Thoughts, Rants & Raves, and Useful Info

By the Numbers

Pundits, wonks, politicos and analysts will often toss around a lot of numerical data in making their points or providing their analysis… but they often cite the raw data without realizing that the vast bulk of their audience does not comprehend the numbers and their eyes glaze over! They’re just now starting to grasp the difference between millions and billions, and they haven’t yet inculcated the concept of a trillion into their collective consciousness!

As a public service, I will distill some of the current numerical dialogue into terms that the average citizen should be well able to comprehend and analyze its impact.

Let’s begin with the basics. A million is 1000 thousand. A million dollars will buy between 5 and 8 typical family homes. A million dollars represents about 20 years of earnings for the average family. A million dollars is 10,000 $100 bills. A million dollars will fit into a briefcase.

A billion is 1000 million. A billion dollars in $100 bills would take up 12 shipping pallets stacked 7 feet high. If we round off the population of the USA to 250 Million people, then you would have to take $4 from every man, woman and child to make one Billion dollars. Remember that fact as we will use it in our discussion.

A trillion is 1000 billion. That means a trillion is one million million. Imagine 12,000 shipping pallets stacked 7 feet high with $100 bills. Imagine a 200 car railroad train loaded to capacity with $100 bills! You’d have to take $4000 from every man, woman and child to make a trillion.

Remember, whenever government talks about a billion dollars, think $4 to you. When they talk about a trillion, think about $4000 of your own money.

So now, let’s do some analysis.

Remember Bush’s $87 billion request for the military to run 2 wars? The one Kerry voted for before voting against it? That would have cost you $348 (at $4 per billion as discussed above.)

How about the awful Bush deficits that made him the “worst president ever”?

The worst deficit that Bush had with a GOP congress was in 2003 after 9/11, 2 wars and the dot.com bubble burst. It was around $420 billion dollars. $1680 cost to you.

The 2003 tax cuts did what tax cuts always do, they increased revenues, and the deficit was reduced each of the following years so that by the time power shifted to the Pelosi/Reid congress in January 2007, the deficit had been reduced to under $120 Billion – or $360 to you.

How about the National Debt?

Bush took office with the National Debt of $4 trillion. That’s $16000 debt for you.

In his first 6 years, he added 2 Trillion to the national debt and was harshly and rightly criticized for increasing our debt by 50% in 6 years. This brought our debt to $6 trillion, or $24000 to you.

Pelosi and Reid took the reins of Congress. In 2 years the 110th congress added $3 trillion to the debt. That increased the debt by another 50% in just 2 years. That increased your share by another $12000. Bush took 6 years to add 2 trillion with a GOP congress, but with a Democrat congress they added 3 Trillion in 2 years.

Then we elected Barack Obama.

In the first 2 years of the Obama Administration, the Pelosi-Reid 111th congress added 5 TRILLION DOLLARS to the debt. They borrowed more in 2 years than ALL 42 presidents before Bush COMBINED! They increased the debt more in 2 years than was accumulated in the first 224 years of the United States!

That 5 Trillion increase brought our debt to 14 Trillion. That $56,000 of debt for every man, woman and child in the USA. If you thought things were bad in 2006 when we turned control over to the Democrats, realize that your share of the National debt has, in 4 short years, gone from $24000 to $56000! Is this helping you to put it all into perspective? Are you recognizing the impact that 4 years of Democrat dominance of Congress, and 2 years of a democrat congress and presidency has had on you personally?

Back to deficits for a moment.

Remember that Bush’s WORST deficit with a GOP congress was 420 billion, and that was reduced to $120 billion by the time Pelosi/Reid took power. In their first year at the helm of congress, they more than tripled the previous year’s deficit to $450 billion. That was the best they did in the 4 years they had both houses of congress. And it was 30 billion worse than Bush’s WORST deficit in his first 6 years!

But they were just getting started.

Remember that Bush’s $120 billion deficit in 2006 represented a cost to you of $360.

In their second year, Pelosi Reid tripled their first year’s deficit, and brought our deficit over the unheard of TRILLION dollar mark. The deficit that year was actually $1.2 Trillion, or $4800 to you. That’s right, in 2 years they brought your personal share of the deficit from $360 to $4800.

