"We're Screwed '08"

As I've written here before, "Election 08:  No matter who wins, we lose."

Now, there's a website (and I had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with this site) named http://www.werescrewed08.com/

I can't vote for HRC.  Why?  She'd force universal healthcare down our throats.  It would bloat government and ... well.  The money for all these government programs that all the candidates are proposing has to come from SOMEWHERE, right?  And we all know that money doesn't grow on trees.  It's not like you can plant a money tree in your backyard and pluck a 20$US every time you need one.  It'd be nice, though.

So, where does that money come from?  Taxes.  They'd have to go up.  There's simply no way around that fact. 

As for BHO (again, the only reason I include his middle initial is because BO makes it look like 'body odour.')  Well, I can't vote for him either.  And it's not because he's black.  It's because I disagree with his stance on a lot of issues.  And his Pastor didn't help him, either. 

JM (also known as John McAmnesty and John McShamnesty) is ... well.  He's chummy with La Raza (literally - THE Race (as an aside, can you imagine the uproar that would happen if a group of white men called themselves 'The Race?'  It'd be the KKK part deux.))

Oh, and let's not forget president Bush.  God, but how I regret voting for him.  I even wrote numerous articles against Al Gore and got invited to the White House Dinner.  Honestly. 

But now?  I regret voting for him.  He's stuffing the Iraq spending bill with something called "The Merida Initiative"  What is it you ask?
It's a bill to help Mexico secure their southern border.  Honestly.

We can't secure ours, but we can help them secure theirs.  AMERICA first, Mr. Bush.

And if I had it to do over again, I would NEVER have voted for you.

aoljpictureUpload, aoljpictureUpload_1

"But We're Only Making 8 per cent!"

I'm sure that by now, you've heard the oil company's excuse "We're only making 8 per cent profit on petrol/oil!"

And ... they're right.  They've used this excuse before.  They've also said that they should be allowed to earn as much as a profit as other consumer goods.  Well...

To understand this, we need to take a step back.  So, let's imagine.

"Widgets Are Us" is the world's largest maker of widgets.  That's ALL they make.  They tried to make waggles, but they didn't sell.  So, they only make widgets.  After their costs (payroll, rent on building, health insurance for workers, utilities, etc) are taken into account, it costs them $.27 on the dollar to make each widget.  BUT...they're also in business to make a profit, so they can't SELL the widget at "Cost (what it costs to make.)"  They need to make a profit.  So, they sell their widgets at $.30 to each of their buyers.  In other words, they make $.03 PROFIT per widget.

Your friendly neighbourhood store (and I've worked retail, so I KNOW this happens) buys their widgets directly from Widgets Are Us.  They buy them at $.30 per widget, and they buy a LOT of widgets.  BUT, this store (let's call them XYZZ Corp) is also in business to make a profit, so they can't SELL the widget to you at $.30.  And, in fact, when you went shopping the other day you did indeed see one of their widgets for ... $.45?!?!?  Yup.

This difference between what they sell it to you for ($.45) and what they BOUGHT it for ($.30) is called MARKUP.  (This is NOT profit...not yet.)

So -  .45 - .30 = .15 markup.  In this case, it's also 50 per cent.  A 50 per cent markup?!?  Yup.  Again, I've worked retail.

But ... we haven't figured in XYZZ's costs yet.  And they do have a lot of cost.  Their employee's salary, healthcare costs, rent for buildings, utilities, costs for shipping, etc.  When you subtract the COST from the MARKUP, you're left with PROFIT.

Well, XYZZ didn't make this sucker ... er widget, they BOUGHT it, so there's no production cost.  BUT...shipping from their DC (Distribution Centre) to your local store does figure in.  So... we know that it cost you $.45 to buy this widget and they bought it for $.30.

Now it's time for math.  The way you figure profit is the profit relative to the sales price, or (.30/.45) x 100% = ?

In this case it's 66.67 per cent?!?  Yup.  66 per cent profit.  Again, I've worked retail.

The oil companies are correct in that their 8 per cent is peanuts compared to some other items.  BUT ... considering the sheer VOLUME (amount) of petrol purchased at the pump, it becomes easy to see where their record profits are coming from.

An excellent primer to MARKUP (business) can be found here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markup_%28business%29

John McCain and La Raza

Oh, the Politics of Identity!  "I'm a (hyphenated)-American!"  Whatever happened to just being a plain American? 

http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/troosevelt.asp

Read the whole thing (yes, it is long, but it's necessary to read and understand all of it.)

Read especially the part where he talks about a hyphen.  And then read about La Raza (literally; THE Race.)  An excellent article about it is here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Raza which states that, contrary to many wild claims you might have heard about it NOT having been coined by a Mexican...BUT:  "The term originated in the book La Raza Cósmica written by a Mexican writer, José Vasconcelos. He described La Raza Cosmica as the product of racial mixing over time that was already in progress in the Hispanic world."

