Price Gouging - It's a Good Thing
- Details
- Created: Friday, 01 September 2017 11:12
- Written by Super User
Yesterday morning the Motiva refinery in South East Texas announced a controlled shut down due to the effects of Hurricane Harvey.
By 4:00 pm the same day, several gas stations in Austin posted "No Gas" signs and those that remained open saw lines form while people flocked to get "their share" before all tanks ran dry. At 10:00 pm last night I drove past a line of about 30 cars on the I-35 service road in line to get gas at one of the open stations on the freeway. These scenes played out all over the State.
This is, of course, a media driven self fulfilling prophecy.
There are approximately 10 refineries closed due to Harvey. These closings reduce the refining capacity of the country by about 15%. Of course, there are typically between 5 - 15% of refineries in scheduled "shut down" in the country; and typically refineries run at something less than 100% of capacity.
In short, the possibility of Harvey making a significant impact on the supply of refined oil products in the United States is 0%.
Yet. We're out of gas. All because people feared, we'd run out of gas.
What could cure this insanity?
Some would call it "Price Gouging"
If the price of gas went from $2.00 to $5.00 yesterday, the only people who would be in line would be those that really need gas, and even then, probably only by what they need.
Same thing for water. Last Friday I watched shopping cart after shopping cart loaded with cases of water leaving the HEB. The store was out of water about in about an hour after Harvey was announced as at least a Cat 3 storm - and that was 200 miles inland.
Hell no. When water is scarce, it's value rises. If public water supplies are temporarily shut down, selling a case of life sustaining fluid at an inflated price is not criminal. At least no more a crime than sprinting to the store an hoarding all the water you can carry - despite the fact that you couldn't drink it all in month. To hell with those that would be placed in need during the following week.
In short, what people criminalize as "price gouging" is often just a rational market response required to control the allocation of a scarce resource. No, it's not perfect, but it's rarely a crime; and it's probably the best allocation control we have.
Add a commentTotal Eclipse - of the Truth
- Details
- Created: Monday, 21 August 2017 11:15
- Written by Ax D. WhiteMan
No, I won't be staring skyward this afternoon trusting my vision to pair of $5.99 Chinese "eclipse glasses." By the time the 70% eclipse passes over Austin Texas, I'll have watched countless high quality videos of the event which happened two hours earlier in Portland.
Perhaps my perspective on the "eclipse of the sun" has been impacted by spending a week staring directly into an almost total "eclipse of the the truth."
This week President Trump made several statements referring to the violence that occurred in Charlottesville, The most controversial being Trumps statement that there were,
"fine people on both sides."
This statement is almost certainly true, and entirely impossible to demonstrate to be false. I watched Faith Goldy ; who seems to be a fine person, give an on-site objective description of the events on the ground. Her description of "dumb white men" being exploited by the "alt-right" while being interviewed by an alt-right podcast; got her fired from her job at Rebel Media.
The statement that there are "fine people on both sides," of any issue - or attending any event seems so obviously true - that it's practically a meaningless statement. I'm fairly confident that their are even "fine people" who belong to ISIS. That is, I'd be willing to stipulate that their are some "fine people" that given the choice of being beheaded - or joining ISIS - would join ISIS.
Granted, it's hard to imagine a "fine person" chanting "Jews will not replace us." (a phrase that makes no sense to anyone but those chanting it - I guess) But that isn't what Trump said. He said there were fine people who showed up to protest the removal of Civil War Statues, and fine people who showed up to support the removal of Civil War Statues.
Unless someone has list of the names and knowledge of the people in attendance, how could such a statement even be questioned?
Yet, in an almost total eclipse of the the truth, much of the media on both the left and the right have gone into spasms insisting that the ONLY good people were those who attended the protest to support removal of Civil War monuments. Oddly, none have made the observation that there are no good people wearing masks and committing violent assault.
In a continuing total eclipse of the truth, the media has Incessantly repeated that Trump equated the counter protesters with NAZI's - when he did no such thing. (even though the ANTIFA may deserve such a comparison) If one states that there are fine players on the New Jersey Nets and the Golden State Warriors - one is making a true statement - but in no way "equating" the two teams.
Many years ago, we coined the phrase, "The Truth is Loud."
The phrase was meant to indicate that "The Truth" has it's own inherent amplification, because people recognize and identify with statements that square with observable reality. What Trump stated about Charlottesville was true, and it resonated with people despite an onslaught of elitist reporting that is dedicated to the eclipse of such truth.
The "Truth" is that here in America, we exist in overwhelmingly racial and cultural harmony. Everyday, there are BILLIONS of inter racial/cultural interactions in this country without the slightest hint of acrimony. The narrative that this country is a seething cauldron of racial hatred is unsupportable by any objective evidence.
This continued effort to stratify people into opposing factions serves no interest other than to empower a Government that encourages both sides to demand protection from the other - implicitly granting more and more power to Government; while diminishing the power of the individual.
Since we coined the phrase, "The Truth is Loud," we've added an addendum to it.
That is, "The Truth is Loud, but it won't tell itself."
Right now, President Trump is one of the few telling the truth. We sincerely hope he continues to do so.
Add a commentTonight The Cavs will make NBA History
- Details
- Created: Friday, 09 June 2017 21:24
- Written by Ax D. WhiteMan
Yes, the Cleveland Cavaliers will become part of NBA history tonight.
Most likely, they will become the team that got swept in Finals to complete the NBA's only 16-0 playoff winning streak.
But, what if they win?
