Democrats to Rename Themselves the “Social Democratic Party”
June 19th, 2008 at 12:42am Mark Noonan
Might as well make the name match the socialist reality:
Here are the highlights from briefing
Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), member of the House Appropriations Committee and one of the most-ardent opponents of off-shore drilling
1115
We (the government) should own the refineries. Then we can control how much gets out into the market.
Given that every nationalised industry everywhere around the world has failed completely, the only explanation for this desire is an ardent belief that socialism is worth economic collapse. That, plus the chances for corrupt patronage which Democrats would love to get their hands on…
Entry Filed under: Congress, Corruption, Democrats, Economy
46 Comments
1. kjstrouble | June 19th, 2008 at 12:57 am
Since most of the Washington elite Dems believe that only they know what is best for everyone - of course they believe that they can handle this better than a free market. They don’t believe in a free market.
2. phnx | June 19th, 2008 at 1:01 am
The pretense is ending and the facade is coming down to reveal the true socialist soul of the Dems.
Hopefully the election will be about the direction of the country: Will the US vote descend into the mediocrity of a welfare state?
Or will it electorate vote to reinvigotate the entreprenuerial nature of our country which has been at the heart of its success?
3. kjstrouble | June 19th, 2008 at 1:06 am
phnx - I hope for, and work for the latter. But then, I actually work for a living, pay my bills and obey the law. I don’t blame others when I make a mistake, I accept responsibility, pay the price, and learn from it. Oh, and I am optimistic enough to be starting my own business.
4. Kahn | June 19th, 2008 at 1:10 am
We can’t drill our way out of this, but we can refine our way out? Refine what? B.S.?
I also hear them say they want to revoke the leases on land where the oil companies are not yet drilling.
They ban drilling.
They ban new refineries.
They (teddy K) restrict wind power.
They stifle hydro-electric power.
Forget about nuclear energy.
What the hell is left? Magic? Oh, thats right…. hope.
5. Gaijin | June 19th, 2008 at 1:10 am
Mark,
“Given that every nationalised industry everywhere around the world has failed completely”
Really?
“For the nine months to 30 September 2007, Gazprom made a pre-tax profit of 611bn roubles ($25bn; £13bn)”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7246416.stm
Seems like a lot of money to me. Care to try again with your blanket statement?
Peace, gaijin
6. Mark Noonan | June 19th, 2008 at 1:16 am
Gaijin,
Gazprom can’t provide enough natural gas to meet its commitments and its one of the most wasteful corporations in the world…its making money because oil prices are high, but once they come down (and they will), Gazprom will feel the pinch of much more efficient competitors who are able to get the goods to the market more effectively.
7. Kahn | June 19th, 2008 at 1:33 am
Gaijin,
Good to see though that you still look to Russia for inspiration.
Besides socialism, Democrats have tried to suppress political speech (calls for the “fairness doctrine, calls to remove Rush and others from Armed Forces Radio - despite popularity) and ban an armed populace. Add to this there almost total control of TV and movies and all but a handful of press outlets and our fears are made all that much more crystalline.
We’ve seen these patterns before in Germany and Russia, and China.
Deamonize us now, that’s the next part…
8. What? | June 19th, 2008 at 2:01 am
Mark writes,
“Given that every nationalised industry everywhere around the world has failed completely . . . ”
“Gazprom can’t provide enough natural gas to meet its commitments and its one of the most wasteful corporations in the world”
Care to back these statements up, Mark?
Also, what is your definition of “failed.”
9. Mark Noonan | June 19th, 2008 at 2:19 am
What,
Naw, you go find me a nationalised industry which was a success…
10. js | June 19th, 2008 at 6:50 am
why is it that so many liberals have so little sense…its a phenominon more worthy of study than we realize….
nationalization of industries doesnt lead to success…its nothing more than socialism…ask the people of venezuela if chaves really is helping the country or not….as 1/2 of the nations population slides into poverty even though they pays pennies for gas….
and saddam hussein’s iraq….wow, what a measure of success….a nation sitting on huge oil reserves…and one man directing it all….you cant measure success in only cash…its not even reasonable to assume that you can….
hussein obama grew up under the tutelage of a known member of the US Communist Party. socialism includes government control and direction of business….just like china……its just another step toward communism…..