This year, the deficit is $1.7 Trillion, or $6800 to you. They are DEFICIT spending almost $7000 for every person in the country. That means that after they spend EVERY DOLLAR that they actually COLLECT in taxes, they keep spending, and borrowing at that level.

Now think back to the budget debate.

Our budget is around 3.5 Trillion a year ($14,000 for each of us). “Discretionary Spending” represents about $1.3 trillion. (That’s about $5200 to you). That includes our military, and the non-entitlement departments, agencies, bureaus and programs. The remainder (2.2 Trillion) represents our entitlement transfers of wealth, and interest on the debt. So the government spends $8800 a year for each one of us, taking from Peter who works, to pay Paul who doesn’t – and to pay the interest on financing the whole scheme!

And yet, the Senate Democrats can’t even agree to cut the 3.5 trillion dollar budget by $100 Billion. They couldn’t bring themselves to reduce your deficit share of $6800 by a lousy $400.

So, now when you hear democrats saying Bush and the GOP are worse than Obama and the Democrats, you can share this information! When they tell you our hardships today were inherited from Bush, you can share this information. And when the politicos and wonks throw numbers around, you can translate them into numbers that make sense! Just remember $4 per billion, $4000 per trillion.

Quit Scapegoating the Oil Companies!

Democrats in congress love to beat up on the oil companies: those “evil mega-corporations that make obscene profits and gouge us poor consumers.” But while that populist meme might gain them a few polling points with the assistance of a complicit press, any objective analyst of the facts will have to call BS on the entire premise.

Just where would we be, if the government succeeded in seriously putting the hurt on the world’s few companies capable of taking crude oil and delivering useful products to market?

Forget, for a moment, the energy resources coming from petroleum like gasoline, jet fuel, kerosene, home heating oil and the like. We are dependent upon petroleum for plastics, for medicines, for pesticides, for synthetic fibers necessary to clothe us. For asphalt necessary for roads and roofing. Look at what these demonized companies provide to us, on a slim margin of profit, as we’ll see.

The pain at the pump felt by Americans as gas prices hover around $4.00 a gallon is palpable. And as Rahm Emmanuel famously quipped, the left will “never let a good crisis go to waste”!

Politically, the left sees a golden opportunity: They can attack an “enemy of the common man”. They can (they think) raise tax revenues. They can further cripple the petroleum industry – providing impetus toward their “green economy”. They can attack corporate capitalism. So, of course, they go after the oil companies with great zeal.

But even Democrat Senator Mary Landrieu (a hard core leftist) recognizes that the attacks on the oil companies are both unfounded, and ill advised. Acknowledging that punitively terminating tax provisions (which are available to multiple industries and for good reason!) for the oil companies will not reduce (and might increase) gas prices at the pump, and will NOT increase revenues to the government, she spoke out on May 11, 2011 against the attempts to score political points by setting up the straw-man boogie-man of the “Evil Oil Companies” as an enemy to be taken down.

What REALLY is the cause of these high gas prices? Who’s REALLY to blame?

Well, let’s take a look at the factors influencing our pump price today.

First and foremost is the cost these companies must pay for crude! Raw Material Costs. Presently above $100 a barrel, these costs are bolstered by the weakness of the US Dollar – a function of the poor fiscal policy coming out of Obama’s Washington. A weak dollar means a dollar doesn’t go as far in purchasing commodities on the world market. We can only expect to see commodity prices (of EVERYTHING, not just oil!!!) to continue to climb unless drastic action is taken to stabilize the value of our money!

In addition, we are dependent on foreign (and not always friendly) sources of our oil. Leftist policies have hamstrung our domestic production. When the Department of Energy was created (ostensibly to REDUCE our dependence on foreign oil) our imports represented around 30% of our total petroleum consumption. Presently about 2/3 of all our oil is foreign sourced! (Good job, federal bureaucracy!)

