Tom Woods Profile picture
Feb 8 11 tweets 2 min read Read on X
🧵Elizabeth Warren, like virtually all gov't officials, wants you to think the pain you're feeling at the store is caused by greedy businesses taking advantage of you, and has nothing to do with the Fed.

Unfortunately, her opponents are doing a lousy job answering her
Her latest complaint is over "shrinkflation," whereby instead of raising prices, companies decrease the amount of product in the package (as when, for instance, a piece of chocolate becomes smaller)
Either via shrinkflation or via rising prices, businesses according to Warren are taking advantage of consumers.

This is juvenile.
Any business wants to set its price at the profit-maximizing level. A higher price is not necessarily the profit-maximizing price.
McDonald's, for instance, does not want to be charging $18 for a meal in some markets. This drives its natural constituency away, as survey data is revealing in abundance.
Some sectors of the economy can see their prices rise because of changes in taste, or sudden disruptions (caused by war, natural disaster, etc.), or other such factors.
But the only explanation (barring a sudden fall in money demand, which would itself require an explanation) for rising prices across the board is an increase in the amount of money in the system.
And this is why some of the MAGA people are also getting it wrong. Rising energy prices cannot cause price inflation across the board. Rising energy prices leave less money to spend on other things, so prices are a wash.

Only more money overall can raise prices everywhere.
The regime would like you to think that you are suffering because of every reason in the world EXCEPT the central bank it created and endowed with a monopoly.

It's evil companies, it's "greed," it's "cost-push," whatever. It's all bullshit.
Now when you take an anti-Fed position, you can expect to be told: the Fed's wise management of the economy has given us more stability, as well as fewer and shallower recessions. What, do you want to go back to the wildcat 19th century?
You should be prepared for arguments like that. Hence my free eBook Our Enemy, the Fed:

OurEnemyTheFed.com
Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Tom Woods

Tom Woods Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ThomasEWoods

Jan 28
🧵I just watched an 18-minute video by a lawyer on why states (including Texas) can't secede from the Union.

A lawyer is the very last person you should consult on issues like this. He knows zero about the state ratification conventions, or the relevant history.
He thinks you can't dissolve a founding document for some reason. Oh, but you can, sir. That's how the Articles of Confederation were abandoned.

The Articles of Confederation even had "perpetual" in the name!
And by the way, "perpetual" in 18th-century diplomatic language meant "has no built-in sunset provision," not "can't ever be repealed."
Read 12 tweets
Jan 26
🧵Texas is in the right constitutionally (in case that still matters to anybody).
I've heard some people say this: since immigration per se is not mentioned in the Constitution (although naturalization is), then the relevant power rests with the states. Such people proceed to deploy this argument in defense of so-called "sanctuary cities."
But if that argument can defend sanctuary cities, it can also and to the same extent defend the Texas move to try to staunch the flow of illegals coming through the southern border. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, after all.
Read 20 tweets
Nov 13, 2021
The vaccine passport system is not intended to control the spread of the virus, even though your hysterical friends tell you it makes them feel safe.
In Canada they've come right out and told us that it is NOT for this purpose, but rather to punish the unvaccinated

Thread below
From the BC Parks and Rec: "Remember, the purpose of the PoV card is to incentivize residents to be vaccinated, not to control the spread of the virus."
Also from the BC Parks and Rec: "This is an important shift to keep aware of for your decision-making; the province has shifted from actions that provide a COVID-safe environment to actions that provide discretionary services to the vaccinated." bcrpa.bc.ca/fitness/covid-…
Read 6 tweets
Nov 4, 2020
Before the predictable yammering about the electoral college (which is an excellent institution no civilized person should even consider getting rid of) starts up again, here's why it's a good thing (thread coming):
Without it, we'd live in a world in which someone could be elected president by campaigning only in New York, Florida, Texas, and California. They'd have the sheer numbers to blow everyone else away. With the electoral college you can get only so much support from any one state
Also, it's not just raw numbers we want protected and represented but whole societies and ways of life, which are represented by the states
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(