Third Party Guy's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/291662/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/161734-cash-for-clunkers-boosts-retail-sales?source=feed#comment-679243 679243 Wed, 16 Sep 2009 12:31:59 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/147044-what-really-caused-the-mortgage-crisis-and-what-to-do-now?source=feed#comment-574976 574976
I would say that an over-reaching national government policies (artificially suppressed interest rates throughout Greenspan's tenure, both Clinton and Bush II Administrations policies that led/forced financial institutions to lend to low-income customers, etc.), that led to..., that led to..., that led to over-reaching national government to create an over-arching plan to throw trillions at the guilty and punish the innocent.

I would agree that the blood/sweat investment makes it somewhat harder to walk away from you home, but there is a tipping point somewhere.]]> Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:43:36 -0400
I would say that an over-reaching national government policies (artificially suppressed interest rates throughout Greenspan's tenure, both Clinton and Bush II Administrations policies that led/forced financial institutions to lend to low-income customers, etc.), that led to..., that led to..., that led to over-reaching national government to create an over-arching plan to throw trillions at the guilty and punish the innocent.

I would agree that the blood/sweat investment makes it somewhat harder to walk away from you home, but there is a tipping point somewhere.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/143428-short-these-truckers?source=feed#comment-549403 549403 Tue, 16 Jun 2009 19:18:32 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/138944-credit-cards-guns-and-ammo-thanks-washington?source=feed#comment-513522 513522
Wow, you mean a signed contract with a Credit Card company will actually be held within the standards of contract law?? Say it ain't so!

Dear Mr. Brown,
Your outrage is missed placed. You should have been outraged when the bank lobby got the law passed through Congress that allowed them to flatly ignore contract agreements.]]> Thu, 21 May 2009 17:17:04 -0400
Wow, you mean a signed contract with a Credit Card company will actually be held within the standards of contract law?? Say it ain't so!

Dear Mr. Brown,
Your outrage is missed placed. You should have been outraged when the bank lobby got the law passed through Congress that allowed them to flatly ignore contract agreements.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/138367-how-to-raise-a-good-energy-tax?source=feed#comment-510457 510457
-End all subsidies on "Alternative Energy", return the savings back to the taxpayers through lower taxes.
-End "Free Trade" on imported oil and gasoline and restore Constitutional Tariffs. Again, return revenues from the tariffs back to the taxpayers through the lowering of taxes.

This will allow all energies to compete on an even level, while at the same time force Americans to face up to the realities of the REAL costs of fuels.

As for the FairTax - It is a horrible idea! The most common number stated is around 22% sales tax. Nothing, and I mean nothing, is in place to stop Congress from raising this to any imaginable percent! 50%, 60%, even 110% sales tax?? NO THANKS. The only good in the FairTax is the repeal of the 16th Amendment!]]> Tue, 19 May 2009 18:39:34 -0400
-End all subsidies on "Alternative Energy", return the savings back to the taxpayers through lower taxes.
-End "Free Trade" on imported oil and gasoline and restore Constitutional Tariffs. Again, return revenues from the tariffs back to the taxpayers through the lowering of taxes.

This will allow all energies to compete on an even level, while at the same time force Americans to face up to the realities of the REAL costs of fuels.

As for the FairTax - It is a horrible idea! The most common number stated is around 22% sales tax. Nothing, and I mean nothing, is in place to stop Congress from raising this to any imaginable percent! 50%, 60%, even 110% sales tax?? NO THANKS. The only good in the FairTax is the repeal of the 16th Amendment!]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/138275-angry-chrysler-dealers-take-their-fight-public?source=feed#comment-509038 509038 Article I Sec. 8.4
"Congress shall have the power to... establish uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States:
Amendment V
"...nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation."

That's where I'd start if I were the NDC. I think they could clearly show that Chrysler's bankruptcy is not "uniform", especially in light of the bailout they received. Also, is "just compensation" being given to the dealers? With the Federal government so heavily invested in the bankruptcies of the auto companies, it's not a huge leap to connect the public use portion of the Amendment.

