I am back after a long hiatus. School continues to be disruptive to my hobby of yelling at no one, for no one to hear. Well, the GIVE act has almost vindicated me and the prediction I have made in December of last year. I need to get my congressman on the phone and ask him what in the world he thinks he is doing voting for that, but whatever. That is between me and him.
Since I took off to do a great many things at UNLV, a great big amount of ruckus has been made about bailouts, and even more about a bunch of guys getting their bonuses. Well, of course we could not block those bonuses; I mean, that would have been unconstitutional. Though that does not seem to be the reason for that. This is evidenced by a great many people clamoring for a tax on their bonuses. Gee whiz, that almost sounds unconstitutional. I mean... taxing particular people, and making the tax retroactive. Nah, I am just stupid. Besides, who cares about the constitution? It is our money!!
Let me first make the obvious point that if AIG was not bailed out, this conversation would not exist. But who cares about little facts like that? Let's just go grab our respective pitchforks and go hunting. The simple fact is that this IS our fault. It is not like AIG walked into our homes in the dead of night and took this money. The government, that we voted in, taxed it from us and gave the money to AIG while so many were crying out about some mysterious and vague end-of-the-world scenario. That is not to say no one cried out about these bailouts. Many, like me, were down right angry we were even considering it. Then we allowed them to fulfill their contracts, as was constitutionally required of us. Low and behold, one of the contracts we allowed them to honor included the bonuses.
Well people are outraged that their money is going to these big corporate execs. People are so angry now that they are even happy that we are going to take all their money via tax. Why are we allowing this? Does it not strike anyone as strange, or dare I say wrong to tax these men and women in particular?
Let me put this differently. What if it were you? What if, for whatever reason you want to choose, the government decided to tax you in particular? What if the reason was you do not give enough to charity? Or maybe it is because you earn an 'inordinate amount' of money in comparison to others in your same job? Or maybe it is simply because you happen to be registered for a certain party, or voted for a particular guy?
'No! That is different.' Certainly the circumstances and reasons are different, but can you tell me it wouldn't be done? With this 90% tax that is going through congress right now, we are giving congress precedent. This means that this belief that it could not happen to me goes away. You could argue that the reasons are different, but does that mean whatever reasons given for the unconstitutional tax levied on them are any more or less important then the ones that could be levied on you? You could say that this reason makes it justified, or that it was a punishment for a 'wrong' they have committed. However, could I not make up a reason for doing the exact same thing to anyone else and then claim that this reason is just as justifiable as the ones for this atrocity?
Once this door is opened it cannot be closed simply by crying bloody murder. If we take these bonuses, then there will be no reason why we shouldn't levy a tax on someone for having done something, anything. All we would need would be the proper motivation for it, whatever that motivation happens to be at that time. Maybe sexual preference, skin color, the fact that your hair is parted on the left. All that is required is that someone at some point makes up a good enough reason, and soon the rights of an individual are infringed "for the right reasons".
This is why a diminishing of rights of one, diminishes every person's rights. So you cannot allow this, even IF you think this is a good reason. The rights that protect you protect them as well. By giving the federal government permission to tax anyone in particular, you have given the government permission by assent to do the very same thing to anyone including yourself.
Why should I care though? Some people I know may want everyone to root for this. After all "the libs brought it upon themselves." Once all hell breaks loose these friends of mine will undoubtedly be the ones laughing all the way to the gas chamber. The reason I am against this line of logic is simple; I live here too. Though I warned people and was insulted, and am still insulted. Even though I put up with crap from every 'know-it-all' who listens to NPR; the fact still stands. I live here and I do not think I will be moving for awhile. Laughing at people for making mistakes, even horrible ones will not repair anything. It will get me and everyone else nowhere. We all must simply get together and vote for every conservative we possibly can in two years. When the problem is fixed, that will be the time we can go say I told you so.
Showing posts with label Congress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Congress. Show all posts
Friday, March 27, 2009
Friday, June 20, 2008
Gas doesn't grow on trees.
At least not in the literal sense. Yes, gas prices suck. I am now paying over $80 dollars a week on this required commodity, and I drive a 4 door sedan. Why the heck are these prices so outrageous!? Well, that depends on who you ask.
How could this be is a matter of perspective. It can't be actually. It is just that many of these people responsible are trying to cover their butts. Such is the nature of politics.
