The Liberals (Are Not) Looking Out for Americans
At a time when America needs leadership from Washington this is the typical response that we are getting from the Democrats and RINOs who are in charge in Washington, well at least they have the numbers, are telling all of America. And it looks like America is about to give the self-defeatist an ever larger presence in Congress. Maybe Americans do deserve the high price of gas and food.
By the way, this pretty much represents Republican John McCains response to drilling in ANWR and the OCS as well to help reduce Americas dependence on the blackmailing OPEC teat. Oh well, some have said that McCain is a Democrat at heart anyway. There just might be some truth to that after all. He is at least a liberal at heart. We all need to turn up the heat on these liberal obstructionists in both parties to become energy independent for America. Write or call your Congressman and Senator as well as the President and demand they allow drilling NOW. Also go and sign the petition at this link that tells Congress to Drill Here Drill Now.
G-8 Energy Chiefs finally starting to come aboard
It would seem that the G-8 and OPEC are finally starting to get the idea that out of control wold crude oil prices are starting to destabilize nations markets and their economies around the world and could even trigger wars and lead to more worldwide food shortages as well as famine if left unchecked. But don't look for any meaningful change in increased oil production or policies before the end of the year and any significant change ore relief at the pump and grocer counter for probably another two or three years while the status quo is maintained with a slowed but steady march towards that $200 a barrel mark for crude oil that has been predicted by many annalists.
In the meantime consumer's all around the world will be forced to make modest to drastic changes to their lifestyles and how they conduct their usual business. This will be especially so for the U.S. consumer. Many Americans are still in denial about these changes but they will soon be awoken from their slumber as prices for everything we buy will just keep inching up except for their wages. Changes will certainly be required if we are to survive the coming near meltdown in the months and years to come. As was reported here recently, "the simple fact is Americans are going to have to get used to a much lower standard of living".
G-8 Energy Chiefs: Fight Oil Prices With Efficiency, New Energy Sources.
Sunday, June 08, 2008AOMORI, Japan — The world's top industrialized nations and leading oil consumers pledged Sunday to fight skyrocketing energy prices by increasing efficiency and accelerating investment in new technologies, while urging producers to expand production.
Energy ministers from the Group of Eight countries, joined by China, India and South Korea, voiced concerns over record oil prices and said both producers and consumers would benefit from greater market stability.
Ministers, meeting in the northern Japanese city of Aomori, focused Sunday on how they could diversify their energy sources to both control rising demand for oil and rein in emissions of greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.
"We simply must increase the level and breadth of investment all around the world," said U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman. "That means promoting aggressive investment in renewable energy and other alternative energies technologies, as well as the development of tradition hydrocarbon resources.
The 11 nations, which account for 65 percent of the world's energy consumption, grappled with oil prices that have hit record highs. Prices made a massive 8 percent gain Friday to $138.54 on the New York Mercantile Exchange.
The G-8 countries — the United States, Russia, Japan, Germany, France, Italy, Canada and Britain — laid out ways of cutting their dependence on oil in a statement.
They pledged to launch 20 demonstration projects by 2010 on so-called "carbon capture and storage," which would allow power plants to catch emissions and inject them into underground storage spaces.
While that technology is still in its infancy, proponents say it could eventually allow the expanded exploitation of the world's abundant supply of cheap coal without polluting the environment and speeding global warming.
There were clear rifts, however, on how to approach the expansion of nuclear energy. The carefully worded joint statement called for assurances on safety and security of nuclear materials, but several nations said they were enthusiastic about building new reactors.
The International Energy Agency, in a report issued last week, estimated the world would have to construct 32 new nuclear power plants each year from now until 2050 as part of an effort to cut global greenhouse gas emissions by 50 percent.
"I think we're on the verge of a new nuclear age and that will be a positive thing for the world," said John Hutton, British secretary of state for business enterprise and regulatory reform.
Germany, however, said it would not join the effort. Jochen Homann, Germany's economics minister, said Berlin was sticking to its decision to phase out nuclear power.
The G-8, China, India and South Korea also established the International Partnership for Energy Efficiency Cooperation to promote best practices in conserving energy.
While the participants called for more oil production, it could take months to get a response. Production levels have been flat for three years and Chakib Khelil, the president of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, has said the group will make no new decision on output until a Sept. 9 meeting in Vienna.
