and Albertsons. If Harris’ planned price controls go into effect, the next thing that may happen is that “too big to fail” grocery chains could receive government bailout money. It’s not that big of a reach and wouldn’t be the first time that the government bailed out a struggling industry.  

The grocery store business is a $1 trillion industry. Trillion—no small number—seems to be the favorite giveaway of this administration. The American Rescue Plan cost $1.9 trillion. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act cost $1.2 trillion. It’s estimated that the Inflation Reduction Act will cost about $1 trillion.   

The Biden-Harris team flooded the economy with trillions of (taxpayer) dollars which created inflation. Inflation created higher grocery prices paid by consumers (taxpayers). Harris’ plan to implement price controls may create store closures and maybe even a government (taxpayer) bailout of too big to fail grocery chains.   

Fiscally concerned taxpayers want off this merry-go-round, and they keep good company.  

Milton Friedman, a former Nobel Prize winner for excellence in economics and author of, “Capitalism and Freedom,” stated, “Price controls, whether legal or voluntary, if effectively enforced would eventually lead to the destruction of the free enterprise system and its replacement by a centrally controlled system. And it would not even be effective in preventing inflation. History offers ample evidence that what determines the average level of prices and wages is the amount of money in the economy and not the greediness of businessmen or of workers.” 

Jason Furman, a top economist in the Obama administration, concurs, “This is not sensible policy, and I think the biggest hope is that it ends up being a lot of rhetoric and no reality. There is no upside here, and there is some downside,” 

And Michael Strain, director of economic policy studies at The American Enterprise Institute, adds that the state laws are typically triggered by specific emergencies and limited to certain goods for a limited amount of time. “That’s just very different than empowering Linda Kahn and the Federal Trade Commission to determine prices in a much less targeted, time-limited, or restrictive manner.” 

Our parents taught us that two wrongs don’t make a right. The Biden-Harris administration caused inflation. Price controls will not fix it.   

Sometimes high prices are caused by price gouging during times of natural disasters or other emergencies. We have state laws for that.  

Other times, high prices are caused by inflation—the product of poor policy making.  

We have elections for that.  

Harris wants to be the first female president of the United States while also gutting benefits and protections for female athletes

“Masculine” is the new favorite word of mainstream media to describe Gov. Tim Walz, vice president candidate, and Doug Emhoff, spouse of current vice president and now presidential candidate, Kamala Harris. MSNBC, CNN, Time Magazine, People, and NPR have all babbled about it. Headlines from the Washington Post and The New York Times include, “Doug Emhoff, Modern-Day Sex Symbol,” and “Tim Walz’s Superpower.”

Meanwhile, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson cannot give a definition for “woman.” On this, liberal media outlets give a pass.

It’s a bit of a disconnect.

But now that these media establishments opened the door on what it means to be a man, we can finally talk about what it means to be a woman.  

History was made when Harris ascended to the office of Vice President of the United States. It was the first time a woman secured that position. Now she’s running for president. If she wins, she will again make history as the first woman to do so.

Make no mistake, mainstream media will go on and on about it. Not because of her human being qualities, but because she’s a woman. It tells us that, in the political world, a person’s sex is important.   

If obsessing and focusing on the sex of those running for the highest office in the land is appropriate, it seems sensible to think about it in other arenas.

Like sports. Just like in the political world, a person’s sex is an important piece of the conversation in the sports world. It means something.     

But the Biden-Harris administration wants it to mean less. It is actively trying to change Title IX protections for girls and women—legislation that created equal high school and college sports participation opportunities for the female sex.

The original text of “Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972” states, “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance…”

Clear and straight-forward language.

The Biden-Harris administration wants to muddy that language and redefine sex by adding the words, “gender identity.” New text reads, “A recipient institution that receives Department funds must operate its education program or activity in a nondiscriminatory manner free of discrimination based on sex, including sexual orientation and gender identity.” In other words, a man who identifies as a woman would be able to compete with women in college and high school sports, share locker rooms and showers with women, have access to female bathrooms, and strip women of scholarship opportunities.

Men are physically stronger and faster than women. This is not a statement of weakness. It’s truth-telling. It’s Biology 101. When men who identify as women compete with women in sports, women will lose. The 1972 law prevented this from happening. Because of the current administration’s meddling with Title IX, women will be denied benefits and protections that this law once provided.

It’s unfair and unjust.

The Pew Research Center conducted a survey in 2022 on the 50th anniversary of Title IX. Unsurprisingly, a majority stated that competing in sports had a positive impact on their health, confidence, and self-esteem. The next generation of female athletes deserve to discover the good things that come from fairly competing in sports, too. It might even help develop leadership skills that will take them all the way to the White House.

Certainly, all people can benefit from competing in sports—including transgender people—but it cannot come at the expense of female athletes. Perhaps a third division is needed where men who identify as women can compete with other men who identify as women. 

In high school and college athletics, too many women are losing to men identifying as women. It sure seems like a no-brainer to address and remedy this situation.

People make mistakes. Wise people learn from them. If wisdom is a necessary trait for the presidency, Harris must show she has it by reversing her call to redefine sex to include gender identity in Title IX.

Harris wants to be known as the first female president of the United States while also gutting Title IX benefits and protections for female athletes.

There’s no way to connect the dots on that one.