The Obama Administration is actually fearful of this case making it to the Supreme Court,. If it is proven that the bankruptcies are not uniform, particularly because of the bailouts, ALL bailouts will be considered Unconstitutional.]]> Mon, 18 May 2009 22:00:14 -0400 Article I Sec. 8.4
"Congress shall have the power to... establish uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States:
Amendment V
"...nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation."

That's where I'd start if I were the NDC. I think they could clearly show that Chrysler's bankruptcy is not "uniform", especially in light of the bailout they received. Also, is "just compensation" being given to the dealers? With the Federal government so heavily invested in the bankruptcies of the auto companies, it's not a huge leap to connect the public use portion of the Amendment.

The Obama Administration is actually fearful of this case making it to the Supreme Court,. If it is proven that the bankruptcies are not uniform, particularly because of the bailouts, ALL bailouts will be considered Unconstitutional.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/132064-caterpillar-s-loss-not-a-good-harbinger-of-economic-things-to-come?source=feed#comment-471920 471920
If you will remember, President Obama visited CAT earlier in the year shortly after CAT announced 20,000 layoffs. In his speech, Obama misquoted CEO Owens in saying that they agreed that the stimulus would alloy CAT to rehire many of its employees. In reality, Owens said a reasonably packaged stimulus would allow that rehiring (not necessarily Obama's Stimulus).

I imagine this chatter is a poke back at the administration.]]> Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:04:03 -0400
If you will remember, President Obama visited CAT earlier in the year shortly after CAT announced 20,000 layoffs. In his speech, Obama misquoted CEO Owens in saying that they agreed that the stimulus would alloy CAT to rehire many of its employees. In reality, Owens said a reasonably packaged stimulus would allow that rehiring (not necessarily Obama's Stimulus).

I imagine this chatter is a poke back at the administration.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/129068-stick-with-gold-and-the-oil-stocks?source=feed#comment-449993 449993
Perhaps April 15th will begin the reemergence of peaceful protests, have you found your local Tax Day Tea Party to protest wrongful uses of taxes yet?

I wonder what the media will report that day!]]> Thu, 02 Apr 2009 17:07:34 -0400
Perhaps April 15th will begin the reemergence of peaceful protests, have you found your local Tax Day Tea Party to protest wrongful uses of taxes yet?

I wonder what the media will report that day!]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/128040-constitutional-issues-in-nationalization-and-the-economic-rescue-plan?source=feed#comment-441501 441501
Why are take overs and the Fifth Amendment even being discussed when the Constitution clearly says what should happen to these institutions that are getting "bailed out":

Article I, Sec. 8.4
The Congress shall have the power To establish... uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States

Congress seems intent on not acting uniformly when it comes to who should fail and who should not.]]> Thu, 26 Mar 2009 16:26:12 -0400
Why are take overs and the Fifth Amendment even being discussed when the Constitution clearly says what should happen to these institutions that are getting "bailed out":

Article I, Sec. 8.4
The Congress shall have the power To establish... uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States

