Talk:Greedflation

Secondary source overview by Axios removed

Previously, the role of profits in inflation was more in the progressive economics fringe. By 2023, sellers' inflation was embraced by some mainstream economists, policymakers, and the business press.1

These secondary sources, like Axios and the WSJ that were removed from the lead but given an overview of the field seem like extremely useful, encyclopedic additions here - moreso than one-off listing of supporters and detractors, which seems more WP:OR than relying on WP:RS to give an overview. Superb Owl (talk) 18:37, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

What are you proposing? "embraced by some..." hardly demonstrates WEIGHT. SPECIFICO talk 02:07, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

They probably fit best as summary sentences in Economic analysis ahead of the subsections Superb Owl (talk) 20:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

This is what I am proposing Superb Owl (talk) 02:48, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Sourcing flag

I am a bit confused as to why is there a flag saying that there needs to be better citations? There are around 60 citations to WP:RS Superb Owl (talk) 06:38, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

This is a topic underlain by complex technical and empirical issues. Would we cite USA Today on details related to cold fusion? Search engines list all published sources. WP publishes the weight of a subset that reflects qualified fact and opinion. RS is the first test, not a reason to include. See WP:V. SPECIFICO talk 12:10, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

So you are arguing that this article needs to rely primarily on academic studies to remove the flag? No news sources can be used to discuss this topic? Superb Owl (talk) 15:27, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

No. SPECIFICO talk 20:06, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

I am going to remove the flag since there is no clear explanation for it Superb Owl (talk) 03:11, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

This is an article improvement tag not a flag. Its purpose is to notify other editots to come contribute to the article. Please read our guideline that tells when it should be removed. It should remain in place at this time. SPECIFICO talk 13:26, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

You have not explained what needs improving Superb Owl (talk) 14:14, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

I certainly did, at my reply to your initial post here. You can request help with the associated PAGs if you do not understand. SPECIFICO talk 14:35, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Proposed UK example

Telecom prices

In the UK, telecom companies received criticism for a clause in its contracts that allowed it to increase prices mid-contract, without notice to customers, by the amount of inflation + 3.9%. The government has required more transparent pricing when advertising after an investigation by The Guardian revealed the extent of the practice in the industry. Ofcom is expected to ban the practice in early 2025. Superb Owl (talk) 03:49, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

The Guardian is reliable but it can be a bit biased to the left. Any question if it's DUE? Cheers. DN (talk) 04:47, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Actually, the way you worded it looks pretty good. DN (talk) 04:49, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

This text describes the opposite of so-called greedflation. Price increases in response to prior inflation is not the behavior or mechanism that's purportedly greedflation. The telecom bit is patently off topic for this page. SPECIFICO talk 10:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

The accusation stems from sneaking in the increases of up to 3.9% on top of inflation without giving notice - trying to pass off the entire price hike as inflation when there's a profit seeking component to it. That is textbook greedflation Superb Owl (talk) 15:29, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

References

NPOV issues

Hello everyone. Let's list any current NPOV issues here. Cheers. DN (talk) 22:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

I started to point out and clean up some concerns, but so far the thing that seems most confusing in terms of DUE WEIGHT is the subsection title and link to Information asymmetry. The connection here is not clear AFAICT. Are there any citations making this connection, because it has the appearence of WP:OR. Cheers. DN (talk) 23:41, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for starting with this subsection and for helping with flagging inline in the article - I pulled out the attribution of the names quoted in each article that discuss this idea so it it easier to identify the parts of each article that discuss this mechanism. While not all WP:RS use the term 'information asymmetry' itself (and there may be a better term) I have a lot of confidence that it is in fact the same concept being described across these sources. Superb Owl (talk) 22:23, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Alright. I would be reassured if you could point them out or share some here. Thank you for addressing this. DN (talk) 05:36, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Short-description

I agree with something neutral like the short-desc @Seefooddiet added here.
I want to ask @User:Iljhgtn to stop adding 'fringe' in front of it without first getting consensus here (and being able to point to any sources in the article that describe the theory as fringe) Superb Owl (talk) 22:52, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

At the very least it should say "Theory that inflation is driven by corporate profits", we can address the fringe aspect separately, but by no means should it state that it just is what it is in WP:VOICE without any qualification that the notion is a theory, one unsupported by many economists as well, but a theory nonetheless. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

I prefer @Seefooddiet's version: Inflation driven by corporate profits. This is WP:Concise, I see no issues with WP:VOICE as it only refers just to the part of inflation attributable (however small that is) to corporate profits. Adding theory does not seem to be necessary here. This is short-desc, not an article summary Superb Owl (talk) 02:34, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Right, which is why I would not make it any longer than to add "theory", I agree it is just the short description, but it should still be precise and accurate, to leave that one key word off it describes it as if greedflation is actually a widely accepted and factual phenomena, which it most certainly is not. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:36, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Which sources say it is "fringe" theory? DN (talk) 03:34, 8 November 2024 (UTC)