11. Ken | June 19th, 2008 at 7:30 am
I think the major problem is the democrats
don’t want the price of gas to go down. If there
is a drop in the price of gas, then the taxes for
gas will go down and any excuse to add more
taxes to the oil companies will go away. The
current high price of gas is a windfall for the
democrats in office. They have someone to
blame, a scapegoat to beat up on and a rally
point to focus their hatred of the free market on.
There is too much money to be stolen from
‘those evil oil barons’ to allow a drop in the cost
of gas.
Granted, if a democRAT is elected as President,
then and only then I’m thinking they will quietly
open up some of the untouched reserves for
drilling. Though I’m not going to bet on that
happening.
12. Carlton Pryor, Lead Economist, TED-OG | June 19th, 2008 at 8:01 am
A market cap of £ 177 MMM yes indeed that does make Gazprom a total failure! I am sure Stockholders in Enron, Bear Stearns, Lehman and many others would love to be saddled with the sort of failure that Gazprom is.
An even better example would be that little financial institution on Threadneedle Street called THE BANK OF ENGLAND. Seems they have been doing okay since 1694.
13. js | June 19th, 2008 at 8:07 am
lol
a russian company under the old russian kgb guards control….lol
dont believe everything you read….like “democratic” elections in russia…and “free market economy”…
when you weild communist power over the working class, yes, it seems like you are successful….but it is a lie…guaranteed.
14. Carlton Pryor, Lead Economist, TED-OG | June 19th, 2008 at 8:10 am
4. Kahn | June 19th, 2008 at 1:10 am
Some of the 11% of the 8 million barrels of oil a day that don’t get refined because of the shortage in refinery utilization. That would be around say 880 K barrels of oil per day that go unrefined. This is the equivalent output of five of Valero Oil’s Mckee Sunray facility.
I am fully in favor of building new refineries on abandoned BRAC federal military installations. These would require no new environmental impact studies and hazards in the soil could be capped under the new foundation of the refinery. A double win. However, the question for all my neoconservative friends is today “What does it cost in 2008 to build a refinery?”
I know the exact cost to the penny.
15. neocon | June 19th, 2008 at 9:51 am
Carlton,
We’re all very impressed by you, really. Question is: should we tax the rich to pay for that refinery?
have a nice day
peace, neocon
16. DM | June 19th, 2008 at 10:14 am
js,
The phenomenon is not so much the lack of sense as it’s more a laziness or lack of initiative. Most issues have a certain depth or complexity that requires a little more than simple thoughts to engage and solve. Most people do not have the desire (time / energy) to understand most issues at the level where the details are known and real solutions become possible. Both the political body and the media know this and in turn supply the mass with answers that are mostly a mixture of half truths, emotions, a cry for perceived fairness (which is rarely fair) and a blend of deceit to sway people toward the direction that benefits those pandering the message. When the political body (for the sake of argument lets say it’s roughly equal at 40% Republican, 40% Democrat and 20% other) is reinforced by a media that is decidedly one sided (in my opinion, liberal) then it becomes even more difficult to engage the truth.
17. Carlton Pryor, Lead Economist, TED-OG | June 19th, 2008 at 10:20 am
15. neocon | June 19th, 2008 at 9:51 am
Well clearly the answer to that is no.
If I were expected to lay out £ 4 MMM to build a facility that could refine 500 to 600 MM bbl of crude per day I would seek my financing in a place like Qatar, Ras al-Khaimah, Umm al Quwain, Abu Dhabi or Dubai with the help of an old school firm like Lazard. This sort of business would have to be in the forefront as far away from politics as possible because as a forward thinker I would get my profit like they always do from the rising price of distillates.
The refiners are already happy with the subsidies they get from the US government the last thing they want is the burden of citizens groups and Congressmen harping about the price of product coming out of their taxpayer funded new refinery.
This still doesn’t mean the whole thing isn’t cost prohibitive. Even under this reasonable financing scheme the Qatari/Emirati Sovereign Wealth Funds would demand a hefty portion of the oil company in the form of options on stock and real voting shares and Lazard, of course, would demand their 15%, off the top as well they deserve for securing a 2% loan on $8 MMM.
A brief thing on taxation. The Laffer Curve is truly one of the saddest jokes ever played on the common man. Here’s how to tax the top 1% would pay 49.5%. Moving down the scale of wealth the next 9% would pay 45%, The next 10% would pay 40%, the next 10% would pay 35%. And now you are into the uppermost regions of what you call the Middle Class. The top 10% of the Middle Class would pay 30% the next 10% below them in income would pay 25%, and the 10% below them 20%.