Congress seems intent on not acting uniformly when it comes to who should fail and who should not.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/126961-not-the-tax-clawback-i-had-in-mind?source=feed#comment-434503 434503 Sat, 21 Mar 2009 12:48:26 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/125110-gold-coin-shortage-is-likely-to-become-chronic?source=feed#comment-421205 421205 Tue, 10 Mar 2009 20:44:57 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/125110-gold-coin-shortage-is-likely-to-become-chronic?source=feed#comment-421204 421204
From the latest Coinage Act
"...the Secretary shall mint and issue the gold coins described...of this section, in quantities sufficient to meet public demand..."
AND
"The Secretary shall acquire gold for the coins issued...of this title by purchase of gold mined from natural deposits in the United States, or in a territory or possession of the United States, within one year after the month in which the ore from which it is derived was mined. The Secretary shall pay not more than the average world price for the gold. In the absence of available supplies of such gold at the average world price, the Secretary may use gold from reserves held by the United States to mint the coins"]]> Tue, 10 Mar 2009 20:44:29 -0400
From the latest Coinage Act
"...the Secretary shall mint and issue the gold coins described...of this section, in quantities sufficient to meet public demand..."
AND
"The Secretary shall acquire gold for the coins issued...of this title by purchase of gold mined from natural deposits in the United States, or in a territory or possession of the United States, within one year after the month in which the ore from which it is derived was mined. The Secretary shall pay not more than the average world price for the gold. In the absence of available supplies of such gold at the average world price, the Secretary may use gold from reserves held by the United States to mint the coins"]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/123396-voting-power-should-be-proportionate-to-who-pays-most-of-the-taxes?source=feed#comment-407977 407977 However, to clear up a few points, America is not a Democracy. It is a Republic. Quite a difference and I suggest McDuffy do a little research on the subject. Also the Constitution allows for 1 vote for 1 person precisely to prevent the accumulation of power by one group or another (poor folk in the case of the author) through the Electoral College.
Obama and the Democrats aren't the only ones trading Capitalism for Socialism. The last 20 years should be proof enough of that. Learn and understand your Constitution and hold the elected officials to their LIMITED powers. If you don't know it, you'll not be able to recognize that you are becoming a slave.]]> Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:25:41 -0500 However, to clear up a few points, America is not a Democracy. It is a Republic. Quite a difference and I suggest McDuffy do a little research on the subject. Also the Constitution allows for 1 vote for 1 person precisely to prevent the accumulation of power by one group or another (poor folk in the case of the author) through the Electoral College.
Obama and the Democrats aren't the only ones trading Capitalism for Socialism. The last 20 years should be proof enough of that. Learn and understand your Constitution and hold the elected officials to their LIMITED powers. If you don't know it, you'll not be able to recognize that you are becoming a slave.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/120823-what-does-the-future-hold-for-u-s-community-banks?source=feed#comment-392585 392585 www.bauerfinancial.com/ have a good or better rating. 2 of the remaining lending institutions are considered a watch, while the remaining 1 has a rating of get your money and run while you can.

It appears, in my local market at least, the majority of the lenders did not forget good business practices or get swept up into the quick money schemes that the national banks did. As such, I have been advising my friends to bank (and shop) locally.

Also, regional banks may be the next shoe to drop in the "financial crisis". It appears a few of them made bad decisions too.]]> Tue, 17 Feb 2009 17:03:02 -0500 www.bauerfinancial.com/ have a good or better rating. 2 of the remaining lending institutions are considered a watch, while the remaining 1 has a rating of get your money and run while you can.

It appears, in my local market at least, the majority of the lenders did not forget good business practices or get swept up into the quick money schemes that the national banks did. As such, I have been advising my friends to bank (and shop) locally.

Also, regional banks may be the next shoe to drop in the "financial crisis". It appears a few of them made bad decisions too.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/119875-infrastructure-dream-deferred-disaster-for-america-s-children-and-industrial-workers?source=feed#comment-384921 384921
A point of concern:
WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA, and most every trade agreement that America is involved with ARE NOT TREATIES, rather they are agreements backed up by federal law, therefore not subject to international law. The US has reserved the right to vote ourselves our of these agreements at Congress' leisure. Foreign Powers know and recognize this. However, the general populaces in those countries (and ours) are ignorant of that fact and could be a PR nightmare.

If the US House has voted on a so-called treaty, then it is truly not a treaty, but a federal statute.
Source: Constitution of the United States of America, Article II, Sec. 2.2

read up]]> Wed, 11 Feb 2009 22:00:34 -0500
A point of concern:
WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA, and most every trade agreement that America is involved with ARE NOT TREATIES, rather they are agreements backed up by federal law, therefore not subject to international law. The US has reserved the right to vote ourselves our of these agreements at Congress' leisure. Foreign Powers know and recognize this. However, the general populaces in those countries (and ours) are ignorant of that fact and could be a PR nightmare.

