Solution to gas prices: Nationalization

Last I heard 200,000 barrels of Iraqi oil disappears every day into
the Halliburton coffers.

A

 

You should call this to the attention of all the right wing economists
then. I'm sure they would appreciate the warning against any form of
misusing words to convey their own special propaganda. I don't repeat
war slogans, just economic ones.

Reagan really *did* start the deregulation craze. Not long thereafter
the taxpayers bailed out the Savings and Loans (but not before some Bush
family members made off with with some chump change). Then they
deregulated electricity. Not like Canada's. Real deregulation. Ever
heard of Enron?

*Some* people. And the richer they get, the more influence they can
buy. The more influence they can buy...........

Hold fast to dreams
For if dreams die
Life is a broken-winged bird
That cannot fly.

Hold fast to dreams
For when dreams go
Life is a barren field
Frozen with snow

 

No, Jimmy Carter did. You could look it up. And in any case, it never
even came close to being "laissez faire". Not even remotely.

There are more regulations and government administrations now than ever
before in US or Canadian history. So much for "deregulation".

That isn't "laissez faire". that's mercantilist.

Also I seem to recall tax law changes gave rise to the S&L debacle in
the first place.

They most certainly did NOT.

California and Ontario did much the same thing when they re-regulated.
Enron gamed the Ontario market as well as California's.

ALL people. Every single one without ever an exception.

In a truly "laissez faire" environment, the government would not be in a
position to dispense largesse to lobbyists.

The reason lobbyists are so thick upon the ground is because there is
either
1) something to be gained by bending the government's ear, or
2) they want preferential absolution from restrictions imposed by the
government.

Dreams are your business, not the business of those whose job it is to
run the courts and keep the roads paved.

As soon as the government gets involved in "dreams", the lobbyists are
in there trying to get some advantage for themselves.

 

Not all of us Americans are fucking idiots. Some us see the
Bush-league gang for exactly what they are. And it ain't pretty.

 

Seems you have built up a considerable personal investment in this
topic. Perhaps fantasy is a better word than dream but I think you got
my drift. I have a hard time vigorously championing anything thats
never been before. No way to gage it. Kind of like heaven. Sounds
good. Sounds better to some than others.

There are usually good reasons things never get out of the fantasy/dream
stage. In this case the number one suspect seems to be human nature.

Don't make it bad to fantasize/dream but windmills can grab ya and throw
ya. Is it true that Senor Quixote spent a lot of time alone and had
many bruises.

 

You got it. That's why we'll forevermore see mercantilism, protectionism,
favoritism and lobbying, and not "laissez faire".

We've come close to "laissez faire" a few times, notably Hong Kong under
Cowperthwaite, and prety much the entire industrialized world in the few
decades prior to World War 1.

Our current widespread prosperity is largely due to the afterglow from the
pre-WW1 era: Private property rights, innocent-until-proven-guilty, that
sort of thing.

 

I partial to the afterglow between Roosevelt and Reagan. When the
wheels come off of this current "widespread prosperity" it is going to
be ugly. Very ugly. But then again, if its done slow enough people just
keep adjusting and before ya know it there will be a new norm.

We'll no longer have families where both adults work to make ends meet.
We'll just morph into families where no one ever leaves and all
contribute from their minimum wage jobs to support the family SUV.

 

Comrade Chavez just pulled the plug on the privately owned TV station in his
country.

Are you sure you want to use him as a role model?

 

Dear oh dear... To what has the educational system come?

DAS

For direct replies replace nospam with schmetterling
---
[...]

[...]

 

Don't know about the ecucational system but Usenet apparently has come
to telepathy.

 

Good point. The only model worth emulating is the one who is on the
best of terms with the owners of "privately owned" media. That way you
can make sure only that which you approve of gets on the airways and
promote market forces at the same time. Large campaign contributions
help round out the proper example.

And when you decide to invade a country you can put reporters for the
free press with the military (for their protection <wink>)and of course,
your pals in the world of corporate media will help drum up support for
your adventure.

When you help set up TV and radio in the countries you conquer you can
tap the vast resources in the free market to help you efficiently
educate the native population on the many wonderful economic
oportunities you have brought from afar.

 

Damn, and I thought I was cynical.

Richard

 

Gasoline has always been cheap there. Premium was equivalent to about $0.30
per
gallon when I lived there years ago. (There were three grades of gasoline
then, and
the cheap one was about $0.07 per gallon, IIRC) This does not represent any
world
economy prices, but is a bone thrown to the people.

Hugo Chavez is a bit left of socialist. He is moving toward communism as
quickly
as he can, but still calls it socialism. (There is a BIG difference)

The currency today is about Bs2000 to the dollar (roughly) but you can
easily get
Bs 3500 for your dollars on the black market, maybe even 5000. When I lived
there it was Bs 4.27 to one US dollar.

 

You mean Reaganist "trickle down" economics...It still follows the laws of
gravity.
Depends who is on top, and peeing on you.

 

Indeed, but you wouldn't know it from the media portrayal stateside.

Interesting.

 

LOL, apparently some folks have to get *real* wet before that dawns on them.

If I recall, oil was 20.00 bucks a barrel when Clinton left office and
as one friend pointed out:

In all the discussions about high gasoline prices, no one has complained
nor explained why the 2007 prices did not follow the pattern of the huge
2006 price rise to $3.50 a gallon when crude went to $75 a barrel. Then
crude dropped below $70 and gasoline plunged to $2.50; later the price
of crude dropped again to $51 in 2006.

However, gasoline prices started up, not down, all the way to the
present $3.50, while crude hovers in the low $60s. Refinery shutdowns
and increased consumption? No. Increased profits? Yes!

 

People believe whatever reason they hear on the news. 50 cent increase in 8
weeks? It's because of higher demand in China. Trouble is, that's the reason
we heard last year when the price went up. Then, the price went down. Demand
in China went down so suddenly, too? Probably not.

 

In message F.H. sprach forth the
following:

Taxes account for more of the price of gas than the oil company's profit
and the station operator's profit COMBINED. Explain exactly what the
government did to deserve so much money. What role did they play in
bringing the gasoline to your car?

 

It's a very simple system. They raise the price, and we pay it. There
really isn't much more to it than that.

I drive for a living. You can talk about supply and demand on a large
scale, but there are a lot of us who demand gasoline absolutely. It
doesn't matter what the price is, I fill up three times a week.

Maybe you can explain to me why E85 seems to follow the price of
gasoline. Being 85% ethanol it should follow its own market forces, but
it seems to be closely comparable to gas for some reason. I think it's
the same old thing. They dream up a price, and we pay it.

 

In message JoeSpareBedroom sprach
forth the following:

Which is why there are exactly three "front-runners" for the Democratic and
Republican nominations, even though not a single vote has been cast, and
despite the fact that Ron Paul wins EVERY online or call-in poll.