Windfall Losses

Just a few months ago, our politicians were screaming about "Windfall profits" of the Big Oil. They claimed that the greed led to the huge profit margins of the big oil and how they need to pay their fair share back to the American people.

Now pretty much the same politicians are claiming that Wall Street greed is causing those catastrophic losses.

So, is it fair to ask if Congress deems that Windfall profits be taxed, should windfall losses be compensated?

While our pols were hyperventilating about Windfall profits of Big Oil, oil quickly moved below $100 a barrel. And nary a peep about how that happened.

Republican Ticket

A lot has been said about the Republican ticket since the Gov. Palin was nominated the VP candidate. And most of it negative attacks from MSM and the Democrats. I do not add or subtract from what has been said. These are simply my opinions about the Republican ticket.

• Fiscal conservative: Not easy being a governor and a fiscal conservative. And especially if you are from Alaska. Even more if you are Republican from Alaska. Vice Presidents don't always sway the administration's fiscal policy. But Dick Cheney changed what a Vice President does (This might only be a GW legacy that might not last in a McCain administration).
• Social conservative: Her family is a testament to that. And here, many play Gotcha about her pregnant teen daughter. But what you are does not always prevent such things. Even in the most closeted families, kids spend inordinate amount of time with their peers. This is a scenario most parents dread. And Gov. Palin's choices are commendable. And definitely not the ones left-coast liberals align with. A lot of us do agree with those choices and values that they represent.
• Normal: She is normal. She is hard working. She did not go to Ivy league colleges. She has funny names for her kids. She sounds like most of my neighbors.

McCain is the original maverick. A lot has been said about how the Republican base is angst at his maverick tendencies. But most forget, he won the Republic nomination in Republican primaries (only hardened base voters vote in primaries). But picking Gov. Palin was the first thing he has done to acknowledge the concerns of the base. And it is good politics. (MSM will say, how dare he play politics?)

McCain's economic policies are good. His pronouncements are awful - just listen to his latest campaign ad. Thus giving us a pause as to which one he believes in. In these times, it is hard to say the right thing. We sure hope he knows the right things to do. I think his congressional record pretty much confirms that he knows them.

Over lunch today, one of my colleagues brought this topic up. And before I could say anything at all, another colleague pounced upon the topic - essentially declaring that all Republicans are fools for having made up their mind - because they vote for the party. In the same sentence he claimed that they are only voting because of Gov. Palin.

He was so condescending of my choices and essentially my intelligence that I decided to write this post. May be this is why we are rallying behind Gov. Palin's candidacy more than McCain's.

In the end, I had to leave the conversation by saying that, of the three only I could vote this November.

5 million new jobs

The Ad says:

"The hands that built this nation can build a new economy. The hands that harvest crops can also harvest the wind. The hands that install roofs can also install solar panels. The hands that build today's cars can build the next generation fuel-efficient vehicles."

...

"Create five million jobs developing home-grown energy technologies because America's future is in our hands"

But if my roofer can actually fix the solar panels and more than likely my electrician can hook it up, where are the 5 million new jobs? Aren't they the 5 million existing jobs?

I guess that would be "Audacity of Truth".

$4

I don't think I need a more descriptive title - everyone knows exactly what I mean. But most don't understand its direct message(s).

1. Conserve: No, most people don't get this message. They are quick to lash out at some "greedy" corporation increasing the price at whim. And of course, somehow the Bush administration is to blame. And the media does its round of disinformation.
2. Weak Dollar: Oil is dollar denominated. So, a weak dollar demands more of them for the same gallon. I don't expect general population to understand the economics behind it, what's with the Fed!!!

Conserve: Let's see. This weekend, during the "heat wave" in the north east, I drove to a local Best Buy. In an otherwise empty parking lot, I could find parking upfront. I parked next to a fairly late model Jeep (large) - noticed that the engine was running but no driver. I noticed couple of passengers inside. They must be enjoying music and the air conditioning. I went in, browsed for half-an-hour or so. When I drove off, that Jeep was still running - parked. What a colossal waste? If it is just air conditioning, store was very comfortable. And it wasn't crowded either. Aren't there better ways of generating electricity for that air conditioning than running a Jeep 4x4 (6 or 8 cylinder engine) idling in a parking lot? And I am sure this indigent driver would be happy to mouth off into a microphone if a reporter were to approach him/her about the price of gas - blaming some "invisible" corporation. Why are we so stupid?

And my favorite pet peeve - speeding. Especially, speed up to catch up with the car in front of you. Most modern cars come equipped with Gas Milage display. And it is pretty obvious that you get the most milage when you are driving steady. And yet people are constantly revving up to catch the next car ahead and put the breaks on to slow down. Each time burning more gas than the engine needs to keep the same pace. Most internal combustion engines (what every car has) operate optimally around 60-70 mph. Even if you don't drive a hybrid (I don't), by driving steadily on a highway, you can still get a respectable milage. I get 30 mpg on most days - driving about 60 miles round trip. I am often amazed how few people use cruise control.