All that oil we’re obtaining from foreign sources must be transported halfway around the globe (on very environmentally friendly tanker ships!). Those Shipping and Delivery Costs contribute to our gas price. Don’t forget, those ships run on DIESEL!! How many gallons do you think a tanker burns to bring a million barrels of oil across the ocean? (And what happens to the shipping costs as the price of Diesel rises?) Then, once offloaded in port, the oil must be transported via pipelines (which charge fees) to the refineries.

Our Refinery Costs are also factored into our gasoline pump prices. We haven’t built a new refinery since the Carter Administration… but we’ve lost a few in that time. Our refining capacity is not increasing to meet demand. Meantime our “helpful” federal government has mandated boutique fuel blends – different formulations engineered for different geographical regions. The refineries must make one blend for Missouri, and another for Illinois! These blends cannot be sold across the regional boundaries, so if there’s a shortage in Illinois for their blend, they can’t sell Missouri’s blend, even if there’s a surplus of that variety! So what happens? The price in IL must go up relative to the price in MO, as a function of its scarcity. And when IL residents note the difference, they cry GOUGING against IL gas retailers, who are innocent of any wrongdoing!

Speaking of the gasoline retailer, their average Retailer Profits are about 10 cents per gallon… unless you pay by credit card! Then the credit card company, which takes a fee based on the SALE PRICE will eat about 6 or 7 cents per gallon, leaving the station operator a mere 3 cents per gallon. This is why gas stations are now mini-markets. They need to sell higher margin items to stay alive! The gas is often a “loss leader” used simply to get motorists to stop and shop their convenience store!

Oil Company Profits must necessarily be figured into the cost equation… but let’s do so with perspective. Oil companies earn approximately 2 cents for every gallon sold! States place Taxes on Gasoline ranging from 30-something to 60-something cents per gallon, with the national average being 48 cents. So for every penny the oil companies earn, the states make almost a quarter. WHO’S reaping the windfall profits? The states invest nothing in exploration, extraction, transportation, formulation, refining, or delivery of gasoline, yet they make nearly a quarter for every penny the oil companies earn in profit!

But we’re not yet done with taxes! Once the states get their share, the feds also get a chunk. About 18 cents per gallon goes to the Federal Government. So about $.66 of every gallon you pump is simply paid to the state and federal government in taxes. Lay that against the lowly 2 cents profit per gallon that the oil companies get! If the profits of the oil companies are obscene, what about the Federal and State Governments appropriating 33 cents (and delivering NOTHING) for every cent the oil companies make in profit while delivering vital products to market?

But they sell billions of gallons! They earn BILLIONS in profit!

Ok… and so? That profit goes to their shareholders. When they make money, 9.2 million stockholders benefit!! Do you have a 401K or IRA or a pension? I’ll just bet you’re one of those evil oil profiteers!

And what of those billions? Oil companies operate on margins that would shut down most other industries. What business could survive with an effective tax rate of 48% and a profit margin under 7%?

According to ABC News (hardly a friend of the oil companies, and certainly not a conservative news outlet) the big oil companies had the following revenues/profits: Source: http://abcn.ws/jgMnP4

Company                           Revenues          Profit           Percent Profit

Exxon Mobil                     284.7B               19.3B            6.8%

Chevron                               163.5B              10.5B             6.4%

Connoco                               139.5B                4.9B             2.8%

Valero Energy                     70.0B                2.0B            2.8%

Marathon Oil                         49.4B                1.5B             3.0%

The total profit for these 5 big oil companies was 38.2 Billion in 2010. (How fast does Government spend 38.2 billion?) Sounds like a lot, doesn’t it?

With approximately 250 million people in the USA, it takes $4 per person to make a billion dollars. So all 5 companies in total earned about $152.80 from each of us in 2010! Now think about what you SPENT on gasoline in 2010! Now realize that over $5000 was collected from each of us in gas TAXES by the states and the feds in that same time period. WHO are you mad at now?

Oh, and the Feds want to raise taxes on the oil companies. Where do you think that money will come from?

So WHO should be demonized when you feel that pain at the pump?

Outside the Box Perspectives

As an analyst of current events, I try to see things from unusual perspectives. To see what others might miss, or at least are not talking about. The recent takedown of Osama Bin Laden has provided more than ample material for such examination!

