VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 00:15:45 05/22/04 Sat
Author: siempre
Subject: Jason Hommel on Barbara Boxer

I received the following, from U.S. Senator of California, Barbara Boxer. Her comments are indented. Included is my response.


Dear Friend:

Rising gas prices is an issue that impacts all Californians.
Whether you drive a car, own a business, or buy groceries and
other goods, you feel the pinch of higher gas prices. For
months, both in Washington and in California, I have been
focusing on the critical problem of rising gas prices.

Over the past three months, gasoline prices have spiraled out
of control. Nationwide, the average price per gallon of gas
has risen from $1.54 on January 5th to $1.88 on April 12th.
Here in California, the price increase over this same period
has been even sharper, from $1.61 to $2.15. In some areas of
California, the price is much higher. In response to these
rising prices, I have come up with a 9-point plan to fight
rising gas prices. My plan includes:


As per your request, I have feedback about your 9 point plan. So that you know, I'm well researched in economics, and I have an email list of 9000 who read my weekly reports on the silver market. I do not own any oil stocks or have any interest in any oil companies.


1. FTC Investigation of Current Situation

First, I have called on the Federal Trade Commission to
investigate the current gas price spikes in California, which
began in mid-February. I have met with the Chairman of the
FTC, who confirmed that there was an "anomaly" in California’s
gasoline market and that the FTC was conducting an informal
investigation.


There is no need to investigate the gas companies. You need to investigate how the free market works. Here's how it works: If prices are high, it will encourage competition that will move in to take advantage of the profits, by charging less than others. Competition is always welcome in capitalistic societies, since it creates the best prices. Furthermore, the gas belongs to those who own it, and thus, they can sell it for whatever price they want, and it is no crime. On the other hand, your threats of "investigation" are like a false accusation that the gas stations are doing something wrong, and they are more apt to fear government reprisals. This creates increased risk, as they may fear government. Increased risk leads to less competition, and higher prices, which they will need to charge to compensate for the risk. Thus, point 1 is a horrible idea, and will lead to the exact opposite of what you intend.


2. Automatic Investigations of Rapid Price Increases

Second, I have introduced legislation that would require an
automatic investigation of the gasoline market for possible
manipulation any time that average gasoline prices in a state
increase by 20% or more over a three-month period. If the FTC
finds market manipulation in a given case, they would work with
the state’s Attorney General to determine penalties to be
imposed on the companies.


Please kill this legislation. Again, investigations for people who have the right to charge what they like, for assets they own, are like false accusations (and hints of communism) that increase the risk of doing business. If I was a gas station owner, and if I knew I could not raise prices more than 20% over 3 months, I'd try and charge the highest price I could as soon as possible if I thought prices may head up. Again, your intention will lead to the exact opposite result. Thus, point 2 is a horrible idea.


3. "Cease and Desist" Orders in Highly Concentrated Markets

I am cosponsoring the Gasoline Free Market Competition Act
authored by Senator Wyden, which would give the FTC the
authority to issue "cease and desist" orders in order to
prevent market manipulation whenever four or fewer gasoline
companies control more than 70 percent of the gas supply in a
given market.


I have no idea what you are thinking. If you issue a "cease and desist" to a gas station, and they go out of business and stop doing business, you will be reducing competition even more. This will not increase competition. What are you thinking?


4. Strategic Petroleum Reserve

We need to stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve – which
is now at 93% of capacity – in order to increase the supply of
gasoline on the market. We should also establish a short-term
"exchange" in which some oil in the SPR is released immediately
and refilled later, just as SPR reserves were released four
years ago to ease the home heating oil crisis in the Northeast.
It doesn’t even make sound economic sense to buy gas for the
reserve when prices are at a peak.


This is a good idea, if we were not at war, but we are. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is not meant to help smooth out prices for the market. It is there in case of war. Given that we are at war, it should be topped off, and be at 100%. But if you want a government stockpile, to add to when prices are low, and sell when prices are high, you should have another reserve for that purpose. It would also need to be operated by the same people who control inflation, since gas prices are not only a function of how much gas is available, but also, they are a function of how much money they are creating.