Weak Dollar: What's with the Fed? Weak dollar has a huge following domestically - for all the wrong reasons. Its politically very popular. With a weak dollar, our exports are cheaper and hence more in demand overseas. So congressmen pressure both the Fed and the administration - both of which accommodate those popular items. The flip side of this is that all our imports, including oil is more expensive. And as American's are by far the largest consumers in the world, we are net importers of foreign goods. All of which is more expensive due to a weak dollar. Administration thinks that its public statements about "strong dollar" policy is enough to fool currency markets, which are closely monitoring administration's deeds.

And the Fed's easy money spigot. Is there any adult supervision going on over there? And everyone is defending the indefensible - the link between easy money and the weak dollar. All you need is common sense. But these guys are economists for crying out loud.

$4 gas is better than $10 that the Europeans pay. And our commodity markets do work. And prices do come down eventually. Not quite so in many other parts of the world.

Lapel Pin

Check out the definition in Wikipedia. So, why has it become a controversy on the campaign trail?

Turns out, the media did not make it a big deal. Obama campaign made it a big deal. He was merely asked a question. And he could have chosen one of many benign responses. However, he chose to denigrate every one who puts on a display of their patriotism. And now he is the one complaining that it is being blown out of proportion.

Every time he is asked to answer some of his troubling associations and actions, he accuses every one else of blowing it out of proportion - anyone remember Rev. Wright.

So, what's next. If he is elected president, he would join anti-American protestors with a spontaneous display of flag burning!

Guilt

Our society these days is full of guilt complexes. White guilt (or slavery guilt), western guilt, wealth guilt and the list goes on. But if you look under the covers, it is all guilt about things done by past generations. And none of the folks feel any guilt about things that they do every day.

Some level of guilt of ones own action is warranted and is healthy for the society. But guilt about the actions of the past generations is unnecessary and accomplishes nothing. In fact, it is counter productive.

Let's take White guilt. This is mostly an affliction of the liberal elite. And yet this guilt has not advanced any positive outcome in either race relations in America or the uplifting of the blacks.

On the contrary it has advanced a sense of entitlement. There are no slave holders nor slaves alive today. So, how is a government handout achieved through general taxation, fair to the current generation. Providing an equal opportunity is fair and available to one and all. This is after all the land of opportunity. Anyone who claims otherwise are ignoring the countless immigrants to this country that have succeeded.

And western guilt. This is a more global phenomenon afflicting the European elite. And it is the basic belief that their occupation of Asian and African countries resulted in their widespread poverty. Where is any evidence of that? British laid millions of miles of rail lines across much of Indian subcontinent - much of it for their own gain. And yet they did not rip it all off when they left (scorched earth policies of most vanquished armies). India wasn't even a single nation until the British rule. And then there are all these African nations. Their infighting is to blame for their current state. Assuming that the British plundered India and the African nations equally (and left around the same time), India is not remotely as bad as majority of sub-Saharan African nations today are. Once the Europeans left the scene, fate of Africa remained their own. And why does west agonize about that. And yet their actions now, with their farm subsidies really matter to poor African countries. That is what they can do to remedy. Not express guilt about a past generations actions.

And then there is guilt about being rich. If you earned every one of your dimes honestly, it does not matter if you have billions. There is nothing to be guilty about. Poverty exists no matter what you do. Because if you are not rich, then you are poor. And making it even worse for others. At least, with you being rich, we don't have to worry about you. Your personal philanthropy is great, but don't recommend socialist principles for the rest of us. You see this with Warren Buffet and Bill Gates. I don't have a problem with their success - just what they profess for us, high taxes.

And finally, the rest of us - the average Joes. Get rid of those guilt feelings about what your grand father may have done - either willfully or ignorantly. Think and feel guilty about things you do everyday, every little thing indeed. Did you speed today? Did you beat a red light? Ultimately, these things matter you know.

Prime Minister of United States

He is running for the office of the President of United States. And yet on his campaign trail, he sounds like he wants to be the Prime Minister of United States. Of course, I am talking about Mr. Obama.

I can certainly understand his dilemma. As member of the most pompous deliberative body, his tendency is to debate, debate and more debate. However, that is his current job - not the job he is running for.

For as back in history as George Washington, almost every president had to fend off the legislature encroaching on constitutionally guaranteed privileges of the executive. So, in his stump speech recently, he was critical of Mr. Bush for not consulting the legislature. I think Mr. Obama fails to grasp the separation of powers as enshrined in our constitution. Or, it is merely an electioneering gimmick.

Each of the branches - legislative, executive and the judicial - have always been pushing the envelope of its reach throughout the existence of this nation. And each has been rebuffed by the other. From time to time, the balance has moved from one to the other. But overall, it has been a healthy balance. And all of that is enshrined in the 220 year-old document - our constitution.

So, Mr. Obama's proposal might even run foul of the constitution. But my own guess is that this is pure electioneering. If he were to be the president, he would be fighting the legislature just as much. We have an interesting spectacle in this election that all 3 remaining candidates are from the 'Most pompous deliberative body in the world'.