The ministers met amid rising concerns that soaring oil prices could trigger global economic troubles. Fanning such fears, both Japan and the United States have announced higher unemployment rates in recent weeks.
"The situation regarding energy prices is becoming extremely challenging," warned Akira Amari, Japan's trade and energy minister. "If left unaddressed, it may well cause a recession in the global economy."
The Sunday meeting followed a joint statement by five top energy consumers — the U.S., Japan, China, India and South Korea — that warned high prices were a menace to the world economy and more petroleum should be produced to meet rising demand. They argued the unprecedented prices were against the interests of both producers and consumers, and imposed a "heavy burden" on developing countries.
The group, however, diverged over oil subsidies. The International Energy Agency has estimated that oil subsidies in China, India and the Middle East totaled about $55 billion in 2007.
The United States urged countries such as China to lower oil supports, which buoy demand, while poorer developing nations said removing subsidies could trigger political and economic unrest.
The gas prices (and government) we deserve
Columnist George Will writes for the JewishWorldReview this week that we Americans are getting the sky high fuel prices that we deserve. That's right and I happen to agree with him in this respect. I also believe that his reasoning and logic could easily extend to the kind of government we Americans are having to deal with has the very same roots.
Senator Chuck Schumer (SocD-NY) wants the US to blackmail Saudi Araiba to lower the cost of gasoline at the pump. He wants the the Saudis to know that the US will withhold military parts and equipment shipments if it doesn't increase the output of oil by one million barrels a day. I'm not kidding you. The very Chuckie Schumer who has religously voted to prevent drilling anywhere that the United States has oil soverignity or rights or in other words, here at home. The very Chuckie Schumer who has religously voted to deny new permits for any new oil refineries, the very same Chuckie Schumer who has religously voted to deny permits to build any new nuclear power plants. You get the idea.
Three quarters of the current US Senate has also voted with old Chuckie Schumer to do the very things I listed above. Now they are running around screaming for the heads of oil execs and pointing fingers at every one and anyone else but at the real guilty parties. Themselves!
Every first world nation and some second world nation around the world are all doing the very same things that we are not doing in order to make their countries self-sufficient and less dependent on foreign oil imports. Everyone but the US. Instead these wise Senators wants the US to become even more dependent on foreign oil imports. This is sheer self-destructive lunacy and will end up destroying our economy and status as the leader of the free world. At this rate we have about ten years or so before our world collapses and we go the way the Romam empire went.
This brings me to why Americans should just shut up and suck it up and stop their incessant whining. After all we citizens are the ones who election after election keep re-electing these very same screwed up anti-American Senators and Representatives to office over and over. Americans claim to want change but they keep doing the very same thing every election. How can change happen if we don't do anything different to make that change happen?! These politicians just keep voting for their very own selfish interests and for their high paid lobbists buddies. The people's interests are the last thing these sell out politicians think about at the end of the day. Do you really think you could get any significant and productive face time with your US Senator if you called him/her for some other than getting your picture taken (aka a photo-op) with him/her to use in their re-election efforts?
You would have to wait in a long long line behind all those highly paid (many of them for foreign govtt's.) lobbists all vying for face time and securing their votes (for suitable enumeration I'm quite sure) for their company or governments projects. Anyway I suppose I digress too much by now. Please, go read George Wills column. It is refreshing to see someone in the MSM address this subject from this perspective.
By George Will
Rising in the Senate on May 13, Chuck Schumer, the New York Democrat, explained: "I rise to discuss rising energy prices." The president was heading to Saudi Arabia to seek an increase in its oil production, and Schumer's gorge was rising.
Saudi Arabia, he said, "holds the key to reducing gasoline prices at home in the short term." Therefore arms sales to that kingdom should be blocked unless it "increases its oil production by one million barrels per day," which would cause the price of gasoline to fall "50 cents a gallon almost immediately."
