Friday, April 27, 2012

Capitalism Explained

This one is easy. I can't believe what I hear. Gas prices are to high, so we should tax the oil companies? If you think that makes sense please raise your hand so some one can come by and dope slap you.

Here's how capitalism works people: Some one makes something or provides a service that some one else needs or wants. The person who with the need/desire will buy the product only if his need or desire is great enough to justify the price.

Competition forces each company to try to keep costs to a minimum by innovating and making themselves as efficient as possible.

Taxes imposed on the person/business providing the product or service increases their costs and so to continue to make a profit they must raise their prices at least as much as they are taxed. Usually though they must increase it more to cover extra accounting and legal fees associated with complying with the new tax. Those costs get passed on to you, the customers of course.

If the need or desire of the customer is great enough then the business will continue on, despite the higher price induced by the tax. However, with every price increase, you will drive away those who can't justify the increase in price, and as such the corporation will lose customers, profits will shrink, layoffs will ensue, and the tax revenue will decrease as a result. Remember the government taxes employment as well as profits.

This is exactly what is going on with gasoline. Most of us must have it. Therefor no matter how expensive it gets we will still buy it until it is so expensive it becomes counter productive, that is costs more to drive to work than you get paid. But as the costs go up we all find ways to reduce our consumption. This, as I stated before, reduces profits for the oil companies, forces layoffs, and reduces tax revenue.

Now on to the nonsense that big corporations love to shaft their customers. This idea goes back to what we call the "robber barons." They were the business men way back in the day that treated the market like the game monopoly. Once they had a monopoly on a particular item they could determine it's price because they then had no competition.

This is why today we have laws against forming monopolies. I'm all for encouraging competition. You see, so long as there are no monopolies the free market will regulate the prices and government never needs to step in. The only thing the government needs to do is to make sure monopolies aren't' formed, and in that endeavor they should be very cautious and only break up conglomerates if absolutely necessary.

Even today there are seaming monopolies, on certain products. Cement for an example. The reason this isn't a problem though is that in the modern era, most have realized that if you keep your prices low more people buy your product or service and you make more money. If you artificially inflate the price, you sell less, and make less money. That is why I say the government should only step in if absolutely necessary. What constitutes necessary is a whole discussion in of itself.

The oil companies don't have a monopoly. There are many companies selling gasoline. Ever see two gas stations across the street from one another, with one priced a few cents below the other? I see that almost every day. And if they aren't across the street they are within a minute of each other on the same road. That's competition at work.

So then why is gasoline so high? Instability in the middle east is a good start. Supply and demand regulates price. If demand exceeds supply, prices rise. If supply exceeds demand, prices decrease. Supply is being threatened, and this drives the price up on the market. Demand is also increasing, especially in China and India. This also increases the price of oil.

In the good ol' US of A the President and his administration have started a war on fossil fuels. The Keystone Pipeline being a prime casualty in that war. They are also preventing drilling, preventing new refineries from opening, and closing down current refineries. All of that increases the price of gasoline as it reduces the supply.

Now on top of that, if Obama raises taxes on the oil producers, he will be raising the price of gasoline, and possibly increasing unemployment. This will drive up the cost of EVERYTHING else you buy as it all takes oil to move goods from those who make the stuff to the store where you buy it. Still like his idea? Didn't think so.

NOW, lets review what we've learned today. 1) People in business provide a product or service that others either want or need 2) If the desire or need is great enough to justify the price then they purchase the product or service 3) In a free market system competition keeps the price as low as can be with current technology 4) Taxes increase prices for every one, and raising taxes will generally reduce demand, reduce employment, and reduce revenue.

Now that you understand Capitalism at it's most basic level,  please stop blaming it for our problems. Government is the problem. Get government out of the way and our economy will flourish and gasoline will be about $2 a gallon.

Long live the Free Market!

Wednesday, April 4, 2012


I'm not sure if thuggery is a word, but Chicago thuggery is the only thing I can think of that accurately describes the Presidents actions concerning the Supreme Court. By now I'm sure you've heard Obama's attempt to influence the SCOTUS decision on his Affordable Healthcare Act, and it makes me sick to hear this from our Fearless Leader.