It would also be part of NBA history. It would either be the single blemish on the Warriors 2017 playoff run, or the first game of 4 game winning streak that shocks the world.
Yes it's unlikely, but lets consider a few facts...
1. NBA teams often perform dramatically differently - sometimes in the same game - for no apparent reason. But certainly in a series. This is one of the things that makes NBA basketball so entertaining. Last year the Spurs CRUSHED the Thunder in the first 2 games of their playoff series. Then the Thunder turned it completely around and dominated the Spurs. No big injuries, no lineup changes.
2.The Cavs have now lost to the Warriors 4 straight times. But that immediately followed the Cavs defeating the Warriors 4 straight times. So, for those of you who are saying the Cavs can't win 4 straight - you're wrong - they already have.
How can it be?
Pretty simple really. It's all about making shots. Especially 3 point shots. The NBA is where skill meets the "law of averages." No player can shoot a basketball precisely at 3 point distance every time. The highest skilled players CAN shoot in what we call a "tighter pattern." That is, their shots, over a long period of time, will consistently fall closer to the center of the target. Yet, inexplicably, sometimes the shots will fall either "in" or "out" for extended periods.
The Cavs were a single 3 point shot away from winning game 3 on Wednesday night. What's more, is the Cavs 3 point shooting has been dramatically lower than their playoff average; while the Warriors 3 point shooting has been markedly better than their already high playoff average. Some will call out "defense" makes the difference.
Really?
Kyle Korver didn't have a Warrior within 12 feet when he missed what would have been a game winning 3 point shot. Some defense.
What if the "law of averages" begins to correct itself?
Then the Cavs would start making 3's at well over 40% and the Warriors would be under 30%. If that happens tonight - the Cavs win tonight - and all the talk would be about how the Warriors missed a date with history, but a Warriors Championship is still a foregone conclusion. If it happens again in Game 5, the series will be 3-2 and headed back to Cleveland. Just like that - the talk of dominance and dynasty will be OVER - for at least a couple days. If the Cavs can sink shots in Game 6 and force a Game 7...
The Cavs will definitely make NBA History - and yes - starts tonight.
Add a commentUnderstanding the "Lines Around the States"
- Details
- Created: Thursday, 16 March 2017 11:48
- Written by Ax D. WhiteMan
I
t seems every conservative healthcare insurance plan advocates removing "The Lines Around the States." That is, to allow insurance companies to sell healthcare policies across state lines.
(credit @PeteHegseth for drawing the lines!)
Most people don't understand what is being proposed here. In reality, a quick google search of the top healthcare insurance firms in the US shows that they all sell policies in all 50 States. The issue is that each State has it's own regulatory control over the insurance industry. Other than minor demographic differences, the thing that makes an insurance policy cheaper in New Mexico than Texas is the cost of meeting State regulatory requirements.
In effect, removing "the lines around the states," is nullifying each States ability to establish its own Insurance regulations.
This may not be a bad thing, and it's certainly been done in other areas. States have been denied the right to define marriage and legal residency status - why not healthcare?
The answer is that the question ignores the obvious problem. That is, that regulatory requirements are a major driver of healthcare costs, and IF Federal Law were to demand that a person in New York could buy a healthcare policy that meets the State regulatory requirements of New Mexico, it would almost certainly also prescribe additional Federal requirements that would not only diminish any savings to the person in New York, but would cause an increase for people in New Mexico.
To a great degree, ObmamCare has already done this. Regardless of what is "legal" in a certain state - if a policy doesn't meet the Federal requirements established by ObamaCare, one is subject to a Federal Tax penalty.
Even if one abolishes ObamaCare, and allows healthcare insurance to be sold "across state lines", one needs to understand they are just substituting the regulations of one state for that of another. The point here is that residences of each state are completely capable of petitioning their government to reduce the regulations that drive healthcare costs. Mostly, the extensive list of "mandated" coverages found in most states.
Insurance "Mandates" are effectively a "Tax" by another name. It is the special interest, crony wing of the insurance industry. These are coverages that most people would decline, but the State has determined that any legal policy MUST have. These items range from addiction treatment to sex change operations. Every State effectively tells its citizens that they are too stupid to choose the correct health coverage - and that the State will choose for them. This would be analogous to going grocery shopping and being required to start with a basket full of tofu, sprouts, tampons, condoms, and rogain. When you complained that you don't need ANY of those things and have almost no money left for what you want, the answer would be to ask you to apply for food stamps - because you can't afford to feed yourself.
The "mandate" aspect of insurance creates the environment for special interests to lobby regulators to include their products and services as a mandated benefit. It may be that most folks wouldn't buy insurance for alcoholism re-hab - especially those that don't drink. Doesn't matter, in most States - you buy it anyway - it's the law.
The over riding point here is that to dramatically reduce the cost of healthcare insurance, people of each State can do so by working within their OWN State. If people contact their State Representative, and demand more cost effective regulations or to allow a "non-compliant" classification of Health Insurance to be sold in their State.
These non-compliant policies would come with a specific warning that they don't meet the State recommended standards, and that they buyer understands the risks. These would be plans that would be reviewed by the State ONLY to meet financial standards - that is, that the Insurance Company has adequately demonstrated the financial capacity to satisfy claims. If such policies were made available, it's likely that buying coverage for ONLY what one believes is needed - would become very cost effective.
In conclusion, it's not "the lines around the States" that make healthcare expansive - it's the "mandates within the States" - that could and should be addressed by every citizen - of every state.
Add a comment