Can a senator, with so many things on his mind, know so precisely how the price of gasoline would respond to that increase in the oil supply? Schumer does know that if you increase the supply of something, the price of it probably will fall. That is why he and 96 other senators recently voted to increase the supply of oil on the market by stopping the flow of oil into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which protects against major physical interruptions. Seventy-one of the 97 senators who voted to stop filling the reserve also oppose drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
One million barrels is what might today be flowing from ANWR if in 1995 President Bill Clinton had not vetoed legislation to permit drilling there. One million barrels produce 27 million gallons of gasoline and diesel fuel. Seventy-two of today's senators — including Schumer, of course, and 38 other Democrats, including Barack Obama, and 33 Republicans, including John McCain — have voted to keep ANWR's estimated 10.4 billion barrels of oil off the market.
So Schumer, according to Schumer, is complicit in taking $10 away from every American who buys 20 gallons of gasoline. "Democracy," said H.L. Mencken, "is the theory that the common people.....
< Read more here >
It's not an Oil Crisis 'Stupid' it's a Dollar Crisis
Here is an article that I came across recently that goes a long way towards explaining why oil costs so much lately. These days everybody and their dog are out there blaming everything under the sun for the high costs of oil with most of them not having an actual clue. Well this guy appears to come closer to the truth than all the rest of those other folks combined. Read on make and up your own mind.
It's not an Oil Crisis it's a Dollar Crisis
Peter Schiff
May 23, 2008It is unfortunate that the Supreme Court, in its ruling this week that U.S. currency is unfair to the blind, did not make the next logical step and declare it unfair to everyone who buys gasoline.
In their search for explanations as to why oil has surged past $130 per barrel, Washington, Wall Street, and the financial media are as clueless as cavemen after a freak summer snow storm. Despite the head scratching, the blame game is nevertheless in full force. Speculators and big oil companies are being trotted out as scapegoats, and increased margin requirements and taxes on windfall profits and futures trading have been mentioned as appropriate sanctions. It should be clear that this is pure farce, and that no one understands what is actually happening.
The reality is that after years of reckless consumption and dollar debasement, Americans are now being priced out of markets over which they formerly held unchallenged title. As more affluent foreigners consume more of the resources and products they previously supplied to us, Americans are being forced to cut back. The rising dollar-based price of gasoline is simply an illustration of this global trend.
Poorly concealed behind contrived government statistics, the signs of America's falling standard of living are everywhere; all one has to do is look. We are unloading SUVs for less desirable compacts, and are paying more to fly on crowded planes (where we pay to check luggage and dine only on what we bring onboard). We drink our lattes at McDonalds or not at all, and we increasingly forego dining out, trips to the mall, and vacations, just so we can scrape together enough to fill our gas tanks and kitchen pantries, pay taxes and insurance, or make credit card, mortgage or car payments.
The collective belt tightening is simply the down payment on the Government's massive bailout of Wall Street investment banks and mortgage lenders. As the Fed creates money to buy bad mortgages and other shaky securities held by banks and brokerage firms, the value of the savings and wages of everyone on Main Street will continue to fall. As a result, the costs of products previously taken for granted have begun to bite.
The various housing bills and stimulus packages now passing through Congress will add significantly to the staggering final price tag. In the end, the "free lunch" currently being dished out by Washington will be the most expensive meal ever served. The cost will be borne by ordinary Americans citizens every time they open their wallets. Four dollar gasoline is just the beginning.
For all the talk of increased global demand, few seem to understand from where it actually comes. The surge in global demand is both a function of the increased purchasing power of foreign currencies and the fact that foreigners are choosing to spend more of their incomes themselves. In other words Greenspan's famous "global savings glut" is turning into a global consumption binge, with Americans unable to crash the party. This trend will only get worse as the dollar-denominated price of just about everything that is either imported, or capable of being exported, goes through the roof.
We can look for scapegoats all we want but the simply fact is Americans are going to have to get used to a much lower standard of living. Those who have been putting all the food on our tables are finally pulling up chairs themselves.
There it is folks. This writer has put it more eloquently and succinctly than not only I could have outlined it but better than all those over paid financial analysts down at Wall Street. The last paragraph highlighted in red sums it up best IMHO as the net end result. The futures traders are going to be howling to high heaven but so what. That's life so get over it. The dollar is steadily losing ground in the global marketplace and with that so is the American economy. We are no longer an island unto ourselves.
