.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
Heavy-Handed Politics

"€œGod willing, with the force of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world
without the United States and Zionism."€ -- Iran President Ahmadi-Nejad

Wednesday, February 07, 2007

Democratic presidential candidate wants to 'take' oil profits to fund her own projects.

By Dan Gainor
Business & Media Institute


"Longtime internet users will recognize the phrase 'All your base are belong to us.” It’s a comically stupid but popular English translation from a late ’80s Japanese video game. In a nutshell, it is a declaration of dominance – everything of yours is now mine.

That sentiment has emerged in Washington – from Hillary Clinton. The presidential candidate used it when she made her feelings about private property known at the Democratic National Committee’s winter meeting .

Clinton must have been shocked that the free market works so well that some Americans actually profit from dealings other than Whitewater. So she decided this sort of thing must end.

“The other day the oil companies recorded the highest profits in the history of the world. I want to take those profits. And I want to put them into a strategic energy fund that will begin to fund alternative smart energy, alternatives and technologies that will begin to actually move us toward the direction of independence,” she told the audience. Notice she didn’t say tax the profits. She just said “take.” I shouldn’t be shocked. A left-wing politician wants to take from people who earn a profit and spend it on something that hasn’t made a profit, like much of the alternative energy field." Read more....

2 Comments:

  • What of the gross ‘profits’ that the government has already realized from its tax on the gasoline that the oil companies produced and sold. Their take is two to three times that of the oil companies profits. I wonder how differently people would feel if that figure was always published along side the oil companies profits.

    “I want to take those profits”? How different is that from Cuba and certain South American countries nationalizing industries?

    Who is it that will draw on this ‘strategic energy fund’ to develop new energy sources? And why would they do so? Out of the goodness of their hearts? Then why would they need the money? Or might they be seeking to generate profits of their own? If there is profit to be had from alternative energy why would not the ‘greedy’ oil companies go after it. After all, they are already in the energy business and know their oil resources are limited.

    The answer is that they are already doing so, using the very profits Hillary finds so offensive. New energy sources will be offered when they or others advance the technology to the point where profit is available. Without profit these new energy sources are simply not economically viable.

    That, dear Hillary, is the beauty of a free market. It insures that what is done produces greater value than what is consumed in the process. Unlike government programs which go on and on with ever greater funding and no accountability as to results.

    By Anonymous Anotmo, at 9:35 AM  

  • Accountability? ACCCOUNTABILITY?

    Heh, heh. Anotmo you have hit upon a word that doesn't even exist in their vocabularity.

    Oh sure. I guess I have had on a few occassions heard them toss that word around in shallow meaningless rhetoric; but they know not of what they speak.

    It is a word they use in much they same manner as to when they get caught doing something wrong and say "I take full reponsibility" for my actions. And then, that's the end of the story. Nothing happens beyond that point. It's as if saying "I'm sorry. I take full responsibility" is complete absolution.

    End of story. Period. Move along. There's nothing to see here.

    By Blogger HeavyHanded, at 9:52 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home