It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
As soon as you make that statement, you've entered a political debate. If it "could also drive inflation," I don't care because I think feeding hungry people who don't have enough to eat is more important that whether I pay a little more for something I--and I know you too because you're on this board--can afford. But the optimal word in your statement is "could." It could drive inflation, but there are a thousand other things that "could" drive inflation, such as the fact we have very low unemployment and labor finally has leverage to negotiate wages, such as the fact that corporations see this period as an opportunity to gouge customers and jack up prices while blaming the government for the problem, such as the fact that there are still all sorts of Covid supply chain logjams and a proxy war with Russia in Ukraine that is causing fuel prices to rise. Not to mention the fact that the Fed and Treasury bailed out the stock and bond markets in 2020 with massive stimulus to help rich folks recover from their losses, but also increased the money supply significantly. Not to mention the $953 billion Paycheck Protection Program passed in 2020 by the previous administration to bail businesses out. It's a complex topic and blaming the weakest and poorest members of society for needing food stamps as the primary driver of inflation is absolutely a political statement.without getting into a political debate...would you agree that policy could also drive inflation regardless of interest rates...i.e, increasing SNAP food program by 25% last October
© 2015 Mutual Fund Observer. All rights reserved.
© 2015 Mutual Fund Observer. All rights reserved. Powered by Vanilla