People had better open their sleep covered eyes and look at what's going on around them closely and take stock and start to plan for a coming downsized lifestyle because as sure as the sun is going to rise tomorrow the American standard of living is going to be downsized just as the economy is going now. America has gone from a world dominating manufacturing based economy to a user service based economy which leaves us all at the mercy of global forces beyond our control. Those who believe in our own governments fairy tale version of economic indicators will be the ones left holding the bag in the end. After all these are the very same folks who have allowed this to happen in the first place.
http://www.321gold.com/editorials/schiff/schiff052308.html
Support Carbon Belch Day June 12, 2008
Support 'Carbon Belch Day' on June 12 - to learn more click on above banner ad and/or go to WND and read:
Citizens fire back with carbon 'belch'
Americans pledge to boost emissions, wage war against proposed CO2 tax
Corn based ethanol scheme facing increasing public and Senate scrutny
edited: for grammar & clarification 5/29/08 2;09pm
Back in 2005 Senators thought they had come up on a grand scheme to not only help the nations corn crop farmers but more so themselves. By mandating corn based ethanol they believed they had come up with a way to solve our nations thirst for foreign oil and make the voters think they had really accomplished something. For all intents and purposes a win-win solution.
Now barely two years later we are seeing the fallout from that legislation that was apparently not very well thought out. A plan that was only looked at from by all accounts only one side, the side that would enrichen the Senators rich business campaign partners and themselves in their quest for campaign contributions to fatten their campaign war chests. It now certainly appears that not much, if any consideration was given to what effect removing so much raw corn from the nations, arguably the most precious basic food commodity from the national food supply chain leading to recent skyrocketing food prices.
Now with the roar becoming an ever increasing and ear bruising crescendo from the voters as they struggle harder and harder to put food on their tables for their families and are now clamoring for some political hide that the Senators are now looking at possible scrapping or at scaling back drastically the poorly planned and misguided corn based ethanol policy that has brought much of their new contemptuous scorn upon themselves and their once misguided business farm campaign donor partners.
Now barely two years later the corn based ethanol subsidy proponents in the Senate are being forced to face the growing fallout from their shortsighted scheme that now wreaks and smells like a monstrous farm pork-laden subsidy program that appears to benefit only the multi-millionaire farmer campaign contributing constituents and puts the nations food supply at great peril. This also is bringing out the ethanol subsidy benefactors clamoring to malign and marginalize just about anyone who dares to speak out against their multi-million and probably soon to be billion dollar subsidized milk cow.
These Senators apparently chose to either ignore or even to consider what many opponents of the one sided corn based ethanol program they rammed through were trying so hard to tell them about the shortcomings and related problems with their plan and opposition is now quickly gaining momentum all across the nation and across the world, at last as food prices steadily out paces inflation and consumers shrinking pocketbooks. The deserved backlash is growing daily and those Senators are growing very nervous as well as they should. To help put this into perspective please read on.
Senators begin to ponder an ethanol exit plan
As food-versus-fuel debate gets louder, politicians start to squirm
May 28, 2008.NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- Think back to 2005 and the energy policy debates in Congress. Democrats and Republicans both claimed the slogan of energy independence as the mantra for a national energy policy..Energy independence quickly became synonymous with homegrown biofuels, specifically corn-based ethanol. The vote was easy: Iowa farmers versus Saudi oil ministers. Congress mandated that 7.5 billion gallons of ethanol to be blended into the nation's fuel stocks by 2012. Last year, Congress increased the mandate to 15 billion gallons by 2015..Fast forward less than one year later. Proponents and opponents of ethanol are waging a rough and rowdy war in Washington over whether biofuel has a future..Ethanol has always had opponents: anti-subsidy, fiscal conservatives; oil industry executives fearful of competition at the pump; wary environmentalists uncertain about the air and water implications of turning food into fuel..Today, however, ethanol opponents are getting louder. And Washington policymakers who overwhelmingly voted to boost the biofuel to national savior two years ago are listening more carefully to the case against biofuels.."The volume on the food-versus-fuel debate is getting louder by the day," said Bill Wicker, spokesman for the majority staff of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee..Recently, the Grocery Manufacturers Association, representing more than 300 food and beverage companies, joined the ethanol backlash. GMA's members include Nestle, Sara Lee - all companies facing higher fuel bills to run their manufacturing plants and higher costs for the raw materials used to make their products. The group thinks ethanol is the culprit in rising prices for meat, milk, and eggs and sees a