If the US House has voted on a so-called treaty, then it is truly not a treaty, but a federal statute.
Source: Constitution of the United States of America, Article II, Sec. 2.2

read up]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/119948-government-must-keep-circular-flow-running?source=feed#comment-384857 384857
In America, (federal) government income is either through the income tax (direct tax), borrowing on the credit of the United States (future direct tax), and/or tariffs (indirect tax).

So the "circular flow" you are describing is taking money from American taxpayers just to give it back to the taxpayers through specifically selected private sector give aways, of course minus the transaction fees the government keeps for itself. Wouldn't it be better not to take in the first place?

Note: unnecessary taxation (which the stimulus is) is theft.]]> Wed, 11 Feb 2009 20:50:05 -0500
In America, (federal) government income is either through the income tax (direct tax), borrowing on the credit of the United States (future direct tax), and/or tariffs (indirect tax).

So the "circular flow" you are describing is taking money from American taxpayers just to give it back to the taxpayers through specifically selected private sector give aways, of course minus the transaction fees the government keeps for itself. Wouldn't it be better not to take in the first place?

Note: unnecessary taxation (which the stimulus is) is theft.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/119547-mapping-obama-s-now-failed-transport-policy?source=feed#comment-382746 382746
If we are able to make repairs to our roads & bridges, while simultaneously upgrading our rail system, America could have a win-win in most regards. This approach could free up money that states and municipalities could spend on other things.

Also, I'd like to see some money go towards high-speed rail. America is way behind the curve in this area. ]]> Tue, 10 Feb 2009 15:08:55 -0500
If we are able to make repairs to our roads & bridges, while simultaneously upgrading our rail system, America could have a win-win in most regards. This approach could free up money that states and municipalities could spend on other things.

Also, I'd like to see some money go towards high-speed rail. America is way behind the curve in this area. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/117812-how-the-u-s-could-balance-trade?source=feed#comment-376166 376166
Thanks for your response, though it seems both you and I were looking at outated data. I found more current data here: www.worldwide-tax.com/ As you can see, America is anywhere from 5% - 12% higher than many of our trading partners. (granted U.S. has not Value Added Tax) There is still room to maneuver tax rates lower.

I suppose we could debate the merits of the social programs, but it is outside the subject of this post. However, with savings of 10% on taxation by some corporations, could they not provide more affordable healthcare? (I know, it should be would they)

My question still remains though, with admittedly smaller tax cuts, does it make sense to impose reasonable tariffs? As long as the money is near equal to importers/exporter, I see no harm. ]]> Wed, 04 Feb 2009 17:53:57 -0500
Thanks for your response, though it seems both you and I were looking at outated data. I found more current data here: www.worldwide-tax.com/ As you can see, America is anywhere from 5% - 12% higher than many of our trading partners. (granted U.S. has not Value Added Tax) There is still room to maneuver tax rates lower.

I suppose we could debate the merits of the social programs, but it is outside the subject of this post. However, with savings of 10% on taxation by some corporations, could they not provide more affordable healthcare? (I know, it should be would they)

My question still remains though, with admittedly smaller tax cuts, does it make sense to impose reasonable tariffs? As long as the money is near equal to importers/exporter, I see no harm. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/117812-how-the-u-s-could-balance-trade?source=feed#comment-374908 374908
As a Constitutional scholar and a political activists, I sometimes (ok all the time) but heads with economists. I wanted to make a few quick points and get your feedback.

First to the students concern:"I'm not sure I like giving the power [to regulate trade] to the government" - This is actually one of the purposes we have the Constitution rather than still operating under the Articles of Confederation. The power to "collect imposts and excises" (tariffs) and the power to "regulate commerce with foreign nations" are two of the actual enumerated powers GRANTED to Congress. However, bailouts of private corporations or stimulus packages are not powers granted to ANY branch of the Federal Government.

Now regarding tariffs, I agree that protectionist type measures, including obtuse tariffs, would devastate the U.S. economy. However, when tariffs are eliminated, the federal tax burden is shifted to the American taxpayers. (I can go into more detail if necessary) As you probably know, the corporate tax rate in America is more than double, and set to increase further, that of most of our industrialized trading partners. I ask you as an economist, would it not make more sense to reduce the corporate tax rate to equal those of our trading partners, impose reasonable tariffs that would be near equal to the lost corporate taxes, thereby reducing American companies costs and reducing (somewhat) the average Joe's tax burden?

