Subscribe to Amazon Kindle

Showing posts with label gas prices. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gas prices. Show all posts

Sunday, March 25, 2012

A Little This...A Little That


Many thoughts have gone through my mind this week, but I could not find a way to turn even one into more than a brief discussion. So how about us taking a brief look at them all, shall we?
The Price of Gas: As the cost per gallon goes up, Obama’s approval goes down. Related? Perhaps. Appropriate? Probably not. Most folks knowledgable about such things spread the blame around. First of all, the US is but a player in the global oil market as China and other developing nations are controlling the price by the amount of oil they require. US consumption is down while domestic production is up. So our ability to affect the market is limited. Add the speculation factor and you tack on what some calculate to be 50 cents a gallon. And before you complain about such gambling on commodity futures, take a look at your investments. Most mutual funds have some of their money in the oil market. So, yes, the price of gas goes up, and, yes, you contribute to it through your “investment” choices. Higher rates of return or lower gas prices: which way to go?
Presidential Powers: Many think the President is omnipotent. They are wrong. The President cannot write a law nor pass a law nor enforce a law. A president can only speak and, through this line of communication, hope to bring associated legislation to reality. Why is it, then, that every candidate for this office experiences numerous stumbles when speaking? Practically every day of the Republican primary process at least one candidate comes out with a “what I meant to say” retraction. These are veteran politicians with teams of handlers and preparers who are paid to avoid such gaffes. Are they filled with hubris? If not, then how can we expect them to do a better job when elected?
Campaign Rhetoric: Promises abound during political campaigning. Shouldn’t there be a penalty for promising things that one cannot deliver upon? Take the abolishment of the new national healthcare laws. A newly elected president cannot simply wave it away on day one yet that is what the Republican hopefuls would like us to believe. How about a financial penalty for such statements with the funds going to the opposing party’s coffers?
The Run Away Law: How about a law that mandates the fleeing from a situation where one feels threatened? Kind of an homage to Monty Python’s Life of Brian: “Run away! Run Away!” It’s no more foolish than the “Stand Your Ground” laws that are now getting a well deserved second look. The last thing we need, I’d say, is armed citizens looking to make up for what is seen as ineffective law enforcement. Just the thought makes me feel threatened!
Pizza: Pizza consists of crust (bread), sauce, and some toppings. Can anyone tell me why breadsticks are offered as a side? Isn’t there enough bread already? And the dipping sauce is the same as what’s on the crust! How about taking a piece of crust and dragging it through the top of the pizza? Voila: a stick of bread and a dipping sauce! And if you need some cinnamon bread sticks for dessert you need to rethink your dietary choices.
Well, I don’t know about you, but I feel better. Not a lot, mind you, but a little. It seems more and more daunting to come to grips with the weekly events of outrage and injustice and insanity. Maybe I need break...

Monday, May 16, 2011

Not So Bad?

