403 Forbidden
www.rawstory.com
    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      20·
      3 months ago

      As a reporter, I’d ask him why, as a current sitting Senator, Vance himself hasn’t done anything to help lower the price of eggs even while his colleagues in the Senate and the House are.

      Kroger exec admits to artificially increasing the price of eggs: link

      27 Representitives and Senators calling for a block of the merger between Kroger and Albertsons: link

      …Vance was not among those calling for a block of the merger of the price fixing grocery store…

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      6·
      3 months ago

      The egg shortage has enabled record quarterly profits and sales at Cal-Maine Foods (CALM), the largest producer and distributor of eggs in the United States. The company produces brands such as Farmhouse Eggs, Sunups, Sunny Meadow, Egg-Land’s Best and Land O’ Lakes eggs.

      https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/13/business/egg-prices-cal-maine-foods/index.html

      The problem, once again, is monopolies. Not enough competition means one company can jack up prices.

      It’s not clear if Harris will continue Biden’s policies, but one of the best things Biden’s admin has done is to actually go after monopolies for the first time in decades. Under a Trump / Vance presidency, I don’t think that’s very likely.

  • AeonFelis@lemmy.worldEnglish
    411·
    3 months ago

    Weird thing is, he didn’t have to lie. He said that the price went from $1.5 a dozen to $4 a dozen, but it’s not like his argument would have been that much weaker had he used the real price $3…

    • RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world
      1·
      3 months ago

      Weird thing is, last time I bought eggs, a few weeks ago at Safeway, a dozen was about $7. All he’s done here is make me feel a little better about the economy.

      • AeonFelis@lemmy.worldEnglish
        43·
        3 months ago

        It’d be more of a spin, or a lie of omission, at most. Either way it’d be less stupid.

          • AeonFelis@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            3 months ago

            Yes, but a much more defensible one. To refute a lie of omission you need to present the omitted information and show how it is relevant. To refute a lie of actual falsehood you just have to present the truth and point out the contradiction.

            I’m not saying he’s not a liar, I’m just annoyed by his stupidity.

        • BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world
          2·
          3 months ago

          The Republican Party is like the lowest-effort scammers who send you spam full of typos, bad grammar, and an obvious malware link to click on. They don’t want people with an ounce of brainpower voting for them because they’d be harder to fool down the line. By appealing to only the biggest morons who can’t see through the most obvious lies, it’ll be easier for the Republicans to strip away all their rights and kick us all in the face while blaming anyone else.

          Just like the scammers, it’s pathetically sad that there are so many people who barely pass as sentient so the scam can work.

          • AeonFelis@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            3 months ago

            This does not make an awful lot of sense. The reasons scammers have to filter for the dumbest victims don’t apply to politicians:

            1. Scammers don’t want to waste resources chasing bad leads. Sending the same email (or emails generated from the same template) to huge amounts of people is rather cheap, but when someone takes the bait at some point you’ll need to assign an actual person to deal with it (I’m not 100% sure this reason still applies today, since you can use AI, but it may not take you all the way and it’s still more expensive than generating an email from a template) and you’d rather not waste that effort if the chances to complete the grift are low.

              Politicians don’t have that problem, because at not point do they need to go one-on-one with individual voters (the bottom feeder activists may do it, but that’s a separate attack vector than party leadership going on media). Having the smart voters not buy into these announcements save them neither time nor money.

            2. If someone is going to figure out the scam, the scammer would prefer they do it as soon as possible. Of course, long after the scammer is gone is even better, and not at all is best, but if they can’t get away with it - sooner is better than later. If you figure it out as soon as you get the email, you’ll just ignore it - and maybe delete it and/or block the address. Most people won’t even try to report it, and even if they do there is usually not much that can be done. But if you figure out the scam after you’ve started to send them money - you are going to want your money back. You’ll have more information can potentially be used to track them (like the details of the account you transferred the money to). And you’ll be better motivated to involve the authorities. It’s safer to filter out the people who are smart enough to do that and make them leave before they have skin in the game.

              If you figure out your politician lied to you - what are you going to do? You can’t rescind your vote. You can not vote for them in the next elections - but how is that worse than not voting for them to begin with? Worst you can do is vote for their opponent - but I fail to see why a disillusioned voter is more inclined toward that than a non-voter or someone who voted to a different party. “Yes, they’ve ruined the country, and if I was their supporter I’d punish them by voting to the other party - but since I didn’t vote for them it’s not really my problem so I’ll just not vote”.

            3. Scammers only really need a small fraction of their potential targets to take the bait, because they’ll be stealing lots of money from each such target. Having too many victims can actually be risky because it raises the chance someone will do something about them. Maybe even someone competent.

              They can afford to filter.

              Politicians can’t.

              Politicians compete against other politicians, and they need a plurality to win. They don’t get to be picky. Even in the USA, the number of people with more than one brain cell is enough to tip an election’s result. You can’t just say “I don’t care about the people I can’t easily fool” because these people will for your opponent. The 16% who fall for scams won’t get you your victory.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    40·
    3 months ago

    Well. At least they used the word lying in the title. The scare quotes don’t help anyone but whatever.