The first myth, it is all the oil companies fault. This sounds plausible if you ignore economics. Simply put, commodities are bought and sold at certain prices and the prices affect demand for those commodities. If I was selling bananas for a dime I would never doubt that you would buy as many as you could carry. If i sold those same bananas for three dollars, though, it would be a rip-off and I would be lucky to sell one. Likewise the oil companies that refine their oil and distribute it sell their gas at a certain price margin. This price margin happens to currently be about 8 1/2 cents per gallon. Sounds small? Well, consider that 300 million people buy billions of gallons of gas and now that sounds like a lot. In fact, Exxon Mobil made over 404 billion dollars net in 2007. (From Exxon Mobil's Form 10-K. SEC. Retrieved on 2008-04-21). That is massive. This theory sounds even better now, except that even if they made zero-profit margin the gas price would drop only eight cents. For this to have any real effect on fuel prices at the pump the oil companies like Exxon Mobil would have to take two dollars loss on every gallon of gas. This "evil" company would fold over night.
Some claim that oil companies are intentionally forcing the price upward. Ignoring the fact that their profit margin would have no increase and hence there is no incentive to do this, the "evil" corporations wouldn't want to anyway. Back to the bananas analogy, lets say my profit margin for every banana was x minus a nickle. So at ten cents my profit margin would be a nickle. It seems like a brilliant idea to simply increase your profit margin to make more money but eventually people start buying less. Less sales mean less profit. Oil companies can't allow their price to go too high, as you can see or else many people will simply take the bus or subway.
No, the real culprit is Congress. For thirty years there has been a ban on oil drilling of any kind and the building of oil refineries. Brilliant idea! Kill the supply, that will show those evil corporations. Naturally, as supply stayed roughly stable in the US and other countries, the demand rose as it was expected to. Supply and demand, something a fifth grader knows, naturally causes the price to go up as demand exceeds supply. This isn't just the Dem's fault, this isn't the republicans, nope, this is as bi-partisan as you can get. Don't you love how bi-partisanship only seems to exist in screw-ups?
We have enormous amounts of oil underneath the ground in the US. We could build dozens of refineries and drill up and down the coast of Florida, California and the Gulf of Mexico. This, yes, would take awhile, but I would rather have cheap gas in the future then no cheap gas at all.
A recent bit of misinformation being passed around is that increasing supply would not decrease price. One belief is that all the fuel would be shipped overseas to the world market. Where? Where would any company want to ship it that it could sell for a profit. It simply is cheaper to sell here, cheaper means less risk and hence a better overall decision. I wouldn't doubt that 50% of oil produced here would be used here.
The other one I have heard even more recently is a shift in blame from oil companies and onto oil futures traders. The misinformation here is that the price is made up primarily from these futures and that the price won't be affected much in any direction, as this is the 'real' problem. For those who don't know what oil futures are, a future is the guaranteed price on a commodity purchased at today's price. To be less esoteric, it would suffice to say that traders of the futures are buying commodities that do not exist yet at today's price in hopes that the price in the future is higher than today's price. It’s gambling on either a supply crisis or a demand boom. A recent example is corn. Due to the massive floods in several farm states the price of corn is expected to go up massively, as much as 400%. This means that anyone who bought futures in corn is having a heyday with their massive return.
This is roughly balanced, as prices are usually stable with increases following inflation but with the widely known supply shortage in oil, many futures traders are buying oil as there is little or no risk involved. It is almost a guarantee that they will make back their investment and more. As you can see this causes an artificial bubble in oil that increases oil prices. This theory is wrong, however, in one single way, the futures traders are not eternally stupid. Because of this they know that if the supply problem is solved then the price of oil, and therefore gas, will drop. If they know this is going to happen the futures traders will pull out, bursting the bubble. Many people will lose their shirts but let’s face it, the average American really does not care.
Congress is still refusing to open ANWR or allow offshore drilling. If you listen to Obama it becomes clear why. They don't want us to drive. They don't think oil companies are evil, they think we are evil. Us and our lack of concern for the environment. They can't make us believe in their Global Warming Delusion, so they have decided to make us comply with them. Make us drive hybrids and ride bicycles. The problem is that not everyone can afford a hybrid, not everyone can use a bicycle in common life. Some people need a truck to carry cement or tools or to carry groceries. I cannot afford a hybrid, and I cannot use a bicycle to get to work. I live over 40 miles away from where I work. Going even forty (I think I can only do twenty) it would take me an hour to get to work. I already wake up at three am. My father goes 70 miles up a mountain to get to work and then drives around all day. There is no way we could live without vehicles. Our nearest grocery store is ten miles away; and our family is not alone in this either. Once again, the 'enlightened' urbans think they know better than rural folk.
Cars cannot be eliminated, nor are any viable alternative fuels available. So drill dammit. Every week I am losing $80 until congress fixes this. I simply cannot wait for some pie in the sky idea. I need help with this now, so fix it.
How could this be is a matter of perspective. It can't be actually. It is just that many of these people responsible are trying to cover their butts. Such is the nature of politics.