The Court should ONLY take into account the Constitutionality, that is the Legality, of Obamacare. Nothing else should be considered. I do mean NOTHING. No one's opinion, wish or desire matters. No one's hopes and dreams matter here. No false appeals to sympathy matter here. The ONLY thing that should matter to each and every member of the Court is whether or not Obamacare is legal.

Already we have 3, maybe 4 people on that Court who hate the Constitution and want to rewrite, or at least re-interpret it. We have at least one justice, Justice Kagan, who should have recused herself but didn't. She was Solicitor General for Obama, and helped write the defense of Obamacare before being appointed to the Court! I believe her actions in not recusing herself warrant impeachment. But then I shouldn't be surprised by her lack of action. She was appointed by Obama, and his administration has shown absolutely no moral fiber.

Even with a stacked deck Obama is nervous. He's acting like a 4 year old: impatiently speaking down to people he should be holding in silent respect. I call this thuggery because he is not a 4 year old child, he is the President. No I don't think he is threatening the well being of any one on the Court, that's absurd. What Obama is getting at is letting the justices know that if they don't rule in his favor he will make them out to be the bad guys. And unlike him, they won't have a podium to rebut the public slighting that would ensue. That's political thuggery right there.

Think about it for a minute. You are a public figure as a Supreme Court Justice, but your not in the spot light very often. You also don't have press releases, or media statements. Now you have the President of the United States threatening to tell the whole country you made a bad decision. Think of that.

These Justices are supposed to be free from political pressure, hence the lifetime appointment. Hence the lack of elections. The President has stepped way out of line on this. It shouldn't' be a surprise though. He insulted them to their faces before when they didn't rule the way he would have liked in Citizen United. If Obama had the even an iota of respect for the Country, the Constitution, and the Justices, he would keep his mouth shut. You just don't do what he is doing in a polite society. But then since when has the Liberal Left been polite?

Obama's actions are despicable, once again. It's not the first time and I wager it isn't the last. I hope there is backlash on this from every angle. No the Liberal Media will only defend him. But I hope and pray that this power grab is reigned in by the people of this still just-barely-great nation.

God Bless America, and God Save America!

Monday, March 26, 2012

The Right to Defend our Rights

I do not know what exactly happened there in Florida that lead to the death of a young man, but my argument here does not reside in those details.

That some would use this boy's death to suggest, or even demand that "Stand your ground" (SYG) laws should be rescinded is beyond absurd.
If we have an unalienable right to life and liberty then by the same logic we have the right to defend that life and liberty or the right means nothing. If he was murdered, the SYG laws are not applicable. If he attacked the man who killed him with what could reasonably be considered brutal intent, then the killing was justified. Those that attack your life, by logical inverse, are forfeiting their own. That is the basic logic of law: that violation of another's rights is then punishable by elimination of the offender's rights.

With self defense, the one being attacked is having their most basic right, that is the right to life, threatened and in the moment of attack is rightly justified in killing their attacker if they posses the means. However, if they are successful at thwarting an attack without lethality, it would be wholly inexcusable to chase down their would-be attacker and kill them. They would then be the aggressor, and the murderer. It is only in the moment of the attack that the right to defense comes into play. The right to liberty is at work in standing your ground. You should fear no man, nor be intimidated to flee a public area. Standing your ground is defense of liberty, defending yourself from attack is defense of life, liberty, and every other right a human being innately expresses, for by losing your life you lose all other rights as well.

Thus, the clamoring to rid us of SYG laws because some one may have used it as an excuse to murder another human being is as foolish as abolishing anti-murder laws because some one was unjustly convicted. My statement above points to the real problem. Those that wish us to have to flee instead of defend ourselves ultimately are the same people who try to suppress free speech, attack Christianity at every turn, and yell racist, homophobe, or
misogynist when they are outwitted.

In short they are calling for a loss of freedom and are either misguided or out to abolish freedom and promote tyranny.

I'll say it again, Stand Your Ground laws (and the Castle doctrine for that matter) are as necessary as laws prohibiting murder (and breaking and entering). If you eliminate the legal ability of self defense, you are promoting murder.

