7.7% inflation! Wait, it's 9.1% inflation!!!!!

In Canada. And Britain.

Thanks, Biden.

Biden, as Lord High Chancellor of Canada AND Emperor of Great Britain, is completely and solely responsible for inflation in those two countries.

Oh, he's also Shogun of Japan, but I don't know what inflation is like there now.

You know, a reasonable person might compare inflation in the US to that currently being experienced by the rest of the world and conclude that our country (and the Biden administration) is handling it better than most. But "reasonable" means "not conservitard."

What has he done to say he is "handling it better than most"?

I'd give you a list of measures the Biden administration has taken and will take to curb inflation, but you'd just sneer at it. But I'm just going by results, anyway--our current annual rate of inflation, though very high, is lower than the rest of the Western world. So if ya wanna blame Biden for inflation, you might have to give him credit for the fact that it's relatively low compared to everywhere else. (Because doing the former but not the latter would be, um...hypocritical.)

Obviously, those measures are and must be limited in scope--because the President has limited power. Plus, inflation isn't so horrible horrible horrible awful that we should do anything and everything, including cratering the economy, to stop it.

The proper solution is to tax the megacorporations that are benefiting from all these price hikes and then use that money to fund transfer payments to those who are being hit the hardest, such as those living on fixed incomes. I favor price freezes on a spectrum of vital consumer goods, including gasoline and diesel. The standard argument against that is that it will lead to supply shortages. But the megacorporations are THRILLED to sell their wares at today's insane prices, given their record profits.

So socialism?  Great Kevin.  

And he has done nothing to help inflation.  In fact I think your party wants it.  

That's an unusually stupid statement, even for you. Obviously, the RepubliQ are benefiting from high prices, because they can point to that and tell everybody that all you have to do is vote for them and it'll be all better. They're already making vague promises to that effect, which no one--especially not "the base"--will hold them to.

You can say Biden's done nothing--I knew you would, it's reflexive and automatic for you--but that's a lie. I'm not going to bother to refute it.

I'm fine with social democracy, which is what I described, not socialism. We already have many, many elements of social democracy in our existing system, and I daresay you actually approve of those things. Such as: free schooling for the first twelve years. Interstate freeways. A heavily subsidized postal service. The FDA. Public libraries. Federal retirement program (aka Social Security). Federal health insurance. Shall I go on?

And taxing windfall profits to help those harmed the most by the events that generated those profits is simple decency and common sense. Call it SOOOOOOOCIALISM (ooo! ooo! ooo!) if you like.

Socialism - always the fallback liberal answer to everything.  I don't get it.  Is it because so few of you made anything out of yourselves in life that you hate when someone has more than you?

That's the standard conservitard line when your gang is asked to help people. I'm wise and noble and smart and hard-working, and my current state of well-being is due solely to my diligence, pluck, and derring-do. Meanwhile, anyone not doing as well as I is obviously a lazy, incompetent fuck-up and doesn't deserve my assistance. Oh, and there's no such thing as bad luck, since I haven't experienced any myself.

This line of claptrap has been bleated by selfish people for centuries. Fuck the poor!

90% of the time it is a choice they have made......I'll help the other 10% no problem.  

Very few people choose to be poor, sick, injured, in a natural disaster, in an auto accident, murdered by a random passerby, or struck by lightning. Or...to be infected by covid.

Your 90% "statistic" isn't supported by anything. But even if someone IS badly off because of "a choice they have made"--does that mean you're not willing to help them? You only offer aid to people you feel "deserve" it, by your exalted criteria, O Perfect One?

I know good people who made poor choices, and I've helped them even though I knew that they, not to put too fine a point on it, fucked up. I don't use "deserve" as a criterion. Call me a sucker if you want. I'd rather be a sucker than live in your world.