The price of gas is a poor indicator of how well a country's economy is performing. Think I'm wrong? Check out the gas prices in Venezuela. They can't give the stuff away.
In the USA gas, or petrol as it is called in the UK, has a checkered price history. When I was first buying the stuff in Kansas City, we often had what was affectionately known as a gas war. Gas got as low as 12 cents a gallon. Happy days! But, not to last. In those days I'm fairly sure the USA was self-sufficient in gas. Before OPEC, gas was plentiful, cheap and readily available. Furthermore gas prices have always been variable from state to state. California gas prices could make you cry?! Currently it's at 4.40 a gallon. It's 2.43 in KC. In the UK, a litre (4.4 liters per gallon) is £1.25 Making a gallon of gas about 5 bucks. What is clear is that the price of gas is a poor indicator of almost anything. Yet, it is a question which concerns the American public and folks in the UK I can assure you.
Gas is a function of the price of energy in general. Your packet of Oscar Meyer bacon has gas as a function of its retail price. The farmer who raises the pig, the slaughterhouse which processes the meat, the factory that slices and packs the meat in a carbon-based container, the bacon curing process, the advertising budget of Oscar Meyer, the consumer's trip to the store to buy the bacon all are components that decide the price of Bacon. Fixing the actual reason for the recent rise in bacon prices to the mast of a particular policy or politician is whilst very probably self-satisfying to some folks and an anathema to others overall not very sane, relevant or important.
Clearly, for a variety of reasons, some good, some possibly spurious, food and gas prices are only going in one direction. This is likely to continue regardless of who is in office.
American consumers need to wake up and smell the coffee. In the UK coffee it's between 9 and 14 £ per kilo (2.2 pounds) in the USA it's about 8.50 dollars a pound- that makes it about 3 bucks more expensive in the US. Your Starbucks is going to get more expensive. Inevitable. If you are a big coffee drinker, I suggest you switch to tea!
Both the US and UK have been cheerfully living high-on-the-hog (pardon the pun)by effectively ripping off the commodity producing nations. They used to do it very nicely with gas until the advent of OPEC and the demise of Texas gold. With pork, the Chinese consumer is now mopping up any cheap pork and the US consumer is paying the price. As more Chinese eat bacon and pork, the cost to the US or UK consumer is going to go up. It’s Economics 101.
As a result of the Biden administration's conversion to a greener energy policy, the consumer is going to continue to pick up most of the tab for the energy component of the rise in commodity prices.
BTW (an aside) A US lab today reported that they are on the verge of the Holy Grail, commercially viable nuclear fusion which will make arguments about the price of almost everything redundant. Unfortunately, this may well not happen until beyond our life-time. Our grand or great, great grand-kids may well look back on this and wonder what all the fuss was about!
Until fusion comes on-stream the price of energy will continue to sky-rocket and we (the consumer) will bear the brunt of any price rises. This will be true no matter where you live. The idea that the U.S. can insulate itself from the global economy is a pipe-dream. This was at the core one of the policies of Donald Trump. MAGA - make America Great Again - presumes that somehow America stopped being great at some time. It plays to the same audience as Charles Lindberg’s tribal appeal called America First before WWII.
When the New York Times interviewed Donald Trump in March 2016, one of the reporters, David Sanger, suggested that Trump’s foreign policy could be summed up as “America First”—“a mistrust of many foreigners, both our adversaries and some of our allies, a sense that they’ve been freeloading off of us for many years.”
“Correct. O.K.? That’s fine,” Trump responded. Sanger pressed him to be sure. “I’ll tell you—you’re getting close,” Trump said, in his typically staccato style. “Not isolationist, I’m not isolationist, but I am ‘America First.’ So, I like the expression. I’m ‘America First.’ ”
This is one factor is driving the US consumer into fits of apoplectic rage. Even with sleepy Joe onboard the focus is on the consumer and their perception of the meaning of America First in consumer affairs.. What Donald and Joe forget to tell the electorate is that at the bottom line politicians of whatever persuasion can be powerless to affect the price of either gas or bacon. They can, of course, and often do tinker around the edges by tweaking the tax or import duties on particular products. This may assuage the public for a bit and effectively kick any real decision down the road, but, and this should come as no surprise, all politicians do this all the time. After all, why take a potentially awkward decision or even worse a potentially vote-losing one when you can effectively b***s*** the public and do nothing at all.
