... you know, the lemmings shown in this video. Anyway, here's what Obama believes:
It's not change when he (McCain) wants to give $200 billion to the biggest corporation or $4 billion to the oil companies when today, Exxon-Mobil announced that it had made the greatest profits of any corporation in the history of the world: $14 billion in one quarter. That's all your money. You are -- you are paying it at the gas station. That's not change when John McCain comes up with a tax plan that doesn't give a penny of relief to more than 100 million middle-class Americans.
To the economic illiterates who buy into this argument, note that once a person gives his money freely in a voluntary exchange of currency for a commodity, that money does not belong to him anymore. It's not surprising that the Prince of Redistribution does not understand this concept, given his education. But why in the world would anyone living in the real-world buy into this stuff?
To the Obama lemmings out there: If not the freedom to engage freely in economic transactions, what? Do you want Mommy or Daddy to buy your gas for you?
Amazing...
Posts
4 comments:
Technically, yes, its a "voluntary exchange". But is it really, if the price for a commodity which you *must* buy is controlled and raised to a painful point, both for the individual and the country?
But is it really a [voluntary exchange], if the price for a commodity which you *must* buy is controlled and raised to a painful point, both for the individual and the country?
Yes, because consumers have a variety of choices. First, they can 'shop around'. Second, they can drive less. Third, they can buy more fuel-efficient cars.
These are called choices.
Finally, what constitutes 'painful'? What is painful to Bob may be quite comfortable to Jack. The implication of your response is that some person or institution exists capable of setting prices that are 'painful' to no one.
Thanks for the response.
1. Shop around means choosing between 4.59 a gallon or the bargain at 4.57 a gallon?
2. Drive less means not going to work? Or walking 5 miles to the nearest bus stop, and/or spending an extra two hours per day on the commute? Or should I sell my house and buy a more expensive residence near my job (which could disappear at any time)?
3. Sell my classic Taurus, which on my $35K job I'm hoping will run a couple more years, and buy a nice new hybrid?
Choices. Right. Maybe if you earn 100K.
When the price of gas becomes painful for consumers, and negatively effects the economy as a whole, while the oil companies are raking in record profits, I call that holding us over a barrel (so to speak), and I call that gouging.
I see nothing unethical or immoral about earning record profits so long as they were earned ethically. Would that all companies could enjoy such success.
Cheers,
Post a Comment