While fishing the news pipe-lines, I found a story that I could not resist commenting on. Read the Full Story here! The US Chamber of Commerce has suggested taxing hybrid and fuel efficient cars to make up the difference they would be paying with the gas tax (to pay for highways, pot holes, etc). You don't have to pull out your cereal-box decoder ring to decode the sub-text of this article. With more and more people (Article In October 10 issue of Time) switching to hybrid, and other more fuel-efficient vehicles to help curb the cost by inflated gas prices, those record profits declared by such corps. as Exon begin to deflate themselves in a hurry.. Meanwhile, gas execs have been fighting allegations of price gouging on capital hill in the past few weeks, and being asked to explain RECORD PROFITS!! (Exon more than doubled it's yearly earnings)
While both price-gouging, and shortages are evident, attacking people who are driving more fuel efficient vehicles is disturbing.
How is a tax increase going to raise Gas Companies profits?
The answer to this question is two fold. 1) It will encourage people to stop buying econamy cars, and 2) Congress has granted tax breaks to gas companies - The money has to come from somewhere!
Reading this article has me so seething with anger, I don't know quite what else to say. I will let you dear reader read the article for your self, and come to whatever conclusion you will come to.
Friday, November 25, 2005
Monday, November 21, 2005
Laid off for Christmas
How the west was Lost?
GM announced Monday that it will be lying off 30,000 employees to recuperate from this years profit losses, and already the mud-slinging has begun. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1333188&page=1 Those on the left have accused GM of using this maneuver to fatten its execs wallets, while those on the right have retorted that GM doesn't have any responsibility to provide indefinite employment. So who has more ground in this argument? I'll give you a hint; it's not the left or the right.
Yes, GM is experiencing lower demand for their vehicles, and yes again, reducing the number of vehicles produced does mean that you will need to reduce the number of people making said vehicles. However, this is not an anomaly, and laying off workers and eventually moving your operations “over seas” have become the number one business trend in the U.S. And it's no longer just affecting the manufacturing sector; it's spreading like plague into higher paying jobs, such as computer programming, too.
Return tomorrow for what this trend spells for U.S. economy, and what I propose as a solution. (It may just be my opinion, but at least I don't just complain endlessly about it.)
GM announced Monday that it will be lying off 30,000 employees to recuperate from this years profit losses, and already the mud-slinging has begun. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1333188&page=1 Those on the left have accused GM of using this maneuver to fatten its execs wallets, while those on the right have retorted that GM doesn't have any responsibility to provide indefinite employment. So who has more ground in this argument? I'll give you a hint; it's not the left or the right.
Yes, GM is experiencing lower demand for their vehicles, and yes again, reducing the number of vehicles produced does mean that you will need to reduce the number of people making said vehicles. However, this is not an anomaly, and laying off workers and eventually moving your operations “over seas” have become the number one business trend in the U.S. And it's no longer just affecting the manufacturing sector; it's spreading like plague into higher paying jobs, such as computer programming, too.
Return tomorrow for what this trend spells for U.S. economy, and what I propose as a solution. (It may just be my opinion, but at least I don't just complain endlessly about it.)
Thursday, November 17, 2005
Under construction
To my one faithful reader, I apologize for my long absence from the world of "blogging". I have been busy with work, school, and, well, that's about it. There is so much news, and so much to say. However, I am again writing on the run. So, until next time, here is a 9/11 link for you all to chew on. Call it liberal propaganda if it makes you sleep better, but at the end of the day the proof is there for those who have the stomach to believe that not everything is as the press has illuminated it.
Watch 9/11 video, then proceed.
The difficult thing about believing you have been lied to for the last five years, is accepting that you were fool enough to believe in it. For many of us, it is easier to continue defending what we have previously stood for, despite the facts. We will see a new breed of both conservative and liberal, one more fueled with passion than truth. For now, the battle is lost. It is lost until we can start fighting passionately about, and for, the truth again.
Cody Hobbs
Watch 9/11 video, then proceed.
The difficult thing about believing you have been lied to for the last five years, is accepting that you were fool enough to believe in it. For many of us, it is easier to continue defending what we have previously stood for, despite the facts. We will see a new breed of both conservative and liberal, one more fueled with passion than truth. For now, the battle is lost. It is lost until we can start fighting passionately about, and for, the truth again.
Cody Hobbs
Monday, October 17, 2005
Gas Crisis
The Gas Crisis
By Cody Hobbs
We are in the midst of a devastating crisis here in the United States. The cost of gas has bankrupt airlines, is forcing small trucking companies out of business, and it won’t be long before we see a major price jump in the price of other necessary goods, such as food, as well. This is due, in part, to the rising number of SUV’s on the road today. For some, driving a large vehicle is a necessity. Farmers, people who contribute to U.S. agriculture do need large vehicles to transport bails of hay, feed, and other supplies. But, many SUV drivers live in suburban America. This trend has proven devastating to our economy.
Wasn’t the oil shortage inevitable anyway?