On the decision to send human assets rather than bombing the compound from 35,000 feet, the talk has all been about knowing of a certainty that we’d gotten OBL. But could there be another ulterior motive?

Has anyone drawn a connection to the Libyan conflict? Obama’s approval on Libya has been flagging. He’s been dithering on Khadafy. He doesn’t want him killed, but wants him to go… yet Khadafy’s been holding power and even making gains against the rebels. Having committed to supporting the rebellion in Libya, yet feeling the heat from the public for his decision to get involved, what is his most graceful way out of that morass? Wouldn’t the voluntary ceding of power by Khadafy fit the bill?

Khadafy is a blusterer and a terrorist, but he’s also a coward. When Reagan rang his bell with a few cruise missiles, he shut up for decades! Remember, when Saddam Hussein was fished out of his “spider hole”? Khadafy abandoned his nuclear program, welcomed inspector and regulators, and began providing us with intelligence! Khadafy DOES NOT WANT us painting a bull’s-eye on him!

Now, with our actions against him and our official position being in support of his ouster from power, Khadafy’s been defiant up to this point, believing Obama to be a weak and impotent wuss. And maybe, to this point, he’s been right!

The actions in Pakistan to take out Bin Laden MUST give Khadafy pause! We have the intelligence and technology to locate Bin Laden and put Seals on the ground. And Obama, to his credit, had the cojones to order the strike. Is it possible Khadafy might reconsider a “peaceful transfer of power” to avoid a similar fate? Might such an eventuality provide a bump in Obama’s approval rating – and could that have factored into his decision tree on utilizing Seal Team 6?

And what if it did? Would that be a case of narcissistic self-interest causing him to stumble into what could actually be a brilliant strategic move?

Moving on to the second item for discussion; Obama spent 4 days distracting the American public’s attention away from domestic policy issues while the release of photos of the corpse of Osama Bin Laden was debated. Ultimately, the decision was made to withhold the release of the photos, citing concerns that they would incite additional violence and put our troops at elevated risk.

Others are debating the merits of release or non-release of the photos. I’m looking at a different perspective: Obama’s ostensible concern for the risk to the troops!

If the troops are REALLY Obama’s first concern, then perhaps he should revisit the policies and the Rules of Engagement that his administration has implemented, which have resulted in the loss of more of our service men and women under his watch in 2 years, than under Bush’s watch in almost 8 years! Decisions made by the Commander-in-Chief in policy setting affect day-to-day operations, strategies and tactics, and ultimately the safety of every service member in theatre. Perhaps, if their welfare is his highest priority, as he states as his justification for not releasing the OBL photos, consistency would demand a review of the administration’s policies and procedures which have so notably degraded the safety of our military men and women since the changing of the guard in the White House!

Finally, the news of the killing of Bin Laden has knocked Donald Trump and the Birther issue off the front pages; but let us roll back the calendar a few days to when it was the big news. Obama had spent around 30 months and millions of dollars avoiding the release of his birth certificate. When the questions first arose, he could have simply produced the document and ended the controversy. Instead he fanned the smoldering coals into a flame! WHY?

I don’t intend to get into the validity or veracity of the document he released. There are those who will waste the next 2 years trying to prove it is fraudulent. There are those who will use it to ridicule the birthers. I’m looking for the perspective no one is talking about. If the document IS genuine, why would Obama have spent so much effort to keep it sealed?

Because it served his purposes to do so!

Fanning the controversy was a perfect distraction. For as long as “birthers” were a fringe element, he could use them to taint the Right as loonies. The Tea Party was dismissed at first as a bunch of racists and birthers! Over time, the doubters numbers began to grow. Obama’s stonewalling caused more mainstream people to question “Where’s the Long Form?” Even Chris “Tingles” Matthews questioned it!