You make a valid point about the trade deficit. America is losing its collective wealth by the billions every quarter, just to China. Another possible solution to the "China problem" is America can "regulate the value... of foreign [currency]" I haven't thought this one thoroughly, but I think there is some merit there. ]]> Tue, 03 Feb 2009 18:49:59 -0500
As a Constitutional scholar and a political activists, I sometimes (ok all the time) but heads with economists. I wanted to make a few quick points and get your feedback.

First to the students concern:"I'm not sure I like giving the power [to regulate trade] to the government" - This is actually one of the purposes we have the Constitution rather than still operating under the Articles of Confederation. The power to "collect imposts and excises" (tariffs) and the power to "regulate commerce with foreign nations" are two of the actual enumerated powers GRANTED to Congress. However, bailouts of private corporations or stimulus packages are not powers granted to ANY branch of the Federal Government.

Now regarding tariffs, I agree that protectionist type measures, including obtuse tariffs, would devastate the U.S. economy. However, when tariffs are eliminated, the federal tax burden is shifted to the American taxpayers. (I can go into more detail if necessary) As you probably know, the corporate tax rate in America is more than double, and set to increase further, that of most of our industrialized trading partners. I ask you as an economist, would it not make more sense to reduce the corporate tax rate to equal those of our trading partners, impose reasonable tariffs that would be near equal to the lost corporate taxes, thereby reducing American companies costs and reducing (somewhat) the average Joe's tax burden?

You make a valid point about the trade deficit. America is losing its collective wealth by the billions every quarter, just to China. Another possible solution to the "China problem" is America can "regulate the value... of foreign [currency]" I haven't thought this one thoroughly, but I think there is some merit there. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/115907-how-we-solved-the-gas-price-problem?source=feed#comment-363588 363588
Not true. The CTFC "reclassified certain positions in the energy futures and options markets from the Commercial category to the Noncommercial category." More to the point, the "certain positions" referred to was ONE trader with a non-hedged speculative position so large that the position was driving oil prices higher. The next few days after the reclassification oil fell $25/bbl and then continued to fall to the $105 range.

Also, I suppose one could argue that the government policies that led to the real estate bubble and eventual credit crash can also be blamed. Consumers unable to find credit, therefore spending money, had to curtail spending leading to less demand and further falling oil prices.

Clearly government programs led to the fall in oil prices, even if by accident or too late.]]> Thu, 22 Jan 2009 21:30:35 -0500
Not true. The CTFC "reclassified certain positions in the energy futures and options markets from the Commercial category to the Noncommercial category." More to the point, the "certain positions" referred to was ONE trader with a non-hedged speculative position so large that the position was driving oil prices higher. The next few days after the reclassification oil fell $25/bbl and then continued to fall to the $105 range.

Also, I suppose one could argue that the government policies that led to the real estate bubble and eventual credit crash can also be blamed. Consumers unable to find credit, therefore spending money, had to curtail spending leading to less demand and further falling oil prices.

Clearly government programs led to the fall in oil prices, even if by accident or too late.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/113494-protectionism-vs-pragmatism?source=feed#comment-348030 348030

Unnecessary taxation is akin to slavery.]]> Tue, 06 Jan 2009 20:12:34 -0500

Unnecessary taxation is akin to slavery.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/109376-globalization-greed-and-outsourcing-nothing-more-than-a-huge-trap?source=feed#comment-322620 322620
China has most favored nation status with the U.S. They have very low tariffs, therefore American taxpayers have been subsidizing the outsourcing to China. This means that the profit from duties and any taxes would be at best recouping money already spent. BTW, it is worse in the Free Trade zones.]]> Sat, 06 Dec 2008 20:09:45 -0500
China has most favored nation status with the U.S. They have very low tariffs, therefore American taxpayers have been subsidizing the outsourcing to China. This means that the profit from duties and any taxes would be at best recouping money already spent. BTW, it is worse in the Free Trade zones.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/107635-the-great-experiment?source=feed#comment-314205 314205 "Our forefathers turned a backwater nation of farmers in 1800 into an economic powerhouse by 1900, not by complaining about whether other countries were 'fair', but by figuring out how to do things better and/or cheaper. We can do the same if we really decide to apply ourselves."