  • mlg@lemmy.worldEnglish
    3·
    3 months ago

    Dunno if anyone here would know about the moment on TV where the PMLN witch was complaining about egg prices in eggs per kilo

    Because regular people definitely buy eggs in kilos.

  • dirthawker0@lemmy.world
    1695·
    3 months ago

    Price increases in eggs have largely been due to the outbreaks of avian flu and producers having to cull their stock, anyway. Not something Harris or Biden caused or could wave away with a wand.

        • sour@feddit.orgEnglish
          3·
          3 months ago

          Yeah, if you let them live until they die of old age. But they are killed for their meat, and that usually happens around 6 weeks.

        • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
          41·
          3 months ago

          You are finding out about the disparity between commercial farm chickens and wild chickens (or rescued chickens).

          Reference: (can find a bunch more about this if you want) Meat chickens: https://meatcheftools.com/how-long-do-commercial-meat-chickens-live/

          Quick Summary Commercial meat chickens typically live for about 5 to 7 weeks before they are processed for meat production. These chickens are raised in a controlled environment with optimal conditions for fast growth, resulting in a short lifespan compared to chickens raised for egg production or as pets. The rapid growth rate and early processing are designed to maximize meat production efficiency in the commercial poultry industry.

          Egg laying chickens:

          https://www.huffpost.com/entry/egg-laying-hens_n_59c3c93fe4b0c90504fc04a1

          Chickens live eight years on average, but hens only productively lay eggs in the first two, maybe three years of their lives. And on the commercial level, it’s closer to two years, and sometimes less.

          • Preflight_Tomato@lemm.ee
            1·
            3 months ago

            I really appreciate this reply, and the effort you’ve taken citing here. I was in disbelief of the fact that chickens can be grown to slaughter that fast.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish
      1191·
      3 months ago

      That’s the justification, and maybe the catalyst, but prices have stayed higher than they were due to price gouging. It’s not Biden/Harris fault, but rather capitalism. They saw they could still make more profit while selling less at a higher price, so they kept doing so.

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.worldEnglish
        17·
        3 months ago

        well.

        yes.

        though, I’m pretty sure the FDA isn’t entirely powerless to create regulations about vaccinating livestock… oh fuck. Republicans shat on that, too.

      • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
        97·
        3 months ago

        On top of that, the FTC under Biden/Harris has been investigating price gouging at the grocery store level and Kroger just came right out and admitted it. While vying for a merger with another conglomerate chain grocery.

        • jaybone@lemmy.world
          131·
          3 months ago

          Yeah and a bunch of other shit the FTC has done under Biden to protect consumers. But Biden will never get credit for any of that.

          • Kalysta@lemm.ee
            4·
            3 months ago

            Because the donor class is pissed about it and most of them own the media.

            They want the dems to fail so trump will give them more tax breaks.

          • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
            627·
            3 months ago

            shit the FTC has done

            Biden will never get credit for any of that.

            Good. Just because he appointed the excellent Lina Khan doesn’t mean that he deserves credit for the work of her and the agency.

            Especially since it’s a reasonably safe bet that her appointment wasn’t his idea to begin with, but rather that of a more progressive member of whichever committee suggests cabinet picks.

            • Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish
              30·
              3 months ago

              Doesn’t he, and his administration, deserve credit, even if it’s just for listening to other people? If it were a particular other president it wouldn’t happen, so his administration deserves to be praised for it. Criticize where it needs to be done, but also praise where it’s deserved. If you only criticize then you’re unable to be won and aren’t worth trying to win.

              • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
                225·
                3 months ago

                No, Biden doesn’t deserve credit for not being Trump. That’s putting the bar so low that you’d need specialized drilling or diving equipment to reach it.

                Likewise, Biden does not deserve credit for not stopping people within his administration from doing good things that he himself would likely not have done.

                If you only criticize then you’re unable to be won and aren’t worth trying to win.

                Conversely, if you set the bar too low, demanding nothing except “don’t be ridiculously awful” from the people who have the power to enact positive change, that positive change will never happen.

                • Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish
                  22·
                  3 months ago

                  I didn’t say for not being Trump. I said he deserves credit for what his administration has chosen to do. Regardless of who’s idea it is, his administration chose to listen to them, if it wasn’t from them. They deserve credit for that.

                  You aren’t even setting the bar too high. You’re not even setting it, and then saying they came in short. You’re saying they don’t deserve credit for something they literally did. How dumb is that?

            • Kalysta@lemm.ee
              21·
              3 months ago

              The FTC is part of the executive branch. Biden absolutely deserves credit for putting an actual trust buster in charge instead of a corporate lackey.

              • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
                13·
                3 months ago

                He deserves a little bit of credit for listening to the recommendations of people more progressive than himself with regards to the appointment itself, sure.

                That doesn’t mean that he gets to take credit for everything she does, though, much of which he most likely wouldn’t have done in her place.

                • Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish
                  11·
                  3 months ago

                  She only recommended her! Everything she does after she doesn’t get credit for, right! /s

                  You can’t stay consistent, can you? “Biden bad” is the only difference between Warren getting credit for recommending her and Biden getting credit for choosing that recommendation because it was the best choice for what he wanted to accomplish.

    • Kalysta@lemm.ee
      3·
      3 months ago

      Republicans don’t want to hear facts. They just want “alpha males” to cater to their feelings.