Reality-Based!
By Pejman Yousefzadeh Posted in Economic Antediluvianism | Economy | Hillary Clinton — Comments (1) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
I suppose that one of the reasons why Hillary Clinton finds herself unexpectedly playing the role of underdog in the fight for the Democratic Presidential nomination is that she strikes people as one of the most arrogant know-it-alls imaginable (strange, I know, since she is the one trying to tag Barack Obama as the "elitist," but still . . .). She showed her tendency towards know-it-allism yet again just over the weekend:
This morning, George Stephanopoulos began his televised interview with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton by asking if she could name a single economist who supported her plan for a gas-tax suspension.
Mrs. Clinton did not. "I'm not going to put in my lot with economists," she said on the ABC program "This Week." A few moments later, she added, "Elite opinion is always on the side of doing things that really disadvantages the vast majority of Americans."
She also said that despite the doubts of actual economists, she was sure that if her Administration got her tax plans "right," then "it would be implemented effectively." The haughtiness is breathtaking. Clinton actually thinks that the paltry savings from a gas tax holiday will be enough to (a) overcome the increase in demand, which will drive prices back up and (b) will overcome the costs that will be passed on to the consumer thanks to her foolhardy plan of imposing a windfall profits tax on the oil companies. Indeed, she doesn't even acknowledge that the oil companies would naturally pass along the costs to the consumer in order to protect their bottom line--which is entirely what one would expect as a result of misguided tax policy that ends up punishing business. As far as Hillary Clinton is concerned, there really is such a thing as a free lunch and her tax plan provides it. If it is ever implemented, consumers will find out that free lunches have gone the way of the dinosaur. And yes, John McCain is also wrong to think that a gas tax holiday would work but at least he doesn't compound his error by opting for the Clintonian windfall profits tax.
« It Cannot Be Stressed Enough — Comments (3) | Free Trade And Its Effects On The Economy — Comments (11) »
Reality-Based! 1 Comment (0 topical, 1 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
blog advertising is good for you
Washington Times
Recent comments
Rite Aid CEO - Mary Sammons (PA)?
by Hammer2008Okay
by AnteaterYes, please do!
by Catsyfederal taxes
by rqballjohnDitto... n/t
by Oscar98Aren't commies the bad guys this go 'round?
by Oscar98Tim
by simpson316My general rule of thumb on Indiana Jones
by simpson316Why McCain won
by John EvansAnyone else really excited
by sayersThey really made "Dune" boring
by jonlesterCan I get an everybody's a winner trophy now?
by Tim SchiefereckeI'll try again.
by Tim SchiefereckeThose are on my list
by E Pluribus UnumDoesn't work in titles n/t
by simpson316unqualified boobs
by E Pluribus Unumor
by simpson316
blog advertising is good for you

get your job site
at simplyhired.com



When McCain first proposed the gas-tax holiday, I had sharply criticized it for all the reasons you describe (and others as well).
For this, I got attacked by loyal Republicans and McCain supporters.
I wonder how they feel now that Hillary is proposing the same gas-tax holiday. Do we support both of them or neither of them?
Note: Hillary's windfall profits tax is less than meets the eye, because it assumes that oil company profits will continue to grow way past the baseline defined in the tax law. What if oil prices fall instead?
The last time we had a windfall profits tax imposed, it was in the 1970s, during a time of skyrocketing oil prices (just like today). But prices never soar to the sky indefinitely. In the 1980s, the world economic climate changed; commodity prices collapsed; and all of a sudden there weren't any windfall profits anymore.
Then the windfall profits tax got repealed quietly when it was clear it wasn't generating any more revenue.
What could cause oil prices to decline sharply again?
Two things: peace in the Middle East (i.e. the final end to the Iraq War and a peace settlement between Israel and the Palestinians); and a real energy program with teeth in the U.S. that really moves us away from imported oil.
And since Hillary claims that an energy program to reduce our dependence on imported oil is one of her top priorities as President, she is in effect calling for the self-extinction of her windfall profits tax once we get over the current hump.