Our forefathers also only supported the federal gub'ment through tariffs and without an income tax. This could still apply if and only if WE were willing to reduce gub'ment programs. Free Trade will never be Fair Trade for American taxpayers.]]> Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:36:43 -0500 "Our forefathers turned a backwater nation of farmers in 1800 into an economic powerhouse by 1900, not by complaining about whether other countries were 'fair', but by figuring out how to do things better and/or cheaper. We can do the same if we really decide to apply ourselves."

Our forefathers also only supported the federal gub'ment through tariffs and without an income tax. This could still apply if and only if WE were willing to reduce gub'ment programs. Free Trade will never be Fair Trade for American taxpayers.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/106247-gm-job-loss-bogus-economics?source=feed#comment-308485 308485 Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:25:05 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/106301-america-s-automakers-in-competition-with-other-governments?source=feed#comment-308476 308476
Also, please explain to me what is the difference between throwing the coal industry to the wolves instead of GM? I don't know the exact numbers, but I imagine that pushing that industry to fail would be just as detrimental to the U.S. economy as letting GM fail.]]> Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:06:34 -0500
Also, please explain to me what is the difference between throwing the coal industry to the wolves instead of GM? I don't know the exact numbers, but I imagine that pushing that industry to fail would be just as detrimental to the U.S. economy as letting GM fail.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/106039-time-to-fill-up-on-the-strategic-petroleum-reserve?source=feed#comment-308310 308310
"...the tax i am recommended would bypass Congress and go directly to jobs and infrastructure to make America more energy dependent..." - I assume this is a typo and you meant to say independent.

Perhaps you missed my pseudonym, but I am far from a victim of the government and media. I realized during the Clinton administration that Capitalism was being dissuaded, but I agree that the Bush administration has driven the nails in the coffin.

And perhaps I put you too much on defense by lumping you in with "Greens" that you missed the point of my comment. Everything you are wanting to do, Infrastructure, solar, NAT vehicles by restoring the tariffs on oil. In you response to me you are correct that I don't want to pay the rising cost for depleting Mexican (truly worldwide) oil and expensive tar sand (and shale) from Canada. By restoring the tariffs on oil, which is another form of subsidy, and the price of oil rebounds to $100/ barrel, alternatives will be competitive without their own subsidy. As a taxpayer, I am tired of taking the risk through subsidies and other programs, while someone else reaps the benefits (or at least no loss).

Further, I was not bashing you for wanting to get NAT solution, rather I was pointing out that there is already a foundation on which to build. Waste Management only uses NAT trucks where state/local laws mandate it. Imagine if every state mandated the refuse haulers were to use NAT trucks, how long would it take for the infrastructure to get in place? There would be a demand and some entrepreneur would jump at the opportunity.

My point is we do not need any new taxes for your wish list to happen. Unnecessary taxation in thievery, and your idea is unnecessary. Further, I believe your idea, " put a $0.02/gallon "green tax" on gasoline with provision that this tax bypass Congress", would require a Constitutional Amendment. But why should we start following that outdated piece of paper now, because not following it has led us to unsound money, wars, exporting jobs, and corporate welfare (among other things) hasn't it?
]]> Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:33:15 -0500
"...the tax i am recommended would bypass Congress and go directly to jobs and infrastructure to make America more energy dependent..." - I assume this is a typo and you meant to say independent.

Perhaps you missed my pseudonym, but I am far from a victim of the government and media. I realized during the Clinton administration that Capitalism was being dissuaded, but I agree that the Bush administration has driven the nails in the coffin.

