Seriously? No one has a response to Monday’s McCain post? I was hoping to stir up some debate. It’s not too late.
Archive for the ‘Economics’ Category
No comments on my McCain post?
Wednesday, October 29th, 2008The case for McCain
Monday, October 27th, 2008As I promised a while back, here are my reasons for preferring McCain over Obama. Of course, I’d really prefer to be voting for Ron Paul.
Before I get into my specific reasons, let me tell you a little about my general political outlook. I like to say that I’m a pragmatic libertarian. I believe the government should play a much weaker role in our lives. I’m for personal responsibility. I’m also a big believer in pure, unadultered capitalism, with very few exceptions. If you’ve been paying attention to the Presidential race, then it should be obvious from just this paragraph who I prefer. Obama wants the government to play a bigger role in our lives. I don’t.
Government Spending and Taxation
I believe that the government should spend a lot loss money than it does. Neither party has done a good job reducing spending over the past several years, and I can’t say with any certainty that either of these candidates will either. However, with all the promises that Obama has made, I know for certain that he will not reduce government spending by any appreciable amount. McCain claims that he will, and I hope he follows through with it if elected.
The other side of the coin is taxation. I believe the government should tax us much less than they do now. I think ten percent is a good goal. While that goal will not be reached by either party anytime soon, I think McCain has the potential to take us closer to it, while Obama will take us further away.
I also take issue with Obama’s belief that the rich somehow owe society a large chunk of the money they have earned. It’s a popular belief these days, but it’s a very dangerous one. I refer to it as “Socialism lite.”
Health Care
Barack Obama believes that health care is a right. I don’t. It’s a popular sentiment, but as a libertarian I don’t believe that’s the government’s job. If I believed the government could do a good, efficient job of providing health care, I think I could get past my libertarian tendencies. Why should I believe that the government will handle health care more efficiently than say, Social Security, for instance?
Obama says he wants to open up the Federal employees health insurance program to all citizens. The reason health care for groups is generally cheaper than for individuals is because members of groups don’t self-select. People seeking to join the Federal employee health plan will tend to be sicker than the average person and the cost of the program will rise as a result. It’s simple economics, and Obama either doesn’t know this or chooses to ignore it. He’s a smart guy, so I tend to believe it’s the latter.
Obama also says insurance companies shouldn’t be able to discriminate against people with preexisting conditions. Unfortunately, in the real world, people that have pre-existing conditions cost more to care for. Ignoring that fact does not make it go away. Under Obama’s plan, the cost of my insurance would go up because I (a healthy person who has always had health insurance, even when it wasn’t convenient) will be treated the same as an unhealthy person who hasn’t been responsible enough to maintain health insurance.
For the record, I’m not a huge fan of McCain’s health care plan either, but it doesn’t scare me nearly as much as Obama’s.
Free Trade
Obama does not believe in free trade. I do, and I have a majority of economists on my side. Yes, free trade can be inconvenient at times, but in the end it is more efficient.
Gun Control
I do not believe in gun control, for both philosophical and pragmatic reasons. Obama wants stricter gun control, which is ineffective and possibly unconstitutional. There are already sufficient laws on the books to prohibit criminals from having guns. Anything further just takes guns out of the hands of lawful owners, leaving them defenseless against criminals.
Education
Obama is against vouchers. I see them as a simple and effective way to fix our poor excuse for an educational system.
Energy
McCain has proposed doing away with counterproductive subsidies on domestic ethanol and removing tariffs on cheap Brazilian ethanol. Obama has not because the corn lobby has him in their pocket.
Obama has also been non-commital on nuclear energy. If we were serious about getting off foreign oil, we’d be building nuclear power plants as fast as possible. It is highly efficient and safe.
Summary
McCain is far from perfect, but when I look at the issues, it’s obvious who my choice should be. That’s all I ask of you. Don’t vote for Obama because he’s “less like Bush.” If you vote for him, vote for him because you agree with him on the issues. You and I will disagree, but you will have my respect because you took the time and effort to have an opinion on the issues and find the candidate that most closely matches those opinions.
Please post comments, especially if you disagree with me. If you have a blog, write a post about why you’re voting for your candidate and post a link in the comments.
Obama and Biden Marxists?
Sunday, October 26th, 2008I will admit to having been more than a little amused when I saw a clip of an interviewer accusing Obama and Biden of being Marxists. I got a good chuckle out of it. The clip is below. You can see the full interview here.
To be fair, Obama and Biden are not Marxists. However, some of their policies (their tax plan in particular) do reek of Socialism. That’s one of the issues I have with them.
By the way, have I ever mentioned that Joe Biden is a darn good politician? I don’t agree with him on the issues, but I wish there was a center-right clone of him.
The Debate
Tuesday, September 30th, 2008I realize I’m a little late with this, but I wanted to put my thoughts on the debate out here.
I thought that McCain won the debate. I know that I’m biased in his favor, but I feel like I can be impartial when I have to. Apparently I’m wrong on one or the other. Most polls show that Obama won the debate. I felt that McCain held his own in the “financial” portion of the debate and clearly won the foreign policy portion of the debate.
I was particularly thrilled when McCain mentioned cutting ethanol subsidies. I had never heard him mention his position on that particular issue before. Do some research. Ethanol subsidies are stupid on several levels. He’s also right about nuclear energy. If we want to get off foreign oil, nuclear power plants are a no-brainer. Is it a perfect solution? No, but the technology is ready today and it’s far and away better than any other options we have.