YIKES!!!  Don't mention that to the PC crowd!!!  Or that he believed in supremacism.  Just of the Mexican people, of course.  And their decendants. 

Hellllloooo, Mr. McCain? 

I know this next link goes to Michelle Malkin's site, but there's a lot of good info on it:

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/05/05/mccain-to-speak-at-open-borders-la-raza-the-race-conference/

Oops.  I won't be voting for McCain, either.

As I've written before:  Election '08:  No matter who wins, we lose.

And you can take THAT to the bank.

Survey SAYS ... I was right.

Well, another night of insomnia has come ... and gone.  I'm gonna try to get a least an hour or so of sleep soon, but before I do:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aza2XQB.kk0k&refer=worldwide

Their first paragraph:  "May 5 (Bloomberg) -- More than 200 economists, including four Nobel prize winners, signed a letter rejecting proposals by presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and John McCain to offer a summertime gas-tax holiday."

Ding.  And the reasons?  Because it doesn't save people much money and because it reduces the tax monies available to maintain roads and bridges.  DING.  That's what I wrote, too.  And I'm not an economist. 

BUT...then we come to what JM said:  "``I find people who are the wealthiest who are most dismissive of a plan to give low-income Americans a little holiday''  Ummm...I'm not wealthy.  Far from it.  I've debt coming out of my ears, frankly.  It's just that I'm not quite so stupid, JM.  I KNOW this is a bad idea, and I KNOW *WHY* it's a bad idea.  Yes, 30$US does more money to me, but that's saved not at one fillup at the pump, but over the ENTIRE driving season (the summer months.)  30$US saved over several months?  Better than nothing, but nowhere near as much as they want it to sound.

``I'm not going to put my lot in with economists'' (HRC said) because ``we would design it in such a way that it would be implemented effectively.''   Oh?  How's that, HRC?  ::tick::  ::tick:: ::tick::  ::tick::

Um...no details here, folks.  Just that she would implement it "...effectively."  Um...news flash; the President doesn't have that type of authority.  Sorry, HRC, but the President really doesn't.  (Since you're running for that office, I kind of expect you to keep up on little things like this.)

In all, there's nothing new here.  Just stupid politicians giving stupid ideas trying to win votes.

The Politics of Oil

Well.  An entry about politics.  :)  Here we go...

Hillary Rodham Clinton (henceforth referred to as HRC) and Barack Obama (henceforth referred to as BHO (because 'BO' makes it sound like he's got body odour)) are on differing sides about the same question.

HRC is touting suspending the petrol tax for the summer driving season.  She's also for having the oil companies pay for the tax, in order that they reign in their record profits.  In theory, that sounds like a good idea.  It would save people some money that they could use for other things ... like groceries, rent, etcetera.  BHO is with John McCain (henceforth referred to as JM) in opposing this idea.

I do like some of HRC's ideas, but she's wrong about this ... in my opinion.  Here's why:

Suspending the petrol tax is about $.18 on the US dollar.  It can be more or less in some areas.  The government uses these monies to build, maintain and repair roads and bridges.  Suspending this tax would deprive the government of some of these monies, and it is possible that some repair projects could face funding problems.

Another reason that this is a bad idea is that BHO is correct when he said that the oil companies would simply raise prices, like they did in Illinois.  Seriously.  The oil companies would raise their price, thereby offsetting the savings from the tax.  The oil companies would make more money ... hence more profit.  Oops. 

I don't know how many people reading this entry (assuming that anybody actually IS) were around during the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo.  A very well-written description can be found here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Oil_Embargo for those that weren't.

I, however, was.  I remember my father and my mother sitting in our vehicle waiting to get petrol.  And it wasn't pretty.  Yes, some fist-fights DID break out.  Harsh words were exchanged.  (I do need to point out right here that my father never participated in the fights or the exchange of words.  None of us did.)

What does that have to do with this?  Simple.  We need to end our dependency on oil.  I've written this before, so it's not new.  Also, after the Embargo, we as a Nation looked at alternatives to oil.  But it didn't last long, and the smell of sweet crude and dollar signs made the industry complacent.

Could the Embargo happen again?  It certainly could.  And at some point, it probably will.  Only this time, we'll have let it happen by not exploring alternatives.  And I don't mean drilling in ANWR, I mean getting off of oil.  IT CAN BE DONE.

But BHO and JM are correct in that this is a bad idea.  I'd go further and call it a cheap political stunt.