Now you are into the effective working Middle Class all of whom all 30% of this group would pay 15%. And the bottom 10% of America income earners would pay 10% of their gross income in federal income tax.
The other side of that is I would set corporate tax rates at 20% which in any economy good or bad is a fair rate.
18. Vicodin-N-Cocoa | June 19th, 2008 at 10:21 am
First of all, Mr Noonan, my son doesn’t know this and won’t until he’s 25 years old but in 1994 through an Azeri broker/dealer I got a heaping helping of Gazprom shares at 1/16c. They sit comfortably in the boy’s trust account and I assume he’ll comply with my very loose covenant that he have received a Bachelor’s degree and has begun to formulate some life plan whether in the industry or profession of his choice, the arts, or graduate school. So, while you may offer an OPINION about Gazprom, the little guy’s going to have quite a party at 25!
I’ve lived in Moscow and have travelled on business throughout the Russian Republic so if anyone wants to have a SERIOUS discussion about the country, I’ll happily engage him or her.
What do you KNOW about Gazprom and it’s facilities, Mr Noonan? Please enlighten me.
I would also like someone here other than Carl to refresh my memory on the refining process from the wellhead to the pump. I know catalytic cracking and catalyic reformulating are steps in the process, if that helps at all. Please explain how a refinery might handle crude oil of various weights and sulphur contents. Could any of the four or five petroleum engineers explain to me at what stage the crude oil becomes unleaded gasoline, jet fuel, light home heating oil, heavy home heating oil, and at which point in the process does liquified natural gas get removed and sold as such and how?
I don’t KNOW anything about refining crude oil, you see, so I depend on petroleum engineering scholars to enlighten me.
19. Vicodin-N-Cocoa | June 19th, 2008 at 10:28 am
Also, has anyone here (other than Carl and I) actually been to a refinery?
20. Pain | June 19th, 2008 at 10:32 am
9. Mark Noonan | June 19th, 2008 at 2:19 am
too easy . . .
Saudi Aramco.
21. Pain | June 19th, 2008 at 10:35 am
19. Vicodin-N-Cocoa | June 19th, 2008 at 10:28 am
On Terra? No, but a refinery is a refinery is it not?
The organic chemistry is literally Universal!
22. Cavalor Epthith, Esquire, D.S.V.J. | June 19th, 2008 at 10:37 am
I see more and more why those with political asperations should not dabble in the serious matters of government and economics.
23. neocon | June 19th, 2008 at 10:43 am
Carl,
I am surprised that you failed to acknowledge the oil companies ability to build their own refineries, instead deferring to taxation or off shore financing. Do you suppose there are any domestic funding options?
Secondly, you have also omitted any prospect of domestic drilling, which would add to the domestic, and cheaper, access to crude.
I do agree with you on the Laffer curve, but not much of anything else. I believe you to be intellectually ignorant having bought into the liberal meme.
My question is: why would you want new refineries built? That will just add to carbon emissions and further destroying the planet. Shouldn’t we shut down refining capacity and increase the price of crude? That would make more sense to the liberal agenda, right?
have a nice day
peace, neocon
24. Vicodin-N-Cocoa | June 19th, 2008 at 10:44 am
Nevertheless, Cavalor, if I’m a politician and I need some guidance on economics I think I’m going to trust Alan Blinder’s opinion over Carlton Fiorina’s every time and feel pretty good about that choice.
25. Vicodin-N-Cocoa | June 19th, 2008 at 11:06 am
Neocon:
How do you reckon Carl to be either intellectually ingnorant or liberal (in the USA sense)?
He’s a pretty thorough scholar, I beleive, basing it on the fuller pieces he writes and I’m not sure what “liberal” exactly means? I do know that Carl and I agree that given a global economic environment pregnant with inflation, it’s a pretty good idea to be conservative in terms of both fiscal and monetary policy.
Let me put this in terms you might relate to, the value of the USD is directly related to it’s real interest rate and if inflation keeps going up, the value of the USD will keep falling. As, the USD falls, guess what? “Foreigners” have currencies of higher and higher purchasing power against the USD. Which means that it is quite possible, no probable, that a Mexican or a Venezuelan is the beneficial holder of your mortgage.
