What Does Political Upheaval In France And Greece Mean for The Price Of Gold?

May 7, 2012 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Economic News, gold bullion 

Now that Nicolas Sarkozy has lost the presidency to a socialist in France and Greek voters have decided that they really don’t want their country to get out of debt, what does that mean for the price of gold? New French President Francois Hollande wants to lower the retirement age from 62 to 60 thus making the country even less productive as a whole and he also wants to tax millionaires at 75% of their income. Not a big deal here because French voters put him in office based on these profoundly unsound economic thievery principles.

While this is temporarily strengthening the US dollar while it is weakening the Euro, the immediate effect is to lower the price of gold. However, once new President Hollande figures out he can’t possibly pay the bills with such early retirement and tax policy foolishness, economic stagnation will begin in France (worse than it already is) and spread around Europe like cancer. And with Greek voters rejecting any austerity measures, Eurozone collapse is soon to follow thus making for that possible day of reckoning that will put the price of gold through the roof.

The next few short months in Greece should be quite interesting as all the hard fought austerity measures and agreements hashed out to try and bring some stability to the sinking ship that is the Greek economy gets scrapped and everybody goes back to the drawing board. That is surely something German Chancellor Angela Merkel as well as German voters won’t be happy about. There probably won’t be much tolerance for shenanigans from Greek riots and then asking for bailout money from the rest of Europe once again.

The day of reckoning is much closer.

Source: MarketOracle.co.uk

Markets Can’t Stomach Tar Sands Discrimination

March 20, 2012 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Economic News, Political News 

Oilprice.com makes an interesting case for ending the debate about Canadian tar sands. There is anough oil on the North American continent that could make the dependence on foreign oil a thing of the past except for the environmental lobby. Feel free to leave your comments at the bottom. Here is the article from OilPrice.com below:

Canada’s natural resources minister told delegates at the International Energy Forum in Kuwait that his country was on the cusp of becoming an “energy superpower.” Canada ranks No. 6 in terms of global oil production, but much of its crude exists in the form of oil sands. European leaders are considering a measure that would classify oil sands as an environmental issue, prompting Canada to threaten to take the issue to the World Trade Organization. With the U.S. political system in a deadlock over Canadian crude, the Ottawa government is now working to convince the international community that the global market is in jeopardy if polices “discriminate against oil sands.”

Drill-happy critics of the Obama administration are painting the Keystone XL oil pipeline planned from Alberta as a panacea to U.S. economic woes. Because of debates over the planned route through Nebraska, however, the White House has pushed the issue aside for now. The pipeline company behind the project, TransCanada, has opted for a smaller leg in the United States while the Canadian government has thrown its support behind the Northern Gateway pipeline meant for Asian exports.

Canadian Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver said his presence at the IEF summit in Kuwait proved his country was “an emerging energy superpower.” Canada has around 175 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, which means it’s the only non-OPEC member in the global top five, just behind Saudi Arabia and Venezuela.

European leaders in March were unable to reach a decision on whether or not to characterize oil sands as an environmental issue. Critics of oil sands note that its production releases much more CO2 into the atmosphere compared with regular crude oil and its tendency to sink in water makes it a particular concern if spilled. Some critics have dubbed it the dirtiest form of oil on earth and advocate an outright ban. The European government is set to consider the issue by June.

Oliver, however, complained to IEF delegates that any policy that would discriminate against oil sands would be harmful to the global market and overall energy security. Last year, the global economy was threatened by a loss of crude oil from war-torn Libya, OPEC’s No. 7, so sidelining oil sands from Canada could be much more severe.

“Our government believes that the free market is the most efficient and cost-effective means to ensure the proper allocation of resources for the development and supply of energy,” said Oliver.

Just as Obama said there’s no “silver bullet” that can magically push U.S. gasoline prices to something American consumers consider fair, there’s nothing in a global market that’s easily replaced. Singling out Canadian oil means potentially sidelining an oil supply larger than Iran’s, something a depressed European economy could hardly stomach. But as with Iranian crude, if the Europeans don’t want it, they don’t have to buy it. While that’s an oversimplification of the issue, the world still needs as much oil as it can get. Europe is embracing a greener economy. But until global economic engines run on something other than petroleum products, when Canadian crude oil is at stake, it’s time to just let it flow.

Source: http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Is-it-Time-to-Abandon-the-Oil-Sands-Debate.html

By. Daniel J. Graeber of Oilprice.com

Yes, we should work towards a cleaner planet and environment, but we are locked into crude oil being the fuel that powers the engine of commerce in the world today and we need energy and answers today, not 10 or 20 years from now.

The Rich Do Pay Their Fair Share

July 28, 2011 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Economic News, Political News 

King "The Rich Don't Pay Enough" ObamaFrom one side of this ridiculous debt debate going on in Washington comes the mantra that the rich simply do not pay their fair share in taxes and that they got rich on the backs of the middle class and what we call the poor in this country. In fact, in the President’s speech to the nation on the debt ceiling fiasco he actually had the audacity to say,

“Republicans in Congress are insisting on a different approach — a cuts-only approach -– an approach that doesn’t ask the wealthiest Americans or biggest corporations to contribute anything at all.  And because nothing is asked of those at the top of the income scale…”

My emphasis added.

Really Mr. President, wealthy Americans are not contributing anything at all to this orgy of government spending? And exactly nothing is being asked of them, as if it is their responsibility to cover for you and your wife’s over-the-top-jet-set-vacations, endless golf outings and trips around the world as your contribution to the crisis we are now facing? This kind of rhetoric from the Propagandist in Chief who acts more like a king than a president, is designed to do nothing more than incite people into thinking that not only do the rich benefit from the poor, but in the process they also contribute nothing. As a supposed leader, the President is insinuating that the rich don’t pay any taxes.