I liked all the talk about cutting government spending. Both candidates claim they want to do it. Admittedly, neither party has been responsible when it comes to spending our (not to mention my children’s and grandchildren’s) tax dollars. However, I believe McCain when he says he wants to cut spending. Obama wants to provide health care for everyone, and there’s no way you can cut spending and do that.
Speaking of health care, I don’t want the government in charge of my health care, as Obama proposes. The government (and bureaucracies in general) get wrong way more than they get right, and I don’t want them messing with my health care. Fix social security and get back with me.
I liked the hard line that both candidates took on Russia. Obama agreed with McCain for the most part, but McCain seemed to know much more about the region and the situation. At times it seemed like McCain was schooling Obama and the audience in foreign policy. I know I learned some things, and I expect Obama did too.
A big deal was made of the fact that McCain got some of the details wrong in his story about Eisenhower. Ike’s second letter said nothing about resigning. It took responsibility for the failure of D-Day. Big deal.
I did think that McCain’s suggestion of freezing spending with the exception of veteran’s affairs, defense, and entitlement was stupid. It was obviously an off-the-cuff comment, and Obama rightfully pointed out that it was stupid.
It’ll be interesting to see how Palin does in the Vice-Presidential debate Thursday night. Some of her interviews haven’t looked so great recently.
Post-Ike Gas update II
Monday, September 22nd, 2008Over the weekend I noticed that gas in Belmont had dropped to $3.49. Gas at Wal-Mart in Pontotoc (our usual cheap gas stop) had dropped to $3.34. That’s a fair amount cheaper than their pre-Ike prices, so I assumed the post-Ike gas crunch was over. Wrong.
The first hint was that gas in Oxford was still $3.79 at most stations. Then I started hearing talk of gas shortages in other states on talk radio. Apparently that’s the case in Atlanta. (The comments on that article are amusing on several levels.)
It’s strange that the situations are so different within the southeastern US. I’m not sure how to explain it. Refining capacity is still not back up to speed, but you would think that’d cause shortages all over, not just in localized areas.
Oil prices jumped up $16.37 a barrel today, so I expect prices will rise all over.
Post-Ike Gas Situation
Sunday, September 14th, 2008We’re back from our weekend trip to Belmont, and gas has gone up everywhere between here and there, where it’s available.
Only one of the three gas stations in Belmont had gas most of the weekend. It was going for $3.79; a steal as it turns out. I was topping off our tank every chance I got this weekend. Not only did we have to get back to Oxford, but we’ve got to go back to Belmont Thursday afternoon for my brother’s wedding and associated events.
On the trip home, it seemed that most stations had gone up around 30 cents a gallon. The average was around $3.99.
The big exception was the Pontotoc Wal-Mart, where we usually get our cheap gas on trips to and from Belmont. It was $4.29, up 60 cents from Friday afternoon. The station across the street from it was advertising gas for $3.89, but was out of gas.
Gas at Kroger in Oxford is $3.89, up 26 cents from Friday morning.
It’s being reported that refineries won’t be completely back online for eight to nine days. Most likely gas won’t be going up any more, barring worse news from the oil and gas industry. It’ll be interesting to see how long it takes for gas prices to go back down to their previous levels.
Hurricane Ike pushing up gas prices
Friday, September 12th, 2008We’re going out of town this weekend, so this morning on my way to work I filled up our vehicle, just in case prices went up before we made it to Pontotoc, where we usually fill up on cheap gas. When I was out for lunch prices hadn’t gone up here in Oxford. However, I’m hearing rumors of $5/gallon gas in neighboring states.
It’ll be interesting to see what happens. Lots of drilling and refining operations in Texas and Louisiana are shutting down in preparation for Hurricane Ike. I’ve heard that the wholesale price of gasoline went up $1.50/gallon today and that some stations had stopped delivery of gasoline until they saw what the market could bear.
Most people look at “price gouging” in a negative light. However, most free market economists argue that raising prices during an emergency is a way of efficiently distributing scarce resources. For instance, if gas stations in areas impacted by the hurricane leave their prices at current levels, most people will fill up their tanks whether they need it or not, just in case (thus the lines), and could cause the gas station to run out of gas. If gas stations raise prices to reflect its scarcity, only those that really need the gas will buy it.
Laws against raising prices during an emergency also reduce any incentive a vendor might have to prepare for the emergency by stocking up or going to extraordinary lengths to bring more of a scarce item into an impacted area.
I don’t think the government should restrict prices during an emergency. On the other hand, vendors that raise prices during an emergency will have to deal with the wrath of the community after the emergency is over, whether there is a law against raising prices or not. The general public doesn’t have a good understanding of economics, and probably wouldn’t care if they did.
Solar becomes closer to being viable
Monday, August 25th, 2008Last week TVA announced that they were raising their wholesale power rate by 20% due to the increasing cost of fuel. Both of the power companies here in Lafayette County get their power from TVA, so they’ll be passing that right on to us.
While that is mostly bad news, the good news is that every increase in the price of electricity makes solar power that much more viable. So, between the price of its “competition” going up and technology bringing the dollar/watt ratio down, solar will be viable before we know it.
And that’s a good thing, because solar is cool. With solar, you aren’t paying a monthly bill to a utility company, you’re paying off a capital expense that increases the value of your home or business. And regardless of your position on global warming, I think we can all agree that the less junk in the atmosphere, the better.
Unfortunately I don’t have any hard numbers to crunch on this, but all signs point to solar power becoming viable in the relatively near future.
Incidentally, TVA is an interesting experiment in American socialism. Take a moment to read up on it if you’re not familiar.