I think I’ve read you arguing for a war against Venezuela. That’s pretty funny considering that the people and government of Venezuela own about 1/16 of the productive capacity of the United States Of America. There are a million English gangster movies like this. A guy owes a drug dealer a lot of money, so instead of paying off his debt, he hatches a plot to kill the drug dealer. It never turns out good.
How much of “God Bless Anerica” do Saudi Arabia and China combined own? 60%? 70%? Ecuador owns about 2% of the USA. How funny is that?
26. Vicodin-N-Cocoa | June 19th, 2008 at 11:09 am
Where are the Russia experts and petroleum engineers?
27. neocon | June 19th, 2008 at 11:16 am
“I think I’ve read you arguing for a war against Venezuela.” - Vicodin
Really? Would love for you to find that post of mine.
Another completely baseless assertion from the non-reality crowd, of which the sexually repressed vicodin leads the pack.
Carlton is obviously an educated man, but his conclusions are based in liberal premise. Which is that America is unable to navigate it’s way through difficult times without the help of the international community which has been proven false time and time again.
America has always led, and always will because the best and the brightest reside here. Which explains vicodins residence in SA. I will also remind you that much of this screed was heard back in the 70’s as well. Try and gain a little historical perspective.
Those who hope for, and predict Americas demise will sadly be disappointed.
have a nice day
peace, neocon
28. Vicodin-N-Cocoa | June 19th, 2008 at 11:24 am
OK, sorry, I must go. I started re-reading some posts here and the word “communism” surfaced. Now, I know this place is utterly and absolutely loco.
But I would ask only one thing — more war please! Please reassure me that if John McCain is elected president the war in Iraq will be intensified, an assult on Iran forthcoming, and a full-scale invasion of South America as well. I will be terribly disappoined if the total US body count falls short of 50,000 and foreign body count falls short of 1,500,000 at the end of President McCain’s magnificent 8 years. Going for the record here, guys. I hope your man has what it takes. I think he’s a little too old to put up Hitler or Stalin numbers but 8 years of Rick Santorum could well take care of that.
If you’re going to do something, do it right, man. This Bush is a good killer but he’s got zippo chance of making the hall of fame with the numbers he’s put up so far. Look what HItler did in only 16 years? And you can’t even think about getting to Stalin’s contemporary record without at least putting up a Hitleresque score after 8 years.
Not impressed.
29. neocon | June 19th, 2008 at 11:30 am
Vicodin,
Slink back to where you came from. You offer nothing to the debate.
bye.
peace, neocon
30. Vicodin-N-Cocoa | June 19th, 2008 at 11:33 am
Neo:
I am very insulted. You’re definitely right that I’m not among the “best and brightest.” But “sexually repressed? That hurts man. I take pride in my sexual licentiousness and complete disregard for shame of any kind. I try to indulge myself in as many perversions I can given my schedule. And I’m proud of what I’ve done.
In fact, you’ve made me think about a woman I know in the states who was a total piss fetishist. You know I like my Vikeys and they are dehydrating, so if I was going to eat Vikeys and get it on with her, I’d make sure to have lots of water and beer on hand.
31. Vicodin-N-Cocoa | June 19th, 2008 at 11:36 am
Neo: that last remark hurts, too, buddy. Because you are an economist, a Russia specialist and a petroleum engineer to enlgihten me on those subjects. And you let me down.
32. Timothy Horrigan | June 19th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Well, it will be interesting to see what happens when the scheduled time for the Olympics comes around in August. Even though socialism has totally failed, and even though China is a socialist country, the International Olympic Committee has refused to move the Olympics to a capitalist country. The sporting facilities in China are of course going to turn out to be totally inadequate… and the tourist and media facilities even more inadequate. A failed society is simply not capable of hosting an event of the magnitude of the Olympics.
33. Timothy Horrigan | June 19th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
I was being sarcastic about the Olympics post… China may be an oppressive society, but they will be able to put on an excellent Olympics… but if they were in fact a failed society, they wouldn’t have even gotten the bid in the first place.
Nationalized industries don’t always fail. Even here in the USA, we have some pretty good ones. The “socialist” US Postal Service competes quite well with capitalist UPS and is way better than the even more capitalist FedEx. (The UPS is not a 21st-style capitalist organization: most of its workers are unionized and it is very much a 20th century company. FedEx is way more modern: it tries to define as many workers as possible as independent contractors, for example.) Aside from the Postal Service, a much less ubiquitous government-owned business is Amtrak, which functions better than the airlines, who are a total disaster area at the moment.
