We were all taught in school that socialism is ineffective. Yet, it seems Vice President Kamala Harris missed that lesson.

But what would you know? You’re a freedom-loving American glued to your iPhone and enjoying your Starbucks. Have you ever wondered what it would be like if your president offered gifts like houses and groceries for free?

Welcome to Kamalanomics.

Brace yourself; it’s a journey into a fantasy world.

You get a house! And you get a house!

During a rally in North Carolina, Harris, the Democratic presidential candidate, presented a homeownership initiative as part of her economic strategy, aiming to attract votes without addressing the pressing issue of how to finance it.

Harris’ plan suggests that eligible homebuyers who have consistently paid their rent on time for two years and are first-time buyers could receive assistance of up to $25,000 for their down payment. First-time home buyers from families without homeownership could gain even more support.

This redefines “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

“The Biden-Harris administration initially planned to give $25,000 in down payment aid to only 400,000 first-generation homebuyers—those whose parents do not own homes—alongside a $10,000 tax credit for those buying their first homes,” a campaign fact sheet noted. “Vice President Harris’s revised plan significantly broadens this initiative, guaranteeing an average of $25,000 for all qualified first-time home buyers, while securing full participation from first-generation buyers.”

Free down payments—what a steal! But I have some questions: Where will the funding come from? How will this affect home prices? Doesn’t providing $25,000 to a new wave of buyers risk driving home prices up?

No thanks, Oprah. I mean, Kamala.

Next on the agenda: grocery price controls

We’ve all seen how inflation has become a major problem for families trying to eat properly.

Between 2017 and 2020, food prices rose by a total of 8.9%. From 2021 until this past summer, however, grocery costs soared by 21.6%. So, essentials like ground beef, eggs, milk, and bread that once cost $100 now exceed $120.

Even with the inflation rate slowing down, as it has recently, prices remain at these elevated levels.

Harris has a solution: as part of her economic plan, she proposes a federal prohibition on price gouging for groceries. Her campaign claims she will establish “clear regulations to ensure that large corporations cannot unfairly profit from consumers regarding food and groceries.”

Reading this made me chuckle. No rational person believes that inflation, which leads to high prices at local grocery stores, is simply due to corporate price gouging.

This is an age-old trick: vilify companies following capitalistic norms, then call for government regulations that restrict businesses under the guise of helping consumers.

In reality, a federal ban on price gouging will not resolve Americans’ financial struggles. It won’t mitigate inflation or bring grocery prices back to their previous levels, which were affected by policies from the Biden administration. Government controls might even result in shortages or item hoarding.

A headline from The Washington Post humorously suggests, “When your opponent labels you a ‘communist,’ it might not be wise to propose price controls.” Writer Catherine Rampell, known for her moderate stance, critiques Harris’ economic policies, describing them as “a comprehensive set of enforced price controls across all industries, not just food. Supply and demand would take a backseat to decisions made by distant bureaucrats in Washington.”

It seems a rejection is in order.

What Issues Arise with Kamalanomics?

To be honest, what is the problem with assisting a diligent family looking to buy a home by providing funds for their down payment? What’s incorrect about labeling inflation as “price gouging” and requiring companies to maintain prices as dictated by Washington? Is there an issue with offering a $6,000 tax credit for a family welcoming a newborn? (I support some child tax credit frameworks, as long as they don’t transform into welfare programs.)

Many of these proposals are founded on a socialist economic philosophy, which has consistently proven to be ineffective.

The policy ideas from Harris reflect an assumption that the government is the most influential entity in America, rather than the people themselves. Consequently, the vice president is unreserved in supporting an economic agenda that broadens governmental authority and imposes heavy restrictions on the free market.

Voters should turn down Harris’ economic proposals. Instead, they ought to support ideas that bolster the free market, promote individual responsibility, and lower taxes to enable more Americans to succeed.