The Sentinel

Commentary |
It’s not ‘Inflation’ — We’re just getting ripped off

These corporate giants have no plans to bring prices down anytime soon.

by Lindsay Owens & Elizabeth Pancotti

Many Americans are still experiencing the sticker shock they first faced two years ago when inflation hit its peak. But if inflation is down now, why are families still feeling the pinch?

The answer lies in corporate profits — and we have the data to prove it.

Our new report for the Groundwork Collaborative finds that corporate profits accounted for more than half — 53 percent — of inflation from April to September 2023. That’s an astronomical percentage. Corporate profits drove just 11 percent of price growth in the four decades prior to the pandemic.

Businesses have been quick to blame rising costs on supply chain shocks from the pandemic and the war in Ukraine. But two years later, our economy has mostly returned to normal. In some cases, companies’ costs to make things and stock shelves have actually decreased.

Let’s demonstrate with one glaring example: diapers.

The hyper-consolidated diaper industry is dominated by just two companies, Procter & Gamble and Kimberly-Clark, which own well-known diaper brands like Pampers, Huggies, and Luvs. The cost of wood pulp, a key ingredient for making diapers absorbent, did spike during the pandemic, increasing by more than 50 percent between 2020 and 2021.

Corporate profits accounted for more than half of recent price increases. To stamp out inflation once and for all, we need to crack down on price gouging.

But last year it declined by 25 percent. Did that drop in costs lead Procter & Gamble and Kimberly-Clark to lower their prices? Far from it. Diaper prices have increased to nearly $22 on average.

These corporate giants have no plans to bring prices down anytime soon. In fact, their own executives are openly bragging about how they’re going to “expand margins” on earnings calls. Procter & Gamble predicted $800 million in windfall profits as input costs decline. Kimberly-Clark’s CEO said the company has “a lot of opportunity” to expand margins over time.

It’s not just diapers — while many corporations were quick to pass along rising costs, they’ve been in no hurry to pass along their savings. A recent survey from the Richmond Fed and Duke University revealed that 60 percent of companies plan to hike prices this year by more than they did before the pandemic, even though their costs have moderated.

Photo: Israel Albornoz/Unsplash

Corporations across industries, from housing to groceries and used cars, are juicing their profit margins even as the cost of doing business goes down. And they’re not hiding the ball. Since the summer of 2021, Groundwork began listening in on hundreds of corporate earnings calls where we heard CEO after CEO boasting about their ability to raise prices on consumers.

Now we hear something slightly different: CEOs crowing about keeping their prices high while their costs go down.

PepsiCo raised its prices on snacks and beverages by roughly 15 percent twice in the last year while bragging to shareholders that their profit margins will grow as input costs come down. Tyson’s earnings report flaunted how their higher prices have “more than offset” their higher costs. The CFO of Hershey said last quarter that pricing gains more than offset inflation and higher costs.

So what can we do about it?

The Biden administration has taken important steps to rein in corporate profiteering and address the longstanding affordability crisis, from eliminating junk fees to strengthening global supply chains and cracking down on corporate concentration.

With the 2017 Trump tax cuts set to expire, Congress should also take this opportunity to raise taxes on corporations. Taxing profits helps disincentivize price gouging and profiteering because large corporations will have to send a greater share of their windfall to Uncle Sam.

We’ve come a long way in bringing inflation down since its peak in 2022. But stamping out inflation once and for all will require a concerted effort to rein in the corporate profiteering.

Elizabeth Pancotti

Lindsay Owens

Lindsay Owens is the Executive Director of the Groundwork Collaborative. Elizabeth Pancotti is Strategic Advisor to Groundwork. This op-ed was distributed by OtherWords.org.

Commentary |
Airbnb is driving up housing costs for all of us

In the early years, staying in other people’s houses felt like an act of rebellion against corporate hotel chains.

by Sonali Kolhatkar

Americans have been on a vacation binge since the easing of COVID-19 restrictions. In particular, the vacation rental company Airbnb is thriving. Late last year, the company posted its highest-ever profits.