Addendum
The withdrawal from Afghanistan has been overshadowing everything else in the news. Neither Trump, Biden or Boris come out looking particularly well. Joe Biden has taken a pasting, and rightly so. People wanted out of Afghanistan, but thought that the folks organising it might have put a bit of thought and effort into it. The UK media are blaming Joe for not seeing the demise of the Afghan army as a real possibility. They are probably right.
Wednesday, August 25, 2021
Price of Gas and Pork
Thursday, March 08, 2012
Close Up the Wall
I'm back.
Actually, I never when very far away. I did go into hospital in Cambridge in early December and had my left knee replaced, but that isn't, I guess, very far.
I strongly urge anyone who is advised to have a knee replacement to give it some considerable thought. By comparison, I'm reliably told, hips are a piece of cake. Recovery time for knees is long – about six months. Now, after three I'm beginning to see the benefit. But, my knee is still worse than before it was done. I wasn't counting on that! Actual improvement is by very slow steps, with some one-up and two-back involved.
Summing up: it ain't no joke!
The pain in my knee is overshadowed by the dreadful news from Afghanistan today. Six soldiers have been killed by a massive road-side bomb. Over 400 British servicemen have now died in what is a a waste – a dreadful waste. Over 1800 American troops have also lost their lives.
What for?
The politicians are struggling to explain. Quite right as there is no real explanation.
The Afghans have been fighting, mostly each other, for hundreds of years. The whole society is based on tribal warfare. The old adage “rather fight than eat” fits perfectly. They have no real state as we know it. They are bandits and drug lords. They have no concept of democracy and are unlikely to get one. The Soviet Army could not do them in the 1980's. Britain's involvement goes back into the 1840's when Britain couldn't do anything with them despite a lot of trying and a lot of dying.
Everyone, including all politicians, knows this. That's what makes it so despairingly tragic!
What's the solution? Get out. Get out now. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200.
By comparison, my knee is a trifle. It hurts a bit. It's a bit depressing. Six young men, mostly in their early twenties are not coming home from Afghanistan. Six families are doomed to a life-time of remorse and agony. It's a travesty for politicians to pretend that there is no alternative. There is.
Get out.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Tony Blair: veni, vidi, vici.
I may be late but I'm very near the mark. The so-called Iraq inquiry finally got a chance to question Tony Blair and they muffed it big time.
It seems amazing to me that the Chilcotters are simply unable, or unwilling, to ask the type of questions designed to bring out the real answers.
At the moment it goes something like this:
Chilcot: Welcome (three minutes of waffle ensues outlining why the inquiry is there and expressing real regret that the witnesses are inconvenienced by having to attend). Now, Prime Minister, oh sorry I meant Mr Blair, could you please, please tell us a bit about what you were doing in relation to the outbreak of hostilities in Iraq?
Tony Blair: Well, (there follows a 35 minute uninterrupted monologue by Teflon Tone).
Got the idea?
Where's Paxman when he's needed?
Actually, taking cheap shots at Chilcot, whilst it has become a sort of unofficial Olympic sport, is not entirely fair. After all he is getting a whacking great sum to do this job and has a very nice lunch everyday courtesy of the government.
How so? How about consulting the terms of reference?
Who picked the members?
The Prime Minister appointed the members of the Committee. Opposition parties were consulted. (Oh gosh, that's all right then!)
Why don’t you have politicians on the Inquiry team?
