You know what I meant when I said "an issue." Sure, people were getting evicted. That's normal and will never go away. However, less people were getting evicted under Obama and Biden. Look it up! The only time it slowed down, under Biden, is when he made it a law where people couldn't get evicted. So, if you owned a rental, and the renters quit paying, you had to eat the costs. The renters would tear up the house and leave. For over a year, you had to let them stay there for free, so you lost your butt over it.
Again, say something bad about how Kamala ran something?
You do know that people were unable to pay rent because of COVID-caused layoffs, business closures, and the like. Yes?
And that Biden's efforts to prevent evictions were in order to help prevent a rapid and extreme downward spiral of society. Kind of like when they freeze the stock markets to prevent collapse?
And that the SCOTUS squashed the moratorium almost as soon as it was in play?
Seriously, why do you lefties think lower prices are bad????
According to you, price reductions equal lower wages and layoffs.
Tell me how that's a win.
If something cost $100 during inflation and people only buy one of those things is it not better if that same item cost $50 with no inflation and people buy 3 of those items. Cost of manufacturing the item during inflation is $50 with no inflation $15. Who's winning here? Looks like both the consumer and retailer.
Your terribly simplistic example would work if the financial changes and differences were that extreme, but they aren't. And never have been.
If the retailer is keystoning their costs, then they would sell the item for $30 if costs dropped to $15.
Selling one at $100 with a $50 cost would yield a $50 profit.
Selling three at $90 total with a $45 total cost would yield a $45 profit.
You can see why your example is not great.
Maybe try again with a real-world example that reflects COGS, retail pricing, GPM, and sales volume, and that shows what you were wanting to describe?
