NJ used to have lower gas prices than the surrounding states (maybe still do) and practically none of them in my area have a store attached. NYC gas stations also basically never have a grocery store attached. Plus, in NJ, it’s very, very expensive to get a liquor license to sell beer.
Anyway, my point is, I’m dubious.
And, the Dems can do what the GOP did- limit the filibuster, not dump it entirely.
Not if their own ACA costs go way down.
Neither the President nor Congress can reliably effect the inflation rate, except maybe over years.
That is a maybe, but it is a Good idea even if it does not work immediately.
How can releasing Russian assets help Ukraine?
I immediately thought of NJ too because I used to live there. In Michigan where I grew up it’s not uncommon to leave your car and run into the store. In NJ you’re not even allowed to get out of your car. But if only one state is not participating in this loss leader scheme I’m not sure it would have an impact on the overall economics of gasoline.
Fair point! But even still, the norm is to advertise your prices outside of your shop. Where I am, gas stations litter every corner. I have tons of choices of where to go. It does not cost me more to drive across the street to save $1. So the gas stations are at war with their pricing, trying to entice everyone to make the turn into their bays, or cross the street to their pumps.
So gas pricing will still follow the commodity ups and downs, because as soon as one station lowers their pricing, they all have to follow suit or lose customers.
This is generally, directionally true, but I’m going to hide this link as a likely off-topic point:
Yeah, but all pricing, unless there’s a monopoly, generally goes up and down with input prices. Maybe slower than gas prices, but still works.
Yes.
Any individual market has quirks to it but broadly prices actually do rise and fall with supply and demand when markets are able to operate. Even monopolies and cartels typically push prices up by constraining their output - so that supply can’t rise to meet the demand.
Eh 12-5 seems way too high for just about anyone’s faith in the Democratic party. I think is more like the Democrats went 6-11 and got fired and the replacement went 2-15. Sure people will likely vote Democratic this election because the current guy is awful, but if all you do is undo the bad stuff of the current guy is not going to make you popular and a fair bit of people are going to think we are losing either way so what does it matter..
I think the Democratic need major platforms on things increasing housing, protecting jobs from AI, regulating data centers and rooting out corruption. And yeah they will be somewhat limited in Washington on this, but they should controls plenty of state and cities so really should be able to show some substantial improvements if only at a smaller scale.
Are you asking how 80B of Russian assets to Ukraine can help Ukraine?
never mind
Trump did not sign it or veto it and, after ten days, it became law automatically.
The real problem is that the Dems can’t do a damned thing except pile up a list of vetoes that they can point to as working towards affordability. Of course, if enough Reps in both houses decide to they could override, but there seems to be 0 chance of that.
I see no evidence that doing more than undoing the bad stuff of the current guy is going to make them popular either. See: The ACA.
If enough people get ticked off at Trump, undoing his garbage will make Democrats popular, at least for a while. (The public is notoriously fickle.)
But regardless, the question in this thread wasn’t, “What do Democrats do to get more people to like them?” It was, “What could they realistically do to address affordability?”
A few people have suggested this, but I’m unclear on how it would play out? Ending the war and bringing oil prices down would be the biggest win for affordability, but do the Dems have the mechanisms to do it? They would have to negotiate an opening of the strait, but I think it would be easy for the administration to sabotage any agreement.
I’m not saying it can’t be done; I’m asking how it could be done.
I’m frustrated with the Dems inheriting wars and financial crises that they didn’t create, then be punished for it. If the Dems can’t improve the price of oil and the associated inflation, maybe they would be better to focus on some of the other suggestions (tariffs and ACA).
Should they try that, be prepared to hear “The Logan Act” until you’re sick of it.
War Powers Act. The President has to get authorization from Congress. The House passed taking away the authorization, but the Senate whiffed. And I am pretty sure he can not veto it.
Yeah, sorry I wasn’t clear with my point. Congress can try to enforce their war powers or cut funding, but how does that translate to opening the strait and lowering oil prices?
The administration can continue to antagonize Iran and force the status quo.
Iran has said they would reopen the strait if the US withdraws. Congress can try to force a withdrawal in hopes that they do, but if Iran wants anything else (e.g. easing sanctions), then we’re back to the administration. I think the administration would resist Congress forcing a withdrawal and it would be a mess.
Alternately, the administration could declare mission accomplished, withdraw, and take the credit before Congress even acts. This is a good outcome for Americans, but not for the Dems.
Well, yeah. You got two of the biggest criminal liars in the world going head to head over the Strait. But maybe if trump sees the writing on the wall he will do as you say-
Not too bad for the Dems if they force his hand.
I agree. I would prefer the war to end even if the Dems don’t get “credit” – it’s the right thing.
But the Dems should go in with open eyes. If they’re not going to get credit for ending the war, then they need to make sure they have some other wins in the column: tariffs, ACA, boosting wages, etc. They need to be able to show they are addressing affordability across income brackets.
As far as electoral strategy goes, Trump is going to get blamed for inflation/affordability as long as he is president.
It is true that if Trump does nothing, Iran can continue to try and block Middle Eastern trade and it won’t help the economic effects of the war domestically. The most drastic thing the democrats could do is simply block defense spending. One (unlikely) outcome of this would be that Trump accepts that congress undermined his negotiating position and just agree to whatever it takes to get Iran to reopen the strait. More likely, it turns into a standoff and trade becomes more dangerous, the potential advantage of this be that Trump and the GOP would take the heat for worsening affordability.