Category: Economics

Timeless Wisdom

Bad News, Deep Thoughts, Economics, History, Modernism

On this website, I have said time and time again that the reason I look so closely at British politics and society is that what happens Over There inevitably follows Over Here.

So I beseech you with all my heart to watch the discussion entitled The Fall Of England, between historian professor David Starkey and comedians (!) Konstantin Kisin  and Francis Foster. 

It is a very long discussion — over an hour and a half — because to be quite frank, it’s a topic that absolutely cannot be encapsulated in bullet points and bumper stickers.

And you should then understand the absolute magnitude of the task that faces us MAGA folks, because in some regards we are worse off than the Brits.  The only thing in our favor right now is the fact that we may have elected our equivalent of Argentina’s Milei — I hope — whereas Britain (England) has no such figure either present or on the horizon.  The Margaret Thatchers of England don’t come along that often to save the day, and to be honest, we don’t get them that often either.

Listen, and learn.

Comment Of The Day

Economics, Taxes and Theft

From Longtime Reader GT3Ted:

“The Lottery is a Tax on the people were not paying attention in math class.”

Absolutely, except for one small quibble.

It’s only a tax when you are compelled by government to pay it, at gunpoint.  Last time I looked, buying a lottery ticket was voluntary.

It’s also therapeutic.  In my case, it prevents me from using my AK-47 outside the shooting range every day (if you get my drift).

Cheap at the price.

Not Just China

Bad News, Economics

Via Insty, this little snippet:

The danger for China is deflation could snowball by encouraging households reeling from falling paychecks to cut back on spending, or delay purchases because they expect prices to fall further. Corporate revenues will suffer, stifling investment and leading to further salary cuts and layoffs, bankrupting families and firms.

China?  How about right here in the U.S.?

The Fed’s beige book, a survey of economic conditions in the US compiled by the regional Fed banks, suggested that the US economy was slowing. Five out of the 12 Fed districts reported flat or declining economic activity, three more than in May’s survey.

And just for (bitter) laughs:

“Inflation has also fallen faster than expected, hitting 3 per cent in June.”

Tell that to my grocery, fuel and utility bills.

More News From Little Big Horn

Business, Economics

Nice of you guys to finally realize this:

Breitbart Business Digest: The Wheels Are Coming Off the U.S. Economy

The Manufacturing Sector Sees Slower Demand, Falling Production, Declining Employment

…now apply that metric to just about every other sector of the U.S. economy (i.e. retail and wholesale) for the complete picture.

There are a few relatively simple solutions to this, but here’s a clue:  they’re unlikely to be implemented in the numbers or at the scale required for them to work — and that’s under a Republican administration.  Under a Harris/Walz regime, not only will the solutions not be enacted, but the precise opposite will take place:  more government spending, more choking of key industries, more and higher taxes, and so on.

In the meantime:  buy ammo, not shares.

And send it to Gen. George Custer;  it sounds like he may need some more.

What He Said, And More Besides

Bureaucracy, Economics, Management, Marxists

Actor James Woods is a well-known conservative, despite his profession and location, and in this case he’s right on the money, as usual:

Specifically, here, is the fact that Democrats make it almost impossible for small companies to survive, weighing them down with not only horribly-burdensome but hostile regulations (as above) like minimum wage dictates.

Then, when the inevitable happens and the small companies go out of business or sell out to larger ones, the socialists like Warren moan about the concentration of trade and the need for “more competition”.  (“Price gouging” as referenced by Warren here is meaningless and a red herring.)

May we remind ourselves of food rationing, endless lines formed to get what little food there was, and fixed pricing which led to the ford shortages in the first place?  Where was this so prevalent… wait, it’s all coming back to me…

Ah yes, in the Soviet Union, where the State owned all means of production and likewise the entire food chain.

And Warren, lest we forget, is an outright Stalinist whose remedy for the current situation here would involve State control of pricing (and of course of production and the entire food chain), just to make the market more “efficient”.

Do people like this ever experience cognitive dissonance between what they think and say, while constantly seeing evidence that completely repudiates their worldview?

Clearly not, and Woods has the absolute truth of it.

Ripoff?

Business, Economics, Retailing

Let’s say you went into a little seaside diner feeling peckish, and saw that they had a menu item that read:  “2 slices of buttered toast”.

Sounds okay, yes?  (I’m going with “normal-person peckish” and not “American peckish” which would apparently require the entire loaf to satisfy that hunger pang.)

Then you see the price:  $5.00 for the two slices of buttered toast.

Ripoff?  Let’s analyze the thing.

I’m going to give the diner the benefit of the doubt here, and allow their claim that this isn’t Wonderbread and store-label butter, but a “premium” offering.  I’m also, for the purpose of the analysis, going to allow that they purchased the ingredients thereof at retail prices (they didn’t).

Our diner, by the way, would be located in the equivalent of coastal Florida, up in the Redneck Riviera.

So using my local gourmet store (Central Market) as a price guide, let’s look at the thing:

Let’s see what the unit cost is.  Assuming you’re doing thick-ish (e.g. “not-quite-Texan”) slice size, you’re going to get about 16 slices out of that loaf, assuming that we discard the ends, of course.  So: $5 / 16 = 31.25 cents ($0.3125) per slice; or 62.5 cents in total for the two.

Now the butter:  even assuming you slather the butter on like I typically do, you’re still going to use about 1/32oz per slice, ergo ending up with (8x 32 = 256;  398 / 256 = about 1.5 cents per slice or 3 cents for the menu item.

Total “cost”:  (31.25 + 1.5) x 2 = 65.5 cents ($0.655) for the two slices of buttered toast.

Now for the tricky bit.

Restaurants, from back when I still managed one, typically have had to mark up “cost” by 600% just to break even.  (Don’t even get me started on whether that’s the case in NYfC or Califuckingfornia:  it isn’t.)  This takes into account fixed overhead like salaries, supplies & equipment, utilities, real estate and so on (i.e. what it costs your diner each day before you get a single customer in the door).

So the extended cost of that 2-slice item works out to (errr carry the six) $3.93, before adding a single penny for gross profit. (And just so we’re clear:  $5 from $3.93 represents about 27% gross profit — I know, don’t make me laugh.)

Is $5, therefore, a total ripoff?

Not from where I stand, and this kind of analysis explains why you have to take your bank manager along to 5 Guys every time you visit them to get you and your wife a burger.

Here’s the article that prompted this post.

And Fuck Joe Biden, because about three years ago that $5 loaf of bread at Central Market used to cost $2.85, and the $4 butter about $2.75 (because I keep track of this kind of thing, even though the Gummint would prefer that I forget that the chocolate ration used to be 5 grams and not three).

[/Orwell]