Sonali Kolhatkar

Meanwhile cities are seeing rising rents, unaffordable home prices, and increased homelessness. Authorities are now linking these crises in part to Airbnb — and some now are passing strict regulations.

Just as companies like Uber were once touted as a way for working people with cars to earn a little extra spending cash, Airbnb offered the promise of supplementary income for those with an extra room or converted garage.

I’ve rented several Airbnb homes over the 15 years since the company was founded. In the early years, staying in other people’s houses felt like an act of rebellion against corporate hotel chains. The privacy, convenience, and often lower cost enabled tourists with tighter budgets to enjoy family vacations that otherwise might have been unavailable.

Now, however, the market is increasingly dominated by a small number of corporate “hosts” and professional property managers — wealthy elites and corporate entities that scoop up large numbers of properties and turn big profits by renting them out to travelers.

And that’s driving up housing costs for everyone.

Stephanie Synclair, a 41-year-old Black mom from Atlanta, recently made the news for becoming a home-buyer — not in her hometown, but in Palermo, Sicily.

In spite of having a budget of $450,000 — no small sum — Synclair had no luck buying a home in Atlanta, where properties are among the most overpriced in the nation. Atlanta’s housing market is dominated by investors and cash-rich corporations who scoop up practically every home listed at $500,000 or less, many of which are then transformed into Airbnb listings for tourists.

So Synclair now plans to retire in her $62,000 home on the other side of the planet instead.

"Staying in other people’s houses felt like an act of rebellion against corporate hotel chains," Kolhatkar said. Affordable, off-the-beaten path rentals once had their quirky charm until corporations invaded the short-term rental market.

Photo: Theo Rivierenlaan/Pixabay

A 2017 study of New York City by the watchdog group Inside Airbnb concluded that the Airbnb model also fuels racism in the housing market. “Across all 72 predominantly Black New York City neighborhoods,” the group found, “hosts are five times more likely to be white.” But the “loss of housing and neighborhood disruption due to Airbnb is six times more likely to affect Black residents.”

To curb such inequities, New York City, which already had strict rules about short-term rentals and subleases, passed a law in 2023 requiring Airbnb to ensure that hosts obtain permission to rent out housing. If it fails to do so, both the host and the company are hit with hefty fines.

While this means potentially higher hotel costs for out-of-town visitors, it could also free up rentals for long-term residents. According to The Guardian, this may already be happening, just months after the law went into effect in September.

While cheaper vacation stays are certainly desirable for those of us who love to travel, vacationing is a privilege in the U.S. More than a third of Americans, a 2023 survey found, are unlikely to take a summer vacation. And of those, more than half say they simply can’t afford it.

A 2019 Economic Policy Institute study pointed out that “Airbnb might, as claimed, suppress the growth of travel accommodation costs, but these costs are not a first-order problem for American families.” What is a first-order problem is affordable housing.

While regulating Airbnb will not mitigate all economic injustices facing Americans — such as suppressed wages and a lack of government-funded health care — it certainly will move the needle in the right direction.

Sonali Kolhatkar is the host of “Rising Up With Sonali,” a television and radio show on Free Speech TV and Pacifica stations. This commentary was produced by the Economy for All project at the Independent Media Institute and adapted for syndication by OtherWords.org.

Study finds two common types of antidepressants were safe for most stroke survivors

by American Heart Association

Researchers looked at the frequency of serious bleeding among hundreds of thousands of stroke survivors who took different types of SSRI and/or SNRI antidepressants.

DALLAS — Most stroke survivors were able to safely take two types of common antidepressants, according to a preliminary study to be presented at the American Stroke Association’s International Stroke Conference 2024. The meeting will be held in Phoenix, Feb. 7-9, and is a world premier meeting for researchers and clinicians dedicated to the science of stroke and brain health.

Among people with ischemic (clot-caused) stroke, those who began taking an antidepressant known as an SSRI (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor) and/or an SNRI (serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor) for the common conditions of post-stroke depression and anxiety, did not have an increased risk of hemorrhagic (bleeds) stroke or other serious bleeding. This included people taking anticoagulation medications. There was, however, an increased risk of hemorrhagic stroke among stroke patients taking two anti-platelet medications, also called dual anti-platelet therapy or DAPT.

