National retail gasoline prices hit $4 per gallon this week - an all-time high. Please excuse the non-updated chart above. Just imagine how high the $4 data point would be.
Flashback to October 2006 when that buffoon Greg Mankiw leaped to the front of the Moron Universe with his Pigou Manifesto. If you don't remember, in it he advocated a new $1 per gallon gasoline tax that would be quite the panacea.
It would ease congestion, save this over-heated planet, improve national security, help balance the budget, and effect a couple of other, loopy, theoretical, unquantifiable pipe dreams (e.g "regulatory relief", "tax incidence", and promote "economic growth").
I worked him over good in Dr. Greg Mankiw, The Harvard Economist, Marginalizing Himself.
And then I decapitated him in Greg Mankiw Swings and Misses when he made the cardinal sin of altercating with me personally.
Well Greg, gasoline was around $2.60 back then so we've gotten your prescribed $1 increase plus another 40%!!!!
Yet roads are still congested, planet Earth is still doomed, and his other fancies (like "economic growth") remain as laughable as ever.
Hey, at least he wasn't as stupid as the New York Times which specified an absolute dollar price, $3.00 per gallon, that would usher in a terror-free, cool-Earth utopia.
And, of course, when gas was $1 a gallon, these clowns were probably all saying that a 50 cent tax would be all that's needed to get the science fictional alternative energies going!
12 comments:
Not only do these morons love to promote ideals that would accomplish the exact opposite of the outcome they supposedly want, but they also romanticize places that prove their ideas are ridiculous.
Gas prices are high in the US, but they are twice as high in other "enlightened" countries.
MORE HERE.
You know a Commie-at-heart when he says the words "taxes" and "economic growth" in the same sentence, without a "will limit" in between the two, and instead in most instances inserts a "will promote" in between the two.
If the Pigovian tax would be so beneficial for economic growth, why not raise taxes to 100% and have the State run the whole economy? Hmmm Mankiw? Why not? Idiot. Dick.
It's like those poofs in Congress who claim to want to provide Americans with a "liveable wage" as if this is something that can be done magically at no cost, and it always makes me wonder why Americans must work at all, when we've got automated printing presses that could give everyone an almost infinite amount of money...
Europe proves only one thing - higher gas prices will only get you smaller cars. Oh, and that another continent will gladly burn the oil you save.
Also, Europeans don't work so they don't really care about their sodomizing gasoline prices. It'd be like making deodorant $20 a stick over there!
Now, if you start taxing their cigarettes....that'd be a different story.
C,
As much as I detest war, I kind of miss the good ol' days of all the European yokels blasting the crap out of each other all day long. Sure seemed to keep them busy!
Hmm, you are sick, maybe half sick.
If the economy is controlled by the government, therefore, is it a monopoly?
You know monopoly market is never efficient?
And then...I think Mankiw isn't as sick as you are. When tax on gas number is raised by the amount he suggested, well, his assumptions are right. But don't overthrow his arguments by saying why not increasing tax by 1000 percent. NUTS! people would beat and kill the government by their own hands! IDIOT SOLUTION, so Mankiw is right. The marginal return by increasing tax a bit: more government income, less saving &more investment (comes from more money for medicare) which equals economic growth, better environment, you say them all. But as the diminishing marginal return law, these marginal return diminished and trigger one negative increasing marginal return: PUBLIC ANGER. When they are enough and overide this good marginal return, you know what? People get mad up. So, it is certain amount, and Mankiw's amount is right. You don't suggest something bad, it isn't making sence...
yappy.benedict@gmail.com
One of Indonesian National Science Olympiad on Economics 2008 in Makassar member
It's always helpful to have a bona fide Moron come post comments on my blog!
Thanks "benedict"!
I may be "half sick" but you are *five fourths* a retard - among other things.
C,
He must know what he's talking about, after all, he is a National Science Olympiad from the great State of Indonesia!
hrmph, see for your self.
The moron know economy, better then what you think...
Zee, pay slight closer attention: the tax raise might kill gas stations, but not yet finished. The gas raise will let the earth sustain an extra 100 years to the lives depending on it.
Your suggestion is not comparable to mankiw, and you are talking about having extreme behavior to ilegallize healthy ones, like the Mankiw said it's good to drink 8 glass of water a day since it makes us healthy, but you are the nut to say that that advice is ridiculous and question it by saying "by then, why not drinking 800 glasses of water a day to make you healthier?"
So, if you are that smarter than the moron, prove it, in your blog, would you?
You can't even explain why MC curve collide with AC curve in minimum point! Try me, though!
Mikir dong sebelum ngomong! (You should think before you speak, in Indonesian)
And, proving I am not moron, I will prove your statement false. In long term, the fuel price rise WILL make people change to smaller cars, IN CASE THERE ARE NO SUBTITUTES!
What Mankiw is talking about is believable, because the subtitutes, like liquid hidrogen cars, can be produced in experimental level for 20000$ per machine, and for production levels 5000$ per machine, news released by HONDA CORPORATION. So, what you are talking about is wrong. Government will use those extra tax income to pay for those research to MAKE SUBTITUTES, and when they exist, your car will worth no more than used steel, unless maybe for it's unique being after 100 years.
Substitutes is still not exist for gas because gas companies is performing monopoly on energy for transportation market, in case no substitutes. When their monopoly power is overwhelmed by existence of bounding rules, other companies will think to make substitutes and earn money from these energy for transportation market. So, what Mankiw say, although not yet happening, IS POSSIBLE, than what you say that he is suggesting ridiculous things is not necessarily true. As I say, try me, and don't ban my comments as a man. Right?
Any more arguments?
By the way, MC is marginal cost, AC is average cost on the short run, hints for you. Can find out why MC and AC collide on minimum point of short run AC curve?
savings are usually saved with interest, aren't they? they are not THAT vulnerable to inflation, i thinkz
Interest is negligible these days. Plus, it get's taxed, chopped down every year, as income.
well it is right.
after all I reviewed my books and finally I think the nation's economics depends on the creativity of entrepreneurs (love you schumpy!).
Invest to help entrepreneurs (and enterprises) act!
Post a Comment