Tag: voo doo economics

Groundhog Day

“Groundhog Day,” one of ek hornbeck’s favorite movies, is about a man caught in a time loop doomed to repeat the same day over and over until he examines his life and changes. Like Bill Murray’s character in the movie the US seems to be unable to move on from the bad tax policies that …

Continue reading

From Sheer Lunacy Back To Just Insanity

After a disastrous week the GOP presidential candidate, alleged billionaire, Donald Trump introduced his economic advisors, a veritable who’s who of what’s wrong with the US economy as pointed out by economist RJ Eskow. Trump’s team isn’t just monochromatic and male. At least four, and perhaps as many six, of the men are billionaires. They …

Continue reading

El Presidente Repeals Law of Supply And Demand

cross posted from The Dream Antilles

This past week we were all treated to a proposed executive repeal of the venerable Law of Supply and Demand by McCain and Clinton.  Today, not to be undone, El Presidente made it clear that they were too late, he had already issued an executive order nullifying the Law of Supply and Demand.  And by golly, he was going to take credit for that.

According to Bloomberg:

Hillary Clinton and John McCain are both pushing a “gas-tax holiday” to give consumers an 18.4- cent-a-gallon price break. Clinton says the plan will take excess profits from oil companies. McCain says it will help families buy school supplies.

Economists have a different take: They say the oil companies may end up the biggest beneficiaries, while the aid to families wouldn’t be enough to buy a $35 backpack.

The trouble with the plan, they say, is that oil prices are rising because of low supplies, and companies will continue to charge the average $3.60 a gallon and just pocket the money that would have gone to federal taxes.

And this doesn’t even mention that old bugaboo, the Law of Supply and Demand, which holds that decreasing price usually stimulates consumption.  This is that Law: If a bottle of beer was $2 and now it’s $1, wouldn’t you consider having 2 instead of one?  So the proposal, supposedly decreasing the price, would lead to greater oil consumption and then, uh oh, higher prices.