Bush and the Republicans have thwarted attempt after attempt by Democrats to pop the speculative oil bubble and provide relief to consumers. Each time, Republicans sided with Big Oil over the American people.
Substantial increase in grain production outlook and decreased speculation have seen a sharp drop in prices for corn, wheat and soybeans, yet anti-ethanol critics continue to complain. What's going on?
John McCain may not know what gas costs or when he last pumped any, or performed any other act not connected to politics or outpatient care, but he's had hundreds of town hall meetings.
Why are the Democrats in Congress, and the Obama campaign, still fluttering with anxiety to join the "Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less" campaign introduced and orchestrated by Newt Gingrich?
This is easily the best energy plan ever put forward by a nominee of either party. By comparison, the plan of John "Nothing but Nukes" McCain plan is a joke.
For only the fourth (or fifth, depending on how you count) time in his presidency, George W. Bush had a veto overridden by both houses of Congress thi...
The barrenness of the US manufacturing landscape was very much the consequence of a dollar that was too high for too long.
Obama was observing that coastal drilling would save us so little oil and so little money even twenty years from now, that you can actually save more money immediately by doing "simple things."
What is McCain's next commercial going to be? That Obama is responsible for global warming? The recent outbreak of salmonella? The inability of the Chicago Cubs to win a World Series?
In 1938 Congress passed the Fair Labor Standards Act regulating the eight hour day, 40 hour week. Most scholars of work and many Americans agree: the traditional work schedule is a relic.
Oil is a financial asset now. It attracts hundreds of billions of dollars of institutional investment. And like all financial assets throughout time, it is given to fashion and fad.
Devising new and hilariously clever agitprop words like "Defeatocrats" is clearly more patriotic than actually addressing the principle source of global and domestic instability.
Though McCain's plan for offshore drilling will not ease the energy crisis, it is dandy patronage for the oil industry, who will be able to make nice profits from extracting and selling the 200,000 barrels per day.
Maybe John McCain wants to mock the idea of simple ways we can use less oil and protect America and our troops, while blocking efforts to get off Middle East oil, but we take it dead seriously.
I never cease to be amazed by the vehemence of opinions expressed on energy by people who are spectacularly underinformed. Let's first begin with a top ten list of clear-cut facts.
What McCain is not telling people is that oil is an international commodity. The U.S. owns only 3% of world's total known oil reserves and, therefore, it is not a player, in a positive way, in setting the price.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
As long as unions insist on overpaying for what amounts to grunt labor, the situation won't change. If you want to dig ditches, don't expect a big paycheck. If you want to dig ditches and get a big paycheck, expect an illegal alien to take your place or expect your job to go overseas.
I resent overpaying grunt management (short-term thinkers creating long-term losses). Perhaps the board of directors should be outsourced.
Overpaying workers, managers, or suppliers results in a costlier product. Free markets address those problems eventually.
Lets just accept for argument's sake all the claims by you that investors are greedy and we need to pay more attention to the needs of employees.
How it stands is that investors are the owners of a corporation and thus their demands and needs come first. But how to change that?
Well you are going to have to start with first shutting off capital markets (equity and debt markets). Since i get the general notion that most liberals hate these anyway, shouldnt be a problem.
How about you guys first start voting politicians in congress who would have a majority opinion that
1) eliminate stock markets
2) The corporations are already public, the govt. allows a buyout of the investors at a small premium of current prices and take them over private. so in essence they beocme govt. entities (since we all know corporations are evil and govt can run it better).
that seems to be the only way to go about it. so go ahead and start a grassroots movement.
It is the function and the duty of the corporations to maximise the profits of the investors. That means keeping wages as high as possible and prices as high as the market will bare, ruining the environment as much as they can get away with, and using predatory practices to eliminate the competion.
It is the funtion and the duty of the goverment as the representative of the people to protect the pubic interest by strictly regulation the activities and policies of these corporations.
The corporations put the needs of the investors first. The government must put the needs of the people first. if the government is protecting the investors, who is protecting the people?
You have the first statement correct. the sole purpose of a corporation's management and administration is to maximize Stockholder profit. This does not mean, however, keeping wages low, prices high, ruining the environment, or using predatory practices.
A corporation who wants to sell products in today's diverse economic and sociocultural environment needs to sell its products at the equilibrium price or offer such benefits as to encourage the consumer to buy at a higher price (recycled paper, for example, the benefit being less new timber cut in order to produce the product, improved environmental sensitivity, etc.) There are times, due to the nature of demand, that increasing prices to the maximum will reduce profit, and there are others that will have the opposite effect. What I mean by this is that not all corporations operate in the manner you state. In fact, most operate well within the realms of legality, ethics, and the golden rule. There are a few who operate outside common courtesy, but I firmly believe that the market will weed them out.(If we can stop bailing them out when they would otherwise fail)
Regarding Government, I would just say that the biggest help they could be to the people is to concentrate on infrastructure and common defense and leave business to businessmen and businesswomen.
While I agree it is astonishing to even have to argue whether high oil prices are, overall, very bad for the U.S. economy, you guys need to quit trying to argue economics with the left. You cannot hold a rational discussion with someone whose basic idea of "fairness" is that some incomes is taxed at different RATES than others (one assumes God is unfair asking everyone for 10%) and that one "union" of people should be allowed to tell a free adult citizen he can't work somewhere because he doesn't belong to their club (notwithstanding freedom of association), think that 5.7 percent unemployment in 2008 is worse than 25% during the Depression, and that the wage someone should earn bears no relation whatsoever to the demand for their skills. They've already drunk the Kool-Aid, so don't waste your time.
For you classists out there preparing to attack me as an rich Republican boogeyman, I am an Independent voter, I was raised in a mobile home on the wrong side of town, went to public school (graduating at the top of my class), my parents and I all worked to put me through a state college (consistently among the best, according to U.S. News), and I have worked my about halfway up the corporate ladder. I agree with McCain 60% of the time (Hilary 40%), but that beats the 5% with his opponent, none of which is in and economic arena that is simply not his strength.
Ask not why John S. McCain III hates the American worker. Ask why John S. McCain III hates America. Not one military operation was launched to free our prisoners in North Viet Nam in all the time he was