The Committee’s membership is a matter for the Government. Sir John has, however, discussed his approach to the Inquiry with the Government, leaders of Opposition parties, Chairmen of relevant House of Commons Committees and other interested Parliamentarians. The Committee will continue to discuss the Inquiry with politicians as the Inquiry progresses. (Ok, this is a joke from a dodgy internet site, isn't it?)
Will the Inquiry look into issues that are being considered by other proceedings?
There may be issues that are subject to other ongoing proceedings – for example, legal proceedings or police investigations - on which it would not be appropriate for this Inquiry to comment. We will decide that on a case-by-case basis, subject to legal advice. (And, we trust you implicitly, after all you were appointed by the very people you are supposed to be questioning and holding to account!)
How is the Government co-operating with the Inquiry?
As the Prime Minister told the House of Commons, “no British document and no British witness will be beyond the scope of the Inquiry.” The Government has assured the Inquiry of the full co-operation of the relevant Departments. (I'm so relieved!)
Will all the documentary evidence be published on the website?
The Committee intends to publish the key evidence with its report at the end of the Inquiry. It may also publish material on the website as the Inquiry progresses where this will help increase public understanding of its work. (I'm sure I read somewhere that the Road to Hell is paves with good intentions.)
Will you tell witnesses the line of questioning they will face?
In order for the evidence sessions to be as effective as possible, and in order to ensure fairness to the witnesses, the Inquiry will provide guidance on the matters that the Inquiry wishes to cover in the hearing, and any documents the Inquiry wishes to refer to. The witnesses will not be told of the precise lines of questioning they will face. (Good, they will only be asked questions they are expecting, how fair is that?)
What protection do witnesses have to speak freely?
The hearings are not covered by Parliamentary or other privilege. The Committee expects all witnesses to provide truthful, fair and accurate evidence. The Inquiry welcomes the fact that the Government and Services have extended an immunity from disciplinary action to serving officials and military personnel who give evidence or otherwise assist the Inquiry, as this will help reassure witnesses that they can provide frank and honest evidence.
Should a witness feel unable to answer questions due to a genuine fear of self-incrimination of a criminal offence, it would be open to the Inquiry Committee to consider whether, in order to secure the greatest possible openness and co-operation, it would be appropriate to seek an undertaking from the Law Officers that evidence provided to the inquiry will not be used in criminal proceedings against them, in accordance with the usual practice in inquiries. (Read this bit again please – if you can bear it.)
What will the Inquiry do if it receives evidence or information about criminal offences?
If the Inquiry receives credible evidence that criminal offences have been committed that has not previously been referred to the investigating authorities, it would be obliged to refer that evidence to the appropriate investigating authority. (I'm just so comforted.)
I would gladly give up a year's pay to get Tone, Gordo, The Man of Straw and the rest of the divots in front of a U.S. Senate Committee. Then the money spent providing this sham might be said to have been well spent.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Apocalypse Now - Apocalypse Again
Country is, perhaps, too strong a word. Hostile territory and the graveyard of invaders for the last 2000 years would be a more accurate description.
An old joke. What's the difference between the Army and the Boy Scouts? Answer – the Boy Scouts have adult leaders.
Ask the Army chiefs for answers and all you get are calls for more mobility and a way of keeping their soldiers out of harm's way – more helicopters.
This is nonsense.
Do they not study the Vietnam conflict at Staff College?
Remember that great tableau in Apocalypse Now where Robert Duvall is leading the Air Cavalry into battle to the strains of Wagner's Ride of the Valkyries, and searching for a good place to surf?
Not only is this great cinema, it is also a lesson in how not to conduct operations in a hostile environment where it is impossible to distinguish the enemy from the civilian population.
Put your troops into helicopters and you cede the ground to the enemy. You lose the element of surprise. You alienate the civilian population who no longer see you as a person – just a malignant, hovering beast spitting shells at them. You have already lost the war.
Not only that but you immediately increase casualties. Helicopter today are much larger that the Huey. The Chinooks can take up to 40 troops at a time into harm's way. The Taliban can and will shoot them down. Casualties will increase, not decrease.
We are in the hole. Stop digging.