Jobs are the means, not the ends in themselves

For today's excerpt for the day: 

Russ Roberts, from the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, and John Papola just released the sequel to their Keynes/Hayek economic rap video (yes, seriously).  

"You see slack in some sectors as a “general glut”

But some sectors are healthy, and some in a rut
So spending’s not free – that’s the heart of the matter
too much is wasted as cronies get fatter.

The economy’s not a car, there’s no engine to stall
no expert can fix it, there’s no “it” at all.
The economy’s us, we don’t need a mechanic
Put away the wrenches, the economy’s organic"

Check out more at econstories.tv

Arghhhhh!

Congress should consider cutting multibillion-dollar subsidies to oil companies amid rising concern over skyrocketing gas prices, House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner said on Monday.


Is this not basic economics?  I mean, I'm a history major, I'm not exactly an expert in this and I simply cannot see the logic in a conclusion like this.  The worry is that gas prices are too high.  So, the conclusion is to make gas more expensive?  Really?  That's what we're going for here?  


Let me elucidate how this works in my brain.  Gas is expensive for numerous, numerous reasons, not the least of which are as follows:


1) tornado and storm damage to refineries, which are the link between oil drilling and the gas you put in your motor; the US already has a dearth of oil refineries, largely due to federal regulation limitations, which limit how much oil is produced even more than drilling regulations might
2) the war in Libya (oh, sorry, what are we calling it now?), during which the oilfields of the Libya are being set aflame
3) a stop on new oil drilling in the Gulf, as per our President's executive order


I could probably keep going, but that's the low-hanging fruit.  Now, oil companies in the US have huge upfront costs involved in locating and obtaining oil from sources.  Much like medical research, it can take years and cost millions to find successful wells.  The price of gas is reflected in the combination of all these factors: to cover overhead, to account for refining costs, to cover any shortages, etc.  Oil companies receive so-called "tax breaks" just like any other company, in order to balance out how these costs and prices interact  for the company and the consumer.  


Now, lifting "tax breaks" for oil companies is going to do at least two things.  It's going to force smaller companies that rely on tax breaks in order to break even during development years out of business.  The larger companies, the ones that get all the bad press like Exxon and Conoco can absorb the increased costs that are going to accompany the removal of "tax breaks".  But what that will do is increase their overhead costs.  And in order to compensate, those costs are going to come down the pipeline as increased price-per-barrel.  The companies are built to make a profit.  They are not charitable institutions.  If they don't make a profit, they go under and hundreds of thousands of more people are out of work.  Therefore, if they lose their present profit margin to an increased tax bill, they will shift costs elsewhere, a.k.a. to the consumer.  


So Boehner's big plan here is apparently to (1) force smaller businesses out of business, and (2) increase the price of gas at the pump.  I'm confused as to how exactly this is supposed to help the consumer. 


But of course, it obviously isn't meant to the help the consumer.  The system is built so that the blame gets placed on the corporation, not the government official who forced increased tax prices through stupid legislation.  It's all part of the "Narrative" that big bad oil companies are out to squeeze you for every bit you're worth, and the nice government man is HERE TO HELP.  


I'm so frustrated that Boehner is the one stepping in this.  I know I should have know better, but I still stupidly expected the GOP leadership to stay away from the same populist bullshit.  Will Collier offers this nice explanation of rising gas prices related to drilling rules, but we've got to be better than beating our heads against this same damn wall.  

Excerpt for the day - April 21

"To progressives, the best thing about railroads is that people riding them are not in automobiles, which are subversive of the deference on which progressivism depends. Automobiles go hither and yon, wherever and whenever the driver desires, without timetables. Automobiles encourage people to think they—unsupervised, untutored, and unscripted—are masters of their fates. The automobile encourages people in delusions of adequacy, which make them resistant to government by experts who know what choices people should make."


- George Will, on Why Liberals Love Trains @ Newsweek

Obama's Budgetary Speech

"But the real problem here, as we saw most vividly in Wisconsin recently, is that today's "progressives" are politically, and perhaps also ideologically, committed to preserving the labor monopolies that produce stupid, bloated and ineffective government."

- excerpt from James Taranto's terrific analysis over at WSJ.com

And this:

“I thought the president’s invitation…was an olive branch. Instead, what we got was a speech that was excessively partisan, dramatically inaccurate, and hopelessly inadequate to address our countries fiscal challenges"

I wish my hopelessly ignorant friends on Facebook would face the reality of a failed welfare state.  But there are academics in my department who study the welfare state, who don't think there is any problem with the welfare state in Europe.  The DOOM (tm Ace) is upon them, and they think we can tax the top 2% earners to a balanced budget.  I feel like anyone who engages in such BS should read Iowahawk's budget pay-off breakdown or watch the video-ized version done by Bill Whittle to see why "eating the rich" is possibly the WORST idea to treat trillions in debt and double-digit unemployment.  

Oh, and this:

" Does no one else in the media notice this? That after sounding like an adult in the very beginning, and telling the public that any politician who tells you that we can reduce our deficit just by cutting "waste, fraud, and abuse" is a demagogic liar, he then goes on to only specify cuts targeting "waste, fraud, and abuse"? ...

Does no one else notice that we just heard that Obama is a demagogue, and a liar, and unserious about governance from the highest possible authority possible -- the mouth of Barack Hussein Obama himself?"

-Ace @ AOSHQ

Excerpt of the day - April 13

"As was revealed yesterday re the sham budget “cuts”, the government class’s response to its fiscal fraud is to obscure it via political fraud, a sleight of hand that demonstrates utter contempt for the citizenry. If this is the best they can do, they’re ensuring that everything is going to get worse. Real worse, real poor, real fast."


- Mark Steyn, @ the Corner




And in the comments:


"Indirectly, that evinces utter contempt for the citizenry which STILL reveres the Constitution. But it's the **limitations on their authority** for which their utter contempt is so virulent.

Mr. Steyn, this is what happens when a nation with a WRITTEN Constitution is led by people who deem our Constitution "dead" in the absence of "leaders" "resuscitating" it with injections of their own personal proclivities, aided and abetted by judges who -- with the legal academy as their cheering section -- subvert legal judgment with personal will."

Excerpt for the day, April 7

"...more taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood equals more abortions. In 2000, Planned Parenthood performed 197,070 abortions while making 2,486 adoption referrals. In 2009, they performed 332,278 abortions and made just 977 adoption referrals. That means an 80 percent increase in taxpayer funding resulted in a 69 percent increase in the number of abortions and a 61 percent decrease in the number of adoption referrals."


- Marjorie Dannenfelser, quoted @ the Corner


And apparently they have enough money to pay people $350 a week to campaign against the defunding of PP.