34. Carlton Pryor, Lead Economist, TED-OG | June 19th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
27. neocon | June 19th, 2008 at 11:16 am
America has always led, and always will because the best and the brightest reside here. Which explains vicodins residence in SA. I will also remind you that much of this screed was heard back in the 70’s as well. Try and gain a little historical perspective.
Put your flags away and take down that bunting you are embarassing yourself. read the Wealth of nations and donate your next paycheck to the charity of your choice if you think you live in the land of the “best and the brightest.” If this is the case why don’t you chaps make a really fuel efficient car? How come most people who call you from a creditor are in C.A., India or Togo for the love of rice? Do you realize you are two bad news headlines from disaster and you talk in terms of patriotism!
Yes I had a wonderful education reading Economics at Oxford but I am a fish and chips sort of fellow. Still after a few pints at an outdoor picnic I check the direction of the wind before I unzip my fly. USA #1!!! Rah Rah Rah gets you nowhere in 2008 and beyond.
It is this kind of thinking that will send you into another Great Slump. Tomorrow is a 4x witching equities day. I’m not a stock man but does anyone want to hazard a guess what all those bedraggled foreigners could do to the US market in an hour if they just decided they would rather have 5% of their money in the 2 year Gilt or the 10 year Bund rather than Dow Stocks? And if they sold a 25% stake you would be trying to put your neighbor in the oven and making tea out of tampons in a fortnight. Tomorrow’s word for the day is shortselling.
Not to put too fine a point on it neocon but your hubris cannot buy you even a slice of a loaf. All you can do is destroy the world on your own. To prosper you need the EU, the UK, Russia, China, India, OPEC and fluidity and liquidity in the markets so that middle class blokes like yourself can live beyond your means so that you don’t riot.
35. Dasein Libsbane | June 19th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
So much ignorance, so little time. I’m sure “Carlton” or Calivor or Pain or whatever he’s calling himself had an interesting experience looking up “Oxford” in a dictionary, but his sophomoric diatribe prove his ignorance in all things economic, or legal or anything else. Wealth of Nations was written long before an American economy existed, the only economy to have flourished post Wealth has been the market driven economies and not the quisi-socialist Keynesian wanna-bees. The “fish n-chips” crowd across the pond owe the viability of their economy to, as Blanch would say “the kindness of strangers.” the US economy is the place of investment from what theses pseudo intellectuals call debtors. I’ve actually read Wealth which the so-called “Carlton” obviously hasn’t.
We “chaps” continue to push world markets with innovation whereas the only contribution jolly old England is capable of is bloody warm beer. How’s that “Empire” working out for ya’? A Royal family of in-bred poodles, football hooligans and praying to Mecca five times daily as they lose the war of national identity, where’s the Benjamin Disraeli’s of the 21st century?
Amtrak is a success? What colour is the sky in your world, Timothy? Have you been sleeping through the decades of taxpayer subsidies?
Cripes, just because these people can put together a semblance of a rational sentence doesn’t mean they know what they’re writing about. If part of their post is suspect, distrust all of it!
36. Dasein Libsbane | June 19th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
I forgot to link the Heritage piece, here
More “success” from a “nationalized” transportation intity. “Since Amtrak’s inception in 1970, the annual business-as-usual bailout has allowed it to squander more than $30 billion in taxpayer money for the benefit of a tiny fraction of the traveling public and its overpaid workforce. Despite this massive subsidy and endless promises of improvement by a series of recent managers and board members, Amtrak is no closer to service sustainability today than it was 38 years ago, in large part because its passengers value the service at only a fraction of what it costs to provide it.” Emphisis added.
37. Vicodin-N-Cocoa | June 19th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Dasein Libsbane: How do you arrive at the conclusion that Keynes was a “quasi-socialist”? For real, buddy, how?
Wasn’t it Keynesianism which kept the West from GOING COMMUNIST during the Depression?
What is your conception of Keynesianism, anyway? It is really the fiscal analog to Irving Fisher’s Theory Of Monetary Neutrality, upon which modern central banking is based and is regarded as a center-piece of conservative thought.
Keynesianism implies looeer fiscal policy in lean times and tighter fiscal policy during times of plenty. I think what you object to is that he advocted getting the money into the hands of those who’d spend it, thereby taking advantage of a higher velocity and multiplier effect. This is, of course, in opposition to Bush’s Plutocratic-Military Keynesianism which seeks t stimulate by cutting the taxes of the wealthy and throwing money at the military.