And perhaps I put you too much on defense by lumping you in with "Greens" that you missed the point of my comment. Everything you are wanting to do, Infrastructure, solar, NAT vehicles by restoring the tariffs on oil. In you response to me you are correct that I don't want to pay the rising cost for depleting Mexican (truly worldwide) oil and expensive tar sand (and shale) from Canada. By restoring the tariffs on oil, which is another form of subsidy, and the price of oil rebounds to $100/ barrel, alternatives will be competitive without their own subsidy. As a taxpayer, I am tired of taking the risk through subsidies and other programs, while someone else reaps the benefits (or at least no loss).

Further, I was not bashing you for wanting to get NAT solution, rather I was pointing out that there is already a foundation on which to build. Waste Management only uses NAT trucks where state/local laws mandate it. Imagine if every state mandated the refuse haulers were to use NAT trucks, how long would it take for the infrastructure to get in place? There would be a demand and some entrepreneur would jump at the opportunity.

My point is we do not need any new taxes for your wish list to happen. Unnecessary taxation in thievery, and your idea is unnecessary. Further, I believe your idea, " put a $0.02/gallon "green tax" on gasoline with provision that this tax bypass Congress", would require a Constitutional Amendment. But why should we start following that outdated piece of paper now, because not following it has led us to unsound money, wars, exporting jobs, and corporate welfare (among other things) hasn't it?
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/106039-time-to-fill-up-on-the-strategic-petroleum-reserve?source=feed#comment-306556 306556
Okay, now that the rant is over, there is a very simple solution: end NAFTA. 70% - 80% (depending month to month) of imported foreign oil comes from Canada and Mexico, not the scary Middle East as we were brainwashed into thinking a decade ago. (notice how the rhetoric used to be oil from the Middle East, but now has changed to foreign oil. Most people have come to equate foreign oil with that from the Middle East) Along with many other wrongs, NAFTA subsidizes Big Oil.

Now that we (America) have had the sticker shock of $4+ gasoline, and it is now heading below the $2 level, it is the perfect time to end the oil subsidy. It is already known that when fuel prices rise significantly, Americans scream for alternatives. Let them compete on even ground with no subsidies. It might be painful for a time, but the cream will rise to the top without taxpayers money. If you like one idea or another, you can then use your own money that wasn't stolen through taxation to invest.

However, it will take significant risk, fortitude, and most importantly will power.

As for the NG debate, every county in America has a stockpile of the stuff. Every landfill is a source of NG (Methane). Waste Management already uses NG powered trucks to collect trash in some states. CAT and DEERE are both working on their own versions of NG engines. Several emerging technologies are coming online to help speed up the break-down process converting refuse into fuel(s). There will soon be a day where landfills are mined for their resources.]]> Sat, 15 Nov 2008 00:22:56 -0500
Okay, now that the rant is over, there is a very simple solution: end NAFTA. 70% - 80% (depending month to month) of imported foreign oil comes from Canada and Mexico, not the scary Middle East as we were brainwashed into thinking a decade ago. (notice how the rhetoric used to be oil from the Middle East, but now has changed to foreign oil. Most people have come to equate foreign oil with that from the Middle East) Along with many other wrongs, NAFTA subsidizes Big Oil.

Now that we (America) have had the sticker shock of $4+ gasoline, and it is now heading below the $2 level, it is the perfect time to end the oil subsidy. It is already known that when fuel prices rise significantly, Americans scream for alternatives. Let them compete on even ground with no subsidies. It might be painful for a time, but the cream will rise to the top without taxpayers money. If you like one idea or another, you can then use your own money that wasn't stolen through taxation to invest.

However, it will take significant risk, fortitude, and most importantly will power.