Yes, it is. However; anyone with an elementary understanding of basic economics knows that when you raise the median average consumption of any product, you raise the average price. Subornites who trade in a more fuel efficient vehicle for a gas-sucking SUV don’t change the amount they drive. They still have to pick up the rug rates from soccer practice, do grocery shopping, drive to work and back, and run their errands. The amount of gas consumed does rise however.
This is the United States of America. I should be able to drive whatever I want!
And you’re absolutely correct. But, you are not the only one affected by your choice to drive a gas-guzzling beast. By making the choice to drive an SUV, you have caused a severe adverse supply shock to refined gasoline. And what happens when you increase the marginal average of consumption (demand) and the supply available decreases? That’s right, the average price per unit increases. Now, instead of $0.99, or even $2.00 gas, we are seeing soaring gas prices that are expected to reach $5.00 a gallon within the next two years, possibly by next summer.
Anyone can complain about something. What’s the solution?
As I have already said, this is America, and you should be able to drive whatever you’d like. But you do not have the right to make everyone else pay for your actions. That is why I am suggesting a split price for gas. People who chose to drive a more fuel efficient vehicle pays $2.00 per gallon for gas, and people who chose to drive a gas-monster pays $4.75 per gallon. People who do need larger vehicles for their industry, such as agricultural workers, construction, etc., should be allowed a discounted rate for fuel at $2.25 a gallon. How is this fair, you ask? Aren’t people who drive more fuel efficient vehicles already getting a “discount” by not having to fill up as much? No. As we have seen with major airline companies, even large corporations cannot afford fuel inflation. So how can we expect a medium to low wage income worker afford gas at $5.00 a gallon, even if they drive a civic? The split price is not meant to punish those who want to drive SUV’s, but it is meant as an incentive to get people to trade in their SUV’s for a more fuel efficient vehicle. Also, American car makers currently lose money on mid-sized sedans. They make money, they claim, only on large trucks, and SUV’s. This initiative is also meant to encourage American car makers to start thinking more fuel efficient. This is not a rant about the environmental damage that SUV’s supposedly cause. American industry cannot survive constant hikes in fuel! Something must be done. Pleas join me in writing a letter to your congressmen urging them to consider the split price initiative. The future of your nation’s economy depends on it. But don’t take my word for it. Get online, and do some research for yourself.
By Cody Hobbs
We are in the midst of a devastating crisis here in the United States. The cost of gas has bankrupt airlines, is forcing small trucking companies out of business, and it won’t be long before we see a major price jump in the price of other necessary goods, such as food, as well. This is due, in part, to the rising number of SUV’s on the road today. For some, driving a large vehicle is a necessity. Farmers, people who contribute to U.S. agriculture do need large vehicles to transport bails of hay, feed, and other supplies. But, many SUV drivers live in suburban America. This trend has proven devastating to our economy.
Wasn’t the oil shortage inevitable anyway?
Yes, it is. However; anyone with an elementary understanding of basic economics knows that when you raise the median average consumption of any product, you raise the average price. Subornites who trade in a more fuel efficient vehicle for a gas-sucking SUV don’t change the amount they drive. They still have to pick up the rug rates from soccer practice, do grocery shopping, drive to work and back, and run their errands. The amount of gas consumed does rise however.
This is the United States of America. I should be able to drive whatever I want!
And you’re absolutely correct. But, you are not the only one affected by your choice to drive a gas-guzzling beast. By making the choice to drive an SUV, you have caused a severe adverse supply shock to refined gasoline. And what happens when you increase the marginal average of consumption (demand) and the supply available decreases? That’s right, the average price per unit increases. Now, instead of $0.99, or even $2.00 gas, we are seeing soaring gas prices that are expected to reach $5.00 a gallon within the next two years, possibly by next summer.
Anyone can complain about something. What’s the solution?
As I have already said, this is America, and you should be able to drive whatever you’d like. But you do not have the right to make everyone else pay for your actions. That is why I am suggesting a split price for gas. People who chose to drive a more fuel efficient vehicle pays $2.00 per gallon for gas, and people who chose to drive a gas-monster pays $4.75 per gallon. People who do need larger vehicles for their industry, such as agricultural workers, construction, etc., should be allowed a discounted rate for fuel at $2.25 a gallon. How is this fair, you ask? Aren’t people who drive more fuel efficient vehicles already getting a “discount” by not having to fill up as much? No. As we have seen with major airline companies, even large corporations cannot afford fuel inflation. So how can we expect a medium to low wage income worker afford gas at $5.00 a gallon, even if they drive a civic? The split price is not meant to punish those who want to drive SUV’s, but it is meant as an incentive to get people to trade in their SUV’s for a more fuel efficient vehicle. Also, American car makers currently lose money on mid-sized sedans. They make money, they claim, only on large trucks, and SUV’s. This initiative is also meant to encourage American car makers to start thinking more fuel efficient. This is not a rant about the environmental damage that SUV’s supposedly cause. American industry cannot survive constant hikes in fuel! Something must be done. Pleas join me in writing a letter to your congressmen urging them to consider the split price initiative. The future of your nation’s economy depends on it. But don’t take my word for it. Get online, and do some research for yourself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)