Politicians have no ability to define what is reasonable
Posted by BrianFrom the Tax Foundation:
The current high price of gas has led to a lot of crazy proposals from gas tax holidays to creating a tax deduction based upon energy consumption. But Rep. Paul Kanjorski’s (D-PA) may top them all in terms of its stupidity. From the Times Leader, Kanjorski’s plan would do the following:
- H.R. 5800 would tax industries’ windfall profits.
- The bill would set up a Reasonable Profits Board to determine when these companies’ profits are in excess, and then tax them on those windfall profits.
- As oil and gas companies’ windfall profits increase, so would the tax rate for those companies.
- Kanjorski said his legislation will encourage oil companies to lower prices to prevent them from receiving higher tax rates.
While Hillary Clinton may have failed ECON 101 along with John McCain, it appears as if Kanjorski may been enrolled in Marxism 450 at the time. In all honesty, nationalization of the oil industry (i.e. Venezuela) may be better than Kanjorski’s ridiculous proposal.
A “Reasonable Profits Board”?!?! This is insane. We should encourage people to make money in this country, not threaten to punish them. The potential to make money stimulates capital investment. That yields things like jobs and wealth that the government has absolutely no capacity to create. Before you reply that the government hires people just think about how they get the money to pay them - from individuals that make and sell things.
Good news Republicans! John McCain is absolutely no better.
Aside - I’d never heard of Paul Kanjorski before today and now I’ve written two posts on him in the span of an hour.
Related content:
May 24th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
And folks wonder why outsourcing and overseas headquarters are so popular.
May 25th, 2008 at 4:48 am
I don’t have a problem with corporations making a profit, I just don’t believe that profit should be at the exspense of American service men and women and the American people.
May 26th, 2008 at 11:49 am
Admittedly this is probably not the answer, but there has to be some measure to insist on fair business practices as well as non-collusion/price setting. The price is artificially high on oil right now, I just hope the market corrects itself in a timely manner (it rarely does) so I don’t have to walk the 20 miles to my job. This is killing rural people.
May 26th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
There have been numerous investigations into collusion/price setting among oil companies over the years. Not one indicated any nefarious activities. This is all about supply and demand of a fungible commodity. I agree that it is hard on rural people, as most of my side of the family lives in rural southeast Alabama. However, any government “solution” to high prices - as tempting as such an effort might seem - will only exacerbate the problem.
BTW, good to have you back. I noticed your previous blog went belly up a while back.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:04 pm
The investigators are investigating themselves. That is why “not one indicated any nefarious activities”. So when you say there have been numerous investigations it depends on who is doing the numerous investigating. Can you say fox and henhouse?
Brain, I would like to know why you are anti government. You are anti government schools, anti government help, what’s the deal?
May 26th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
Talmadge,
You said that the market rarely corrects itself in a timely matter. Why do you think that? I don’t necessarily disagree with you. Just want to know why.
May 26th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
I’m not anti-government - I’m pro-individual, pro-choice (as it applies to the marketplace), and pro-freedom. If you haven’t noticed yet, the more “help” the government gives you the less freedom you have and the more power the government has.
May 27th, 2008 at 1:29 am
Uh, I noticed the lack of “government help” during Katrina that was not a good thing.
I’ve also noticed that Bush and Cheney have created the largest government in United States History and yes they have taken a way a lot of our “freedoms” and they’ve granted themselves more power than any Executive branch in U.S.history.
So you are pro individual choice as it applies to the “marketplace” but not when it comes to an individuals right to chose on social issues?
The purpose of Government is to Govern. Without Government we would have chaos and anarchy. Who is running the government controls the size and the scope.
May 27th, 2008 at 6:54 am
Redeye,
How long have you been reading this blog? Where do you get the idea that Brian doesn’t believe in an individual’s right to choose on social issues? I suggest that you go back and read the archives.
May 27th, 2008 at 6:56 am
Just to clarify, are you bhmhomeboy from Doc’s?
Yeah, Democrat mayor Ray Nagin did a great job letting all those buses flood instead of transporting people out of the fish bowl.
I’m pro individual choice far more than you realize. I’m not going to give you a line item list of my positions; feel free to search the archives if you’re curious about my beliefs.
I’m no anarchist. The primary function of government is not to “govern” - a word whose very definition smacks of authoritarianism (to rule over by right of authority). The primary functions of government include protecting its citizens, providing a just legal system, and interfacing with other governments. The initial purpose of our federal government was to be minimally intrusive into the lives of private citizens and the affairs of the states. The bloated leviathan we have today would be considered an abomination by the Founders. And yes, I’ve been quite critical of the Bush administration on this point.
Regarding your “fox guarding the hen house” comment – you’re wrong, unless you consider Federal government entities like the FTC subservient to the oil companies.
Getting back on topic, explain what you mean by “profit should [not] be at the [expense] of … the American people.” Riddle me this – if an American willingly trades his/her money for any product (whatever the price or profit) why do you have a beef? It’s not like we make the decisions under threat of force (except when we’re talking about taxes).
May 27th, 2008 at 8:22 am
Brian, thanks for the welcome. I just didn’t have time to upkeep my other blog regularly and could have revived it, but just decided to start anew. Another reason it has been down was because of conflicts of interest due to political activities for a while.
Bill,
I say this because look at artificially high stock prices in the 1990s or artificially high housing prices throughout the same period and the early century. In both instances stocks for companies were way overvalued because of speculation and it took a while, but eventually the market corrected itself. Admittedly oil should be higher right now, but not as high as it is.
May 28th, 2008 at 3:50 am
At a recent hearing re oil industry, Rep. Maxine Waters told the oil heads that if they don’t strighten up, Gov was going to socialize oil and take over the industry.
May 28th, 2008 at 11:17 am
All of the Marxists, I mean Democrats, who think that nationalizing the oil industry is a swell idea might want to observe one of the many case studies available. Mexico’s Pemex would be a good start.