But then this is about freedom, not murder. There are thousands of murders all across this country every year. Why is this one singled out? Simple: there is political gain to be had at the expense of our freedom. Our government is currently headed by a socialist dictator who has done more to harm our freedom than any single man before him. Those in his administration jump at every opportunity to destroy our freedom and obviously saw this as a way to strip away another one. Pray in earnest that they are not successful.

God Bless America, God Bless Freedom!

Thursday, March 22, 2012

What's in a VP?

Here's what I don't get. What's in a VP? Does the VP really matter? Well more to the point, why do people think the VP selection matters? I don't mean to say it doesn't matter at all, or that it's inconsequential, but it troubles me to see people who say "I couldn't vote for _____ until he chose ____." You fill in the blanks. I heard this with Mcain, and I'm hearing it again with Romney, and to a lesser extend Santorum.

So let me get this strait: you couldn't vote for the candidate because you dont' like him, don't agree with his policies, etc. But as soon as he selects some one as his VP that you would actualy want for president, all of a sudden it's ok to vote for some one you dissagree with?

What kind of twisted, illogical decision making is that? It's like saying "oh i hated how that car drove, but once i saw it with the wood trim i had to buy it!" How does the wood trim affect the performance of the car? The VP has no real power unless the president is incapacitated.

I'm not saying the VP doesn't matter at all, no it's important that person be a person you agree with AS WELL. But that AS WELL is critical. The VP isn't going to change who the President is, or how he/she runs things.

The vice president doesn't set policy, doesn't sign legislation into law, does't comand the military, and doesn't make selections for the Supreme Court. The VP position is, as has been stated many times, the most the useless position in the government. In modern times the position basicaly serves as a representative of the president, and not much else.

So if you can't stand the presidential candidate, and don't trust his policies, and won't vote for them as he or she stands alone, how does a VP change your vote? The VP will have to follow marching orders from the President. They will have little to no say over the presidents policies, especialy when you consider that most VP selections are either out of political turn, or to get your vote. Once in office the president can, and will, do what they were going to do any way. The candidate is making a political move with the selection, don't fall for it. If you won't vote for them alone, don't vote for them in company. A turd with whip cream on it is not a brownie.

Thursday, March 15, 2012

Respect, They Have None

The anger this picture stirs within me cannot be expressed in words worth writing here. I struggle to control my anger in the face of such utter contempt and disrespect for our nations flag. Have they no respect at all?

How dare they elevate one man to the level of honor that Old Glory has earned. She didn't get her respect automatically, she has earned it by the sweat of the common man who poured his soul into his work, and by the blood of patriots, men and women, all to often young enough to still be called boys and girls, who died, or were horribly maimed defending the freedom the American Flag stands for.

It is the people behind the Flag that earn the respect that makes men remove their hats, and soldiers proudly salute when the Colors pass bye. It isn't the lack of respect for the flag from which the problem stems, it's a lack of respect for the people who worked and fought for the respect that is represented by the flag.

Setting a persona onto a flag is a representation of tyrannical rule. The flag of our nation stands for the people who have helped to make it great. We salute and honor the flag because of those people, not because of the fabric of the flag or the federal government, nor the president. We love our country because our country is all the people we love, and the principals we aspire to. Setting a persona, a portrait of any one on the flag is to set that person up above the people and the principles that made this nation great.

The President is an elected official, he serves us, and no servant is greater than the master. Yet these people, with this flag, are setting Obama above us all, and above all our principals. This is disrespect of the most egregious kind.

They despise us, they despise our constitution, they despise all that makes us who we are, and this, this defamation is beyond belief. Don't think for a moment this is a mistake or an ill conceived publicity stunt. No, this is intentional, this is their intent! They want this, and Obama wants this. He has already been acting as a dictator using executive orders to go around congress and congress hasn't stopped him. He continues to say he will go around congress as much as he can whenever they don't do what he wants.

These people have the right to their free speech, and the right to disrespect us all they want, but don't be blind to what is really going on. Tyranny is working it's way into our land at an alarming rate. Public displays such as these are only symptoms of an underlying problem.

Pray for the country, never stop praying for our country!

God Bless America!