In Which Maria Cantwell Pretends To Care How Much You Pay For Gasoline

Evil oil speculators can't fool me...I know what they're up to.

Maria Cantwell has a super boffo idea for bringing down the cost of a gallon of gasoline and it’s so surefire, it’s a wonder no one has ever thought of trying it before! Yes! It’s as simple as reining in the evil speculators who dabble in oil. Note to Maria…while we’re reining them in, maybe we should just go ahead and tar and feather them for some good, price-busting fun!

For those of you who are as confused by the commodities market as I am, let me explain the basics in simple terms. Simple because that’s the only way I understand it myself.

The laws of supply and demand dictate that when a commodity – in this case, oil – is plentiful, prices will be low and when it’s scarce, prices will be high. Speculators capitalize on this by buying when prices are low and holding it in anticipation of future high prices.  It is true that by removing oil from the market, the cost of oil is forced upward, but what Senator Cantwell fails to take into account, among other thing which we’ll get to shortly, is that when speculators sell, i.e., release oil into the market, supply is increased, easing the upward pressure on prices and moderating the market.

I’d hate to think that Senator Cantwell knows even less about the commodities market than I do, but it appears as though that may be the case…and she’s in a position to do something stupid out of her ignorance. Or make a fool of herself in public by talking about it.

Now if Senator Cantwell really wanted a quick fix, one that didn’t meddle in the market, she could propose a gas tax holiday. The federal tax alone on gasoline is 18.4 cents per gallon. It’s not a lot, but it dwarfs the profits the oil companies are earning on a gallon of gas. From Exxon Mobil’s Perspectives blog:

“For every gallon of gasoline, diesel or finished products we manufactured and sold in the United States in the last three months of 2010, we earned a little more than 2 cents per gallon. That’s not a typo. Two cents.” 

In fairness to Senator Cantwell, it does appear that she wants to throw oil speculators under the bus only as a short term solution, which would lead one to believe that she has a long-term plan. If she does, it doesn’t involve tapping into our own, hefty oil reserves; she voted “No” today on S.953, “The Offshore Production and Safety Act of 2011.” Key word being “production.” As in drilling for our own oil. Let’s note that the failure to drill for our own oil “removes” many time more barrels of oil from the current supply than speculators do.

So Senator Cantwell can sit in front of the camera and yammer on about gasoline prices from now until the cows come home and it won’t convince me that she really cares at all about gasoline prices, but for her own good, she’d better not sit there until the Democrats agree to drill here, drill now…she’ll be dust before that happens.


Filed under 2012 Senate Races, Maria Cantwell

4 responses to “In Which Maria Cantwell Pretends To Care How Much You Pay For Gasoline

  1. Joe Conservative

    I want to like her, I really do. She looks likable. But her values and her ideas result in decisions and actions that reduce our standards of living by causing products to cost more than they would if there were not such governmental manipulation of the marketplace, of peoples’ efforts t work, live, thrive.

    People work to create wealth, yet that end result is demonized any time it can be identified as being a net gain in the purse of a corporation. To Democrats, it is easier to attack corporations, to tax them, because that way they are not pointing a finger of critical scrutiny directly at PERSONAL incomes; or so it seems. In reality, every time a company has people working diligently to create a product it wants to sell to you and me, then government intervenes and places restrictions on its ability to produce that product, or taxes its sales revenues, it is harming the consumer. Companies pay no taxes, they are merely a conduit, because they pass the cost of taxation on to the consumer, jacking the price i order to enable them to pay their bills AND their taxes. Taxing corporations is taxing you and me, by making the things we want to buy more expensive. Taxes are in and of themselves INFLATIONARY, causing a DEFLATED result in our wallets as we purchase taxed goods and services. The higher the “evil corporation” tax, the less we can buy before we run out of money.

    And what does a government DO with the tax revenue, once they have confiscated it from you and me by taxing these corporations, who then raised their prices enough to be able to pay their taxes AND still stay in business? They certainly do NOT spend it all on “necessary” infrastructure and keeping you and me safe (fire, police, courts, elected officials, etc.). No, they also redistribute those revenues – er, confiscations – to social engineering projects where they feel it will do the most good. But it does “the most good” for whom? Well, most of our elected officials who decide how to spend those revenues are interested in their own survival, so regardless of their party choice, self-preservation is one factor. They’ll be inclined to spend money on projects – on people – who might re-elect them. They will also be inclined to think that they know better than you how to spend the money you earned, but then were forced to forfeit to them. After all, were they not elected to represent you, likely because they were smarter, more capable, more wise, and were therefore better able than you to make proper decisions on how to redistribute your confiscated wealth to do the most good for those in our society who were deemed (by our elected officials) to be the most deserving?

    How DARE we be entrusted with MOST of our income, for we would (in our elected officials’ eyes) spend and donate our money improperly, unwisely. We would not donate to charities or needy people or causes that were wise choices. If we were wise enough to direct our own charitable giving, then why are WE not in these “leadership” positions in public office?

    Unfortunately, elected officials of both primary political parties have acted in a tax-and-spend manner that seems to put far less back into the hands of the taxpayers than it takes in. But in the years I have studied and observed the ideologies of people in both parties, it is my factual conclusion that it is almost always Democrats who overwhelmingly support bigger government, impose higher taxes, and increase regulation to “socially engineer” the marketplace with puppet-string control, all to choose winners and losers in the otherwise-free marketplace and to further their agenda, not yours or mine; to further THEIR wealth and security, not yours or mine. To support causes that are in THEIR opinions best, not necessarily best in either your or my mind.

    Maria is contradicting herself when she wants to help us, to make our lives better, but then acts in ways that end up raising the cost of goods and services, pushing them one step farther out of our reach. It is like telling a child, “You cannot have this, because I am making it harder for you to have it, but it is for your own good.” Problem is, she’s telling this to us consumers, to us voters. Gee, Maria, we’re too stupid to have a more free marketplace of speculators and demand-driven competition for the sale of goods and services. Why don’t you step in and tell us who should be allowed to win, and who should be forced to lose? Darn those pesky evil corporations, wanting to sell something for a profit. How dare they! How DARE people speculate on commodities! How DARE they want to make money in the marketplace of willing buyers and willing sellers finding agreement over the price of a transaction they choose to make … voluntarily.

    You’ll show THEM, right Maria? I am clay – with wealth to be confiscated. Tax me. Punish the marketplace of voluntary commerce for daring to do so based on supply and demand. I am not smart enough to spend my heard-earned income correctly, but oh my goodness, you are. After all, isn’t that how you got elected, for being so much wiser than we are? Mold me, Maria, into an obedient subject for your tax-and-spend wisdom.

    • It's Only Words

      Joe, don’t worry about not being able to like Maria. I don’t know if you’re from Washington, but if not, you might not know that Cantwell was elected to the US House in 1992 from Washington’s 1st District and served one term. When she was defeated in 1994, she demonstrated a complete lack of grace by never conceding or congratulating the winner or in any way making a public acknowledgment that she’d lost….just silence. She entered the private sector and I thought she was finished in Washington State politics on the basis that no one like a poor loser. Sadly, I was wrong.

  2. momsaid

    This reminds me of how the Welfare system worked for so many years. You must be completely dependent, not dare to earn/save enough to be self-sufficient, and always vote for candidates who want to increase your benefits. Here, we must wait for someone else to drill and refine (sometimes using our money), then sell us the products at ever-increasing costs. In both scenarios, we are at the mercy of others, instead of taking care of our own needs. Funny how the same people (Dems) support both systems…

  3. Pingback: Time To Crack A Few Egg(Heads) | it's only words

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s