The only thing further from the truth than the statement in quotes above, is that the person who now resides in the White House is actually qualified to be President.

Of course the rich are contributing to the revenue base that runs this country, they are contributing greatly. For example, a person who earns $100,000 per year pays approximately $22,000 per year in taxes, while someone who earns $1,000,000 a year will be paying $320,000 per year in taxes. So, a person who makes 10 times what a $100,000 per year earner makes, will pay 14.5 times the amount of taxes than the lesser earner does. I guess the government parasites are right, the rich don’t pay their fair share, they pay way, way too much.

Another way to look at this is to ask if the person making $1,000,000 a year actually uses $320,000 worth of government services in that year. Does the fact that they make that much money create such a burden on the system that they need to pay all that extra money? What about the money a top earner spends, does that contribute to the economic system that runs the wheels of commerce or should we just tax them more? Let’s have a look at that.

Not only does the high income earner spend lots of money, many times they also pay a premium for services that the rest of us never really see and all the money they spend obviously goes into someone else’s pocket whether that be profits for a business, wages to employees of those businesses or directly to individuals for goods and services. Let’s say a $1 million a year earner buys a $100,000 automobile, that money gets divided up amongst the:

Salesperson
Sales manager
Dealership owner
Receptionist that greets customers
Service advisers
Mechanics that service the car
Administrators that service warranty claims
Janitor that sweeps the dealership floor
Auto detailers
Auto shipper

And then we move on to the manufacturing process. These people also get a cut:

Auto assemblers
Assembly floor manager
Quality inspectors
Auto designers
Engineers
Parts fabricators
Tool makers
Inventory and stock personnel
Parts buyers
Parts expeditors
Parts suppliers
Material suppliers
Parts designers
Raw material suppliers
Parts shipping and transportation
Process engineers
Procedure writers
Assembly trainers
Facilities maintenance personnel

And then there’s the cut the government gets in:

Waste disposal fees
OSHA inspectors
Tire taxes
Battery taxes
Hazardous waste certifications
Emissions inspections and taxes
Permits
More permits
Environmental impact fees
Possible gas guzzler taxes

All that and more is paid by the rich person who injects their wealth into the economy of just buying an expensive automobile. Yes, wealthy people buy luxury items, but someone has to make and then sell those items and as you can see from the list above there are a lot of people along the process to getting an automobile to market and then to the consumer.

Beyond just purchasing transportation, rich people also buy the same things you and I buy. And then there are those extra premium fees mentioned earlier. We recently went to Ft Lauderdale and although I love this part of South Florida it can be very expensive to live there. Almost everywhere you turn you have to pay for items and services that the rest of us rarely see. Yes, we had to pay for those services while we were in Ft Lauderdale, but the people who live there pay for them every day. Some of those fees include parking at hotels and on the street. It costs a minimum of $20 a day to park at any of the hotels in town or on the strip or $6 for 2 hours while you go eat breakfast at a hotel. If you want to go downtown and shop add $6 to $12 on top of your purchases for the privilege of parking near shopping.

Property taxes are also much higher in areas like Ft Lauderdale. On top of the cost of your dwelling and property taxes, there are then either condo association and maintenance fees or home owner association fees that pay for people to keep the outside of you building from crumbling or the common areas of your neighborhood mowed and tidy looking. Gee, those silly maintenance and lawn workers, they have to eat too you know.

No, we’re not done quite yet. If you have a lot of money and can afford to stay in Ft Lauderdale in the more exclusive hotels, beyond the cost of either paying for parking at the hotel or renting a car that puts money into the local economy there is that rip-off hotel tax we have in Florida. All Florida hotels have the tax, but when you stay in an expensive hotel, such as in Ft Lauderdale, you obviously pay more for that. For instance, if you were to stay at the W on Ft Lauderdale Beach for 3 nights at a cost of $400 a night (a cheap rate by the way), your 3 day stay will cost you $1,200 plus $72 state sales tax, plus $78 Florida State Hotel Rip-Off tax because apparently the money tourists are bringing into the state by vacationing here, just isn’t quite enough. Did you get that? Someone who stays at the W in Ft Lauderdale Beach for 3 nights pays an extra $78, on top of all the other fees and taxes, just because the state of Florida demands it.

It is obvious that people who have money, spend money, and that money doesn’t just go into a black hole, it goes to pay the salaries of people who provide the goods and service that cater to people with wealth. It keeps the economy humming along at a pretty good pace but, according to our President and many members of Congress who continue to beat the class warfare drum, what the wealthy are doing to contribute to the economy is absolutely nothing.

Government acts as if the money they spend belongs to them, when in fact, it doesn’t. The height of absurdity and propaganda comes from this White House infographic where it is shown how much the policies of George W Bush added to the national debt vs what Barack Hussein Obama policies added to the debt. The evidence that this group of thieves who are now running the show thinks that government money actually belongs to them is at the bottom of the infographic where the Bush tax cuts are being blamed for adding $3 trillion to the debt. That’s like me going over to my neighbors house and stealing $100 and then claiming that it cost me money when I decide to return $50 to him out of the goodness of my heart. It wasn’t my money to begin with and it costs me nothing to return any or all of the money to him.

The bottom line is that the rich do pay their fair share as do the rest of us. We give enough money to the parasites in Washington, they don’t need any more money. The real question is, when is the government going to stop creating more social programs, more bureaucracies, more government Czars and more inventive ways to spend our hard earn money and start reigning in the orgy of spending?

We are waiting…


Next Page »


  • Gold Coins For Sale
    On eBay:


  • Recent Posts