“Mental health conditions, such as depression and anxiety, are very common yet treatable conditions that may develop after a stroke. Our results should reassure clinicians that for most stroke survivors, it is safe to prescribe SSRI and/or SNRI antidepressants early after stroke to treat post-stroke depression and anxiety, which may help optimize their patients’ recovery,” said study lead author Kent P. Simmonds, D.O., Ph.D., a third-year physical medicine and rehabilitation resident at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas. “However, caution is needed when considering the risk-benefit profile for stroke patients receiving dual anti-platelet therapy because we did find an increased risk of bleeding among this group.”

According to the American Heart Association’s Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics 2024 Update, when considered separately from other cardiovascular diseases, stroke ranks fifth among all causes of death, behind diseases of the heart, cancer, COVID-19 and unintentional injuries/accidents. Approximately one-third of stroke survivors develop poststroke depression. If left untreated, depression may affect quality of life and reduce the chances for optimal poststroke recovery such as returning to their usual daily living activities without assistance.

The most common classes of antidepressants are SSRIs or SNRIs, and they are widely used and effective for treating anxiety and depression. However, they may not be prescribed at all or early enough after a stroke, when the risk of depression or anxiety is particularly high, due to concerns that they may increase the risk of a hemorrhagic stroke or other serious types of bleeding.

Researchers looked at the frequency of serious bleeding among hundreds of thousands of stroke survivors who took different types of SSRI and/or SNRI antidepressants (such as sertraline, fluoxetine, citalopram, venlalfaxine). Serious bleeding was defined as bleeding in the brain, digestive tract; and shock, which occurs when bleeding prevents blood from reaching the body’s tissues.

Researchers also investigated serious bleeding among stroke survivors who took antidepressants combined with different types of blood-thinning medications that are used to prevent future blood clots. These blood-thinning medications may include either anticoagulants or antiplatelet medications. Anticoagulants are prescribed as a single medication and include medications such as warfarin, apixaban and rivaroxaban. Antiplatelet medications may be prescribed as either a single medication (commonly aspirin) or two types of antiplatelet medications can be used in dual antiplatelet therapy. DAPT includes aspirin plus another antiplatelet medication called a P2Y12 inhibitor (such as clopidogrel, prasugrel or ticagrelor).

The study found:

SSRI and SNRIs were generally safe to start during the important early stages of recovery as patients taking these medications were not more likely to develop serious bleeding compared to stroke survivors who did not take an antidepressant. This included ischemic stroke patients who are also taking anti-coagulation therapy.

An increased risk of serious bleeding occurred when SSRIs or SNRIs were taken in combination with DAPT treatments (aspirin and blood thinners). However, the overall risk remained low as serious bleeding events were rare.

Among ischemic stroke patients on antidepressant medications, there was a 15% increase in the risk of serious bleeding when taking medications from classes such as mirtazapine, bupropion and tricyclics compared to SSRI/SNRIs.

“Maximizing rehabilitation early after a stroke is essential because recovery is somewhat time-dependent, and most functional gains occur during the first few months after a stroke,” Simmonds said. “Fortunately, dual antiplatelet therapy is often administered for 14, 30 or 90 days, so, when indicated, clinicians may not need to withhold antidepressant medications for prolonged periods of time. Future research should investigate the risk of bleeding associated with the use of anti-depressant and anxiety medications among patients with hemorrhagic or bleeding stroke.”

According to a 2022 American Heart Association scientific statement, social isolation and loneliness are associated with about a 30% increased risk of heart attack or stroke, or death from either. “Depression may lead to social isolation, and social isolation may increase the likelihood of experiencing depression. The current study helps answer safety issues around the use of antidepressants for treatment of mental health issues that may develop after a stroke,” said Crystal Wiley Cené, M.D., M.P.H., FAHA, chair of the writing group for the Association’s scientific statement, and a professor of clinical medicine and chief administrative officer for health equity, diversity and inclusion at the University of California San Diego Health. Dr. Cené was not involved in this study.