Obama milked the controversy to the point where it reached the tipping point. Almost half the country questioned whether Obama was born in HI. His first term was half over and he’s in campaign mode. Could there be a better time to trot out a long form document, proclaiming him to have been born in Honolulu? The release accomplished several things for the President:

1) The majority of doubters will simply accept the document and be satisfied. 2) Trump is made to look foolish for making all that noise about it. 3) Those who question the document are marginalized and ridiculed. 4) Obama gets a big “I told you so… why didn’t you believe me in the first place?” gaining a “victory” heading into campaign season. 5) No one dares bring up his Indonesian citizenship or what passport he used to travel to Pakistan – which might have provided more effective questioning of his eligibility!

Whether the document is genuine and was always there, or was a fraudulent creation of the moment is not the topic of this article. Either way, releasing it at this particular juncture was brilliant. Obama was already cooking on the Bin Laden takedown, which would soon knock the Birth Certificate off the front page and out of people’s minds, with their last thought on the matter being that Obama had settled it. The issue is dead, and Obama won. Anyone attempting to resurrect the issue at this point looks foolish, and doing so will be a fruitless endeavor which will serve Obama’s interests by distracting some who could otherwise effectively battle his policies through the remainder of his term, and work to defeat him and his allies in 2012.

You will notice, this article offers little in the way of answers or conclusions. Its purpose was to raise awareness of fresh perspectives; a different way of looking at events. Events and life itself are 3-Dimensional. It is often interesting and frequently useful to go beyond the discussion of the obvious, and look at situations from angles other than head-on.

Our education system seems to have abandoned the purpose to encourage students to think, and to teach them how to do critical analysis. Instead of teaching HOW to think, they indoctrinate with WHAT to think. American Patriots must reawaken and cultivate the skill of critical analysis and outside-the-box thinking!

Trump is Entertaining, But He's Just an Opening Act

Donald Trump is nothing if he’s not a showman! The man knows how to get attention. He’s a self-promoter and loves the spotlight, and he’s certainly garnered a lot of that limelight of late!

He is riding a rising tide of popularity, and he’s milking it for all its worth. America is so very disenchanted with Obama that anyone who can land a body-blow on him is a hero. Trump has been relentless in his sometimes comical, sometimes clownish criticism and skepticism of the President. This makes him something of a folk-hero, whose stock has just posted great gains after Obama blinked on the Birth Certificate staredown. Now he is calling for school records. An amusing diversion, to be sure, and it may cause further deterioration of Obama’s credibility… but it’s not doing much to cause a rise in confidence in Trump’s ability to govern!

But if I might draw an analogy, Trump is an opening act. He warms up the audience for the headliner. Someone else will close the show and take the curtain calls.

Perhaps an even better analogy is that of a bullfight. Given the close association that so many people have between “bull” and Obama, this may perhaps be the most fitting analog I can find!

In a bullfight, there is not a single human opponent to the bull. There is a TEAM. The Picador will annoy the bull and will insert lances to weaken his back. This is the role I see The Donald playing. Frustrating the bull, causing him pain and injury, confusing him, and wearing him down.

During the next phase of the bullfight, a Torreador will play the bull. Goading him to charge at his red cape, while deftly avoiding the bulls horns, he further confuses and tires the bull. This is a finesse act. Perhaps too finesse for The Donald’s cavalier manner. I expect one or more challengers of the Paul Ryan, Mike Pence, even Ron Paul variety to challenge Obama on the REAL issues. To make him answer real and reasoned questions on fiscal matters, and on the differing world views and underlying philosophies that distinguish between the Progressive Left and the Conservative Right. But the Matador… the one who ultimately plunges the sword into the bull and ends the bullfight in victory… that person has yet to emerge. This must be a charismatic person. One who can eloquently articulate the positions, policies, platform, and plan that will set our nation on a course for prosperity and success. One whose policies are not political gamesmanship, but which come from a core belief and a personal conviction. A Reaganesque character who will unite people behind an optimistic vision and a realistic plan.

This character profile does not fit Trump, and he won’t play that role in the end. Who will? It’s too early to tell! There are several I have my eyes on, and a few I truly hope will jump into the fray – but it’s far to early to make such a prediction or endorsement!

In the meantime, suffice it to say… I’m enjoying the opening act. But Trump will have to vacate the stage so the headliner can perform.