38. Cavalor Epthith, Esquire, D.S.V.J. | June 19th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
37. Vicodin-N-Cocoa | June 19th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Careful my friend Dasein Libsbane is an actual professor of accounting at a California university.
I felt it would be only fair to warn you since he bears quite a hostility at those who have made an economic success of themselves. Consider this you have socked away more € for your son in Gazprom shares than DL will earn in his entire life. Such a fact would make me a little thorn in hoof as well.
39. Vicodin-N-Cocoa | June 19th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Cavalor: I took a quarter of Financial Accounting and two quarters of Tax at a California University, so I’m not concerned. I just don’t recall any of my professors being ideological. The vibe was more about reading balance sheets, statements of cash flows, and income statemnts, and stuff the the ACRS write-off rules.
Why should he care if I “pulled myself up by my bootstraps” and “was entrepreneurial” and a “risk-taker” and guessed right? Russia worked out for me. It didn’t have to work out. It sure looked dicey in 1998. I almost went for EVERYTHING. I wouldn’t have asked him to cry for me then, so he shoudn’t be envious that it all came good. I assume he’s a capitalist.
40. Kahn | June 19th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
Carlton, as to post 14. What post of mine were you referring to? #4? How?
How is building NEW refineries on government property the same as seizing existing refineries owned by publicly held corporations?
And you say you know the cost to the penny? (again apparently asking yourself a question, then answering it). OK. How much is it… to the penny?
You think the government should build, staff, maintain, and run this new refinery? Start buying oil and selling petroleum products (to who?) Build a chain of gas stations?
Look up socialism you idiot and tell me you are not arguing for it. At least have the courage to stand up for what you believe in. You’re socialist. Be proud.
41. gaijin | June 19th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
One of the better debates I have seen on both sides. Although, the liberals seem to have won the day. I would just like to point out that I was the one that threw in that Gazprom monkey wrench.
I would also like to thank Mark for the wealth of facts and supporting evidence he offered in posts 6&9. Now that’s how you debate!
Peace, Gaijin
42. FmrMarine | June 19th, 2008 at 8:15 pm
NEO:
>>>>Careful my friend Dasein Libsbane is an actual professor of accounting at a California university.
I felt it would be only fair to warn you since he bears quite a hostility at those who have made an economic success of themselves<<<
The little marxists NEVER like the “unenlightened ” to make it financially.
Only the PHONEY govt. employees such as “professors” are supposed to be all knowing and the only ones worthy of value.
WHAT a HOOT !
43. neocon | June 19th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
Carlton darling,
The best and the brightest do reside here, primarily because of the financial incentive to succeed.
Congress, Lobbyists, and the Oil companies can be blamed for our lack of updated energy structures and efficiencies. They have sold us all down the river for a long time. But this country has an amzing track record to adapt to changing paradigms.
That’s not waving the flag, that’s just fact.
The long term future are a new sustainable energy sources, the short term is for extracting domestic reserves, which are sufficient to see us through the transition. Cost is immaterial.
peace, neocon
44. js | June 19th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
Not really DM.
The lack of common sense I am talking about is blatant and obvious….you can tell they are all repeating the same lines they read on move on and other liberal blogs….its nothing to do with reality or policy….its rhetoric and fodder for lemmings….not too hard to spot either….
45. Kahn | June 20th, 2008 at 12:29 am
Gazprom? You see that as a success? I guess so, since being an oil company is like having a license to print money.
But what about their using the threat of shutting off oil to screw with Ukraine?
It employs 300,000 people and pays for 25% of the Russian budget. It’s huge. It’s wildly inefficient. And it’s corrupt as hell.
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/01/aacaf75d-5629-436a-b453-7c8a470c4368.html
Well, I guess liberals WOULD see that as successful.
Gaijin, I don’t read the above discussion as a win for the “liberals”. But I am glad to see you dropping the pretense and admitting you’re socialist. Remember now, Marx said socialism is the transitional phase between capitalism and communism. THAT is what you stand for. Meanwhile every other growing economy is solidly free market or moving that way. Brilliant.
46. Sovereign Bank Mortgage R&hellip | August 18th, 2008 at 2:58 am
Sovereign Bank Mortgage Rates
More posts please ^_^