As for the NG debate, every county in America has a stockpile of the stuff. Every landfill is a source of NG (Methane). Waste Management already uses NG powered trucks to collect trash in some states. CAT and DEERE are both working on their own versions of NG engines. Several emerging technologies are coming online to help speed up the break-down process converting refuse into fuel(s). There will soon be a day where landfills are mined for their resources.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/104382-a-capitalist-reformation?source=feed#comment-299832 299832
I'm fairly new to SA, but I have seen many of your comments and I tend to agree with you more than not. But you said: "We need to ABOLISH the income tax and fund the government solely on sales taxes". Now my question for you is what is to stop our esteemed elected ones from setting the fed. income tax at 22% and then raising it to 30%, 40%, or even 110%? Nothing! Be careful what you wish for. This country was able to live within its means before 1913 without the income tax or national sales tax. There is another Constitutional way to fund the government.

To All:
A true Capitalist Free Market is still the best option for America. However, we've allowed our nation to skew far from the Free Market, as some others have pointed out, through corrupt lobbyist and politicians. However, government does have a vital role to play in a Free Market: To prevent crime, fraud, and monopolies in the market. Outside of these three things, it is just unnecessary manipulation, which always comes back to bite us in the back side.

When we expect more (handouts, entitlements) from the government, we get less (overall). When we expect more (morals, scruples) from the government, we get less (people willing/able to fit the bill).
]]> Thu, 06 Nov 2008 22:29:26 -0500
I'm fairly new to SA, but I have seen many of your comments and I tend to agree with you more than not. But you said: "We need to ABOLISH the income tax and fund the government solely on sales taxes". Now my question for you is what is to stop our esteemed elected ones from setting the fed. income tax at 22% and then raising it to 30%, 40%, or even 110%? Nothing! Be careful what you wish for. This country was able to live within its means before 1913 without the income tax or national sales tax. There is another Constitutional way to fund the government.

To All:
A true Capitalist Free Market is still the best option for America. However, we've allowed our nation to skew far from the Free Market, as some others have pointed out, through corrupt lobbyist and politicians. However, government does have a vital role to play in a Free Market: To prevent crime, fraud, and monopolies in the market. Outside of these three things, it is just unnecessary manipulation, which always comes back to bite us in the back side.

When we expect more (handouts, entitlements) from the government, we get less (overall). When we expect more (morals, scruples) from the government, we get less (people willing/able to fit the bill).
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/103976-the-biggest-bubble-of-them-all?source=feed#comment-298362 298362
"...but utterly against the recent wars that we have pursued." Again, ignoring the Constitution got us into these conflicts (not wars). If people would first re-learn the Constitution, then only support and promote candidates that did the same, this country would be much better off.

Re: Socialism cannot compete!

" Many have forgotten that the U.S. has been down the road of war with Islam before, with the Barbary pirates (largely Muslim coalitions of pirates from Algiers, Libya, and Morocco) between 1785 and 1815!" President Jefferson wrote Letters of Marque and Reprisal (the only other Constitutional way to use military force) against the Barbary Pirates, but did not wage a war.

Re: HARM

"Despite what you may have gleaned from listening exclusively to Fox News, Rush and Laura Ingraham, we never found any weapons-grade uranium or other WMDs in post-war Iraq."

I suggest you learn your facts before you comment. From CNN.com (hardly a Bush fan): www.cnn.com/2008/US/07.../ - Yellowcake found in Iraq.

]]> Tue, 04 Nov 2008 19:45:56 -0500
"...but utterly against the recent wars that we have pursued." Again, ignoring the Constitution got us into these conflicts (not wars). If people would first re-learn the Constitution, then only support and promote candidates that did the same, this country would be much better off.

Re: Socialism cannot compete!

" Many have forgotten that the U.S. has been down the road of war with Islam before, with the Barbary pirates (largely Muslim coalitions of pirates from Algiers, Libya, and Morocco) between 1785 and 1815!" President Jefferson wrote Letters of Marque and Reprisal (the only other Constitutional way to use military force) against the Barbary Pirates, but did not wage a war.

Re: HARM

"Despite what you may have gleaned from listening exclusively to Fox News, Rush and Laura Ingraham, we never found any weapons-grade uranium or other WMDs in post-war Iraq."

I suggest you learn your facts before you comment. From CNN.com (hardly a Bush fan): www.cnn.com/2008/US/07.../ - Yellowcake found in Iraq.

]]>