5. Increased Production by OPEC

I am cosponsoring a Senate resolution that calls on the
President to work with OPEC to increase world crude oil
supplies in order to achieve stable crude oil prices.
President Bush should work with OPEC to increase supply.


Excuse me? Neither a senator from California, nor the President of the United states, controls OPEC. OPEC, in case you don't know, was formed as a result of the U.S. leaving the gold standard, and paying for oil with irredeemable dollars. If you want the President to "work with" OPEC, you should be advocating a gold standard, and not working to continue the fraud of the unjust weight and measure of the dollar.


6. Subject OPEC to U.S. Anti-Trust Laws

I am cosponsoring a bipartisan bill authored by Senator DeWine
that would subject OPEC to the laws prohibiting collusion,
market manipulation, and other anti-competitive behavior.


Now you are just being ridiculous. Do you think the Arab States are states of the United States? They are sovereign nations. Do you propose we wage war on all of them if they do not comply? Furthermore, owners who have products to sell cannot manipulate markets. Markets are manipulated by shorts, who sell what they do not have. And by nations who produce fraudulent paper money, which is a broken promise to deliver gold we do not have.


7. Save the Bakersfield Refinery

I have called on Shell Oil to find a buyer for its Bakersfield
refinery and commit to keeping the refinery open until a buyer
is found. I have also asked the FTC and Attorney General Bill
Lockyer to use their powers to stop the refinery from closing.
We cannot afford to lose any more California refinery capacity.
If this refinery closes, it will only further stress an already
tight California market.


Given all the talk of government taking over refineries and energy plants after the California energy crisis, I don't blame Shell for trying to sell their refinery. If you want to save the refinery, I suggest that California apologize for even hinting at confiscating the property of Shell Oil. I also suggest that California reduce any taxes and environmental regulations, so that they can operate a profitable refinery, in peace. Without profits for the local Oil refineries, local gas prices will be even higher as transportation costs will increase.


8. Oxygenate Waiver

Along with Governor Schwarzenegger, Senator Feinstein, and
California’s bipartisan Congressional delegation, I have called
on the EPA to grant California a waiver from the requirement
that an oxygenate – MTBE or ethanol – be added to gasoline.
Adding ethanol to gasoline may already be driving prices higher
in some parts of the state.


This is a great idea. Reduced legislation and regulation! Wonderful!


9. Fuel Formula Investigation

We may be able to reduce price spikes by reducing the number of
different fuel formulations now required by different
jurisdictions. I have asked the General Accounting Office to
investigate whether we can do this while maintaining the same
air quality benefits that we get with California's
cleaner-burning gasoline.


Again, another great idea. Get government off the backs of the producers, and they will be more efficient.


I believe that these steps, if implemented, would go a long way
toward easing gasoline price spikes in California and
preventing further price gouging in the future. If you have
questions about any item on my 9-point plan or if you would
like to send me any other idea, I encourage you to contact me
at http://boxer.senate.gov/contact/webform.cfm


In conclusion, 2 out of 9 would give you an F in school. But I'm glad you had at least 2 free market solutions on your list. Too bad they are at the bottom, and not at the top of your list. To my readers, please contact Barbara Boxer at the link above. I do not want to live under communism in California.

Barbara Boxer, you need to learn to trust in the free market and you need to trust capitalism to provide solutions to problems. Government's role is to provide an environment where true free market capitalism can flourish, so that all of society will be better off. If you really want to do something great to help California, you should sponsor a "sound money" bill, as they are doing in New Hampshire.

The problem with gas prices in dollars is a problem, not of gas, but of dollars. The dollars are the problem. Right now, the U.S. government is set on a course of inflation, to devalue the dollar, so that we can, in theory, compete with other nations in exporting goods. Other nations will do the same, and devalue their currencies. It is literally a race to inflate, and devalue the overvalued fraudulent dollars in society. All who hold dollars stand much to lose. But the race to devalue fraudulent money is real, and the winners will be those who devalue first, just as China has devalued their currency! The winners will really be those who devalue all the way, and who go back to using gold and silver as money first. Those who use gold and silver first, will be, essentially, buying and holding gold and silver while it is least valued, and not in use in other places, and thus, will become the most wealthy in the long run.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.