The first myth, it is all the oil companies fault. This sounds plausible if you ignore economics. Simply put, commodities are bought and sold at certain prices and the prices affect demand for those commodities. If I was selling bananas for a dime I would never doubt that you would buy as many as you could carry. If i sold those same bananas for three dollars, though, it would be a rip-off and I would be lucky to sell one. Likewise the oil companies that refine their oil and distribute it sell their gas at a certain price margin. This price margin happens to currently be about 8 1/2 cents per gallon. Sounds small? Well, consider that 300 million people buy billions of gallons of gas and now that sounds like a lot. In fact, Exxon Mobil made over 404 billion dollars net in 2007. (From Exxon Mobil's Form 10-K. SEC. Retrieved on 2008-04-21). That is massive. This theory sounds even better now, except that even if they made zero-profit margin the gas price would drop only eight cents. For this to have any real effect on fuel prices at the pump the oil companies like Exxon Mobil would have to take two dollars loss on every gallon of gas. This "evil" company would fold over night.
Some claim that oil companies are intentionally forcing the price upward. Ignoring the fact that their profit margin would have no increase and hence there is no incentive to do this, the "evil" corporations wouldn't want to anyway. Back to the bananas analogy, lets say my profit margin for every banana was x minus a nickle. So at ten cents my profit margin would be a nickle. It seems like a brilliant idea to simply increase your profit margin to make more money but eventually people start buying less. Less sales mean less profit. Oil companies can't allow their price to go too high, as you can see or else many people will simply take the bus or subway.
No, the real culprit is Congress. For thirty years there has been a ban on oil drilling of any kind and the building of oil refineries. Brilliant idea! Kill the supply, that will show those evil corporations. Naturally, as supply stayed roughly stable in the US and other countries, the demand rose as it was expected to. Supply and demand, something a fifth grader knows, naturally causes the price to go up as demand exceeds supply. This isn't just the Dem's fault, this isn't the republicans, nope, this is as bi-partisan as you can get. Don't you love how bi-partisanship only seems to exist in screw-ups?
We have enormous amounts of oil underneath the ground in the US. We could build dozens of refineries and drill up and down the coast of Florida, California and the Gulf of Mexico. This, yes, would take awhile, but I would rather have cheap gas in the future then no cheap gas at all.
A recent bit of misinformation being passed around is that increasing supply would not decrease price. One belief is that all the fuel would be shipped overseas to the world market. Where? Where would any company want to ship it that it could sell for a profit. It simply is cheaper to sell here, cheaper means less risk and hence a better overall decision. I wouldn't doubt that 50% of oil produced here would be used here.
The other one I have heard even more recently is a shift in blame from oil companies and onto oil futures traders. The misinformation here is that the price is made up primarily from these futures and that the price won't be affected much in any direction, as this is the 'real' problem. For those who don't know what oil futures are, a future is the guaranteed price on a commodity purchased at today's price. To be less esoteric, it would suffice to say that traders of the futures are buying commodities that do not exist yet at today's price in hopes that the price in the future is higher than today's price. It’s gambling on either a supply crisis or a demand boom. A recent example is corn. Due to the massive floods in several farm states the price of corn is expected to go up massively, as much as 400%. This means that anyone who bought futures in corn is having a heyday with their massive return.
This is roughly balanced, as prices are usually stable with increases following inflation but with the widely known supply shortage in oil, many futures traders are buying oil as there is little or no risk involved. It is almost a guarantee that they will make back their investment and more. As you can see this causes an artificial bubble in oil that increases oil prices. This theory is wrong, however, in one single way, the futures traders are not eternally stupid. Because of this they know that if the supply problem is solved then the price of oil, and therefore gas, will drop. If they know this is going to happen the futures traders will pull out, bursting the bubble. Many people will lose their shirts but let’s face it, the average American really does not care.
Congress is still refusing to open ANWR or allow offshore drilling. If you listen to Obama it becomes clear why. They don't want us to drive. They don't think oil companies are evil, they think we are evil. Us and our lack of concern for the environment. They can't make us believe in their Global Warming Delusion, so they have decided to make us comply with them. Make us drive hybrids and ride bicycles. The problem is that not everyone can afford a hybrid, not everyone can use a bicycle in common life. Some people need a truck to carry cement or tools or to carry groceries. I cannot afford a hybrid, and I cannot use a bicycle to get to work. I live over 40 miles away from where I work. Going even forty (I think I can only do twenty) it would take me an hour to get to work. I already wake up at three am. My father goes 70 miles up a mountain to get to work and then drives around all day. There is no way we could live without vehicles. Our nearest grocery store is ten miles away; and our family is not alone in this either. Once again, the 'enlightened' urbans think they know better than rural folk.
Cars cannot be eliminated, nor are any viable alternative fuels available. So drill dammit. Every week I am losing $80 until congress fixes this. I simply cannot wait for some pie in the sky idea. I need help with this now, so fix it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)