I'm in no way suggesting that I'm in favour of higher taxes.  I believe that we're already overtaxed.  But this idea is a bad one...a very bad one.  It deprives the government of monies it needs to maintain the roadways, and does nothing to solve the long-term problem.  And making the oil industry answer to Congressional hearings?  I've not forgotten that they have ALREADY had their hearings in the past over the price of petrol.  We've already been down this road, HRC.  It didn't do any good because the politicians (that's you, by the way) and the oil industry decided it shouldn't.  Now here we are again.  Same problem.

Perhaps HRC will come back later in the campaign and say she 'misspoke' or was taken 'out of context.'  How many times have we heard THAT line during this campaign ... from ALL parties?  As I've already written, it's come to the point where I wouldn't believe ANY politician, no matter WHAT they said. 

We need to get off of oil.  It really is that simple.

Driving and Petrol

Well...just yesterday I said a few more entries like that and this would turn into a driving journal.

Then today, somebody tailgated me ... again.  Brake check...still tailgating.

Then we come to a section of road with three lanes.  One going northbound, another southbound and in the middle a centre turn lane.

You're not supposed to use the centre turn lane to pass another vehicle, but that's exactly what some woman in a Chevy Malibu did.  The speed limit on that section of road is 35 mph.  I was doing 37.  She passed me in the centre turn lane as if I were standing still.

Some times I wonder why I even drive on the roads...the drivers out there like that really upset me.

But something else upset me later on...a paper that said that petrol prices in the US could reach 10$ per gallon. 

Here's what gets me.  16 years ago Bill Clinton, while running for the presidency, was talking about hydrogen fuel cells.  Now I've already written about them - that they're only a stop-gap.  But that's not my point.

12 years ago as President Clinton ran for his second term, he again talked about hydrogen fuel cells.  Eight years ago, George Bush talked about hydrogen fuel cells while he was running for the presidency.  Four years ago, President Bush again mentioned hydrogen fuel cells.

16 years, folks.  Not one damn thing got done by the politicians due to the oil industry's lobbyists.  NOT ONE DAMN THING.

Could you imagine what the US could do with the money that we're using to purchase oil?  We could solve so many problems with that money.  We could also tell the oil producing states that we don't need their oil.

Guess what would happen?  They'd suddenly lose a HUGE source of revenue.  Some of those governments might crumble.  And they'd ALL treat the US with more respect.

Of course, that's just a fairy tale.  You and I both know that with the record profits that the oil companies are posting that nothing will get done.

And yes, I've seen Shell's, BP's and Chevron's propaganda adverts about being "Green."

Buffalo chips.  They could have solved the problem already.  Now, the technology for fuel cells is ALMOST there ... but we could have had it 16 years ago.

And biofuel?  Good idea as another stop-gap.  But don't believe the propaganda that the rise in food prices is due to the biofuels being used.  We produce only enough biofuels to account for 20 per cent of the increase in food prices.  Don't believe me?  Google it.

Somebody, somewhere, is making a tonne of money.  I have no problem with people making money, but I DO have a problem with forcing other people to pay higher prices for you to get it.

Again, before you call me a conspiracy theororist, G O O G L E  I T.  Seriously.  Google is your friend.  Well...sometimes not.  But that's another story.

And speaking of stories, what's wrong with this picture:

(Image copyright 2008 Europa Technologies.  Courtesy of Google Earth.)

That building is on a US Naval Base.  Seriously.  Google (God, that sounds like a broken record, doesn't it?) "Swastika building" and you'll find it.

aoljpictureUpload, aoljpictureUpload_1

Oy

Oy.  I think I need to clean out the cobwebs from here.  It's been a while since my last entry, but I've not been idle.  Neither have the politicians, the race-hustlers, and our favourite(?) villans, the identity thieves.

I really wish I had more to write about...or more accurately, the will to do so.  A LOT has been happening out there and now with the economy tanking, it's not going to get better.

BUT; Google "Bilderburg."  Their own documents prove that they engineered the sub-prime mortgage crisis.  And the Fed taking further control?  Also in the documents.

Now before somebody calls me a conspiracy theororist ... do a Google search.  It's easy. 

It's almost enough to make me want to bury my head in the sand, but that wouldn't help anybody.  Unfortunately, we as a people have to get involved.  That means putting down the TV remote, getting off the couch, and getting involved. 

But as long as I'm on a rant, would you PLEASE drive carefully to where you're going?  Please.  I had some idiot tailgate me so close I couldn't even see his headlamps.  But I did get some satisfaction.

BRAKE CHECK!!!

Idiot drops cell phone.  Idiot slams on brakes.  Car damn near comes to a full stop.  Yeah, I know it's not the safe thing to do.  But hopefully that idiot learned something.

And while we're on the subject...you know those lines on the roadway?  They're there for a reason, folks.  Seriously.

A few more blogs like this, this is going to turn into a driving journal.  ::sigh::