There's not one of us that did not experience a childhood trauma with an observer telling us that it wasn't all that bad. My goblins were hypodermic needles and dentists. And, as I squirmed and howled, my mother would admonish me with, "Oh, come on, it doesn't hurt that much." Excuse me? I'm the one with a needle in my ass or a drill in my mouth so don't try to tell me what it feels like!
But now we're all grown up and beyond such input, aren't we? If only that were true. Today we hear statistics that tell us things cost about as much as they used to and we're in pretty good shape. According to the statisticians, perhaps, but how do you feel about it?
We've got numbers galore extolling low inflation and a reasonably flat consumer price index (CPI). The problem is that you and I both know that our dollars simply are not going as far today. The current behemoth is the price of gasoline. That should come as no surprise since we are a mobile society. As fuel costs go up, our direct financial loss is readily apparent, but other costs go up accordingly because most anything we buy depends upon some sort of transportation. Food prices go up, too, along with just about everything else. Does it matter what the experts are telling us when we're looking for ways to conserve our cash between pay days? Some would call this the higher cost of living which is much harder to quantify than CPI's or inflation rates.
No, the cost of living depends, first of all, on how one defines living. Does it include cigarettes? Or liquor? Or Starbucks? We each have our list of things that we consider essential in our daily lives and the list gets longer as our cash flow increases. That cash flow, though, has stemmed a bit, so the list is getting shorter, but each list is different.
How about a new number that better reflects the daily challenge in making ends meet? Let's call it the "Cost of Essential Service". You're right in seeing that "essential" is a relative term, but I'd bet there are a few things that appear on everyone's personal list. Food, for example. Or housing. And, of course, fuel. These three areas strike me as universal despite the particular menu or address or vehicle.
Each part of the country has its own costs of essential service and these differences need to be factored into the final number. Median home prices and rental rates along with other averaging would create a fairer representation of these costs. Now we have a number that we can use to compare our current location with others. And now we have an answer for those that tell us it's not that bad.
While someone is working on this new number, can someone else tell me what's so shocking about oil executives pleading poverty to Congress? Who wants to pay more tax? And, since employment is such a hot topic these days, what better argument than loss of tax breaks will result in loss of jobs? Remember when restaurant and bar owners warned of impending doom if non-smoking legislation were to pass? No, I'd say oil companies ponying up a bit more to Uncle Sam won't cost anyone a job, but it's a scary thought and that's why they're planting it in our minds.
Meanwhile, Obama is re-thinking drilling opportunities in Alaska and "incentives" to oil companies so they might actually drill on lands where they already possess leases. The proceeds from new drilling won't show up at our gas pumps for decades and "incentives" should eerily similar to tax breaks. Oh, what a politician won't do for better poll numbers.
Enough of financial wonks and the like tut-tutting us about how good we really have it. You know and I know that times are tougher and our dollars don't go nearly as far. Perhaps this essential living index might better illustrate the true state of our financial well-being. It surely couldn't hurt and who'd notice yet another number in the sea of statistics?

Sunday, March 6, 2011

What Are You?

It seems that most of us prefer short descriptives in categorizing our position on current events and the challenges they provide. You know: left, right, moderate. Or, if you prefer, Republican, Democrat, Independent. (Yes, I know I omitted the Tea Party. It is simply a faction of the Republican Party and can be found way over there on the right of the rest of the right.) Even “for” or “against” can be heard when offering a broad brush opinion. They all have one trait in common: they’re simple, short, and clear cut. The problem is that many of the issues before us today are anything but simple or short or clear.
So let’s take a short quiz to truly ascertain our priorities and political allegiances. Let’s start with the right to life: are you opposed to abortion rights and believe life is sacred? If so, how do you feel about capital punishment? How about gun control? Are you a member of the NRA and believe that guns don’t kill people, but only people kill people? If so, are you repulsed that a maniac can obtain a weapon capable of firing a large number of uninterrupted rounds and use it in a school?
If you support a free market system, I guess the latest spike in gas prices is causing you no angst nor financial pressure. We can all trust corporate America to provide safe and healthy products, can’t we? Who needs regulators and inspectors?  After all, they only stand in the way of a truly open market-based economy.
Do you want a smaller, less intrusive government and a balanced budget with no deficit? Are you ready to “adjust” your Medicare and Social Security privileges to achieve that goal? How about unemployment benefits or aid to dependent children? 
And what about all those bureaucracies, be they public or private? Surely we can pare them down a bit. But wait a minute...don’t most of us fill some sort of square within a corporate flow-chart? We’re necessary, though, aren’t we? They need our contribution, don’t they?
All of a sudden, that plain and simple description of our values gets a bit muddy, doesn’t it? As well it should. You see, many, if not most, of us move about the spectrum as the conversation changes. And sometimes we move even within a given topic. That’s because any issue at hand is much like a diamond. Or a lump of coal. Either has multiple facets and each can be flawless or seriously flawed. It all depends upon our perspective at that particular moment. To think that the world is simple is overly simplistic.
I’d say that our positions can be boiled down to two: the theoretical and the realistic. If we are not drawing unemployment benefits it is easy to say that those programs are needless. Once we lose our job, though, that theory gives way to the reality of our situation.
I suggest we use a more relaxed definition when attempting to pigeon-hole our position or anyone else’s. Me? I claim to be a social progressive and a fiscal conservative. And I know that my positions could well change depending on the realities I’m currently facing in my life. Now, some might call that schizophrenic. I prefer “complicated” and see it as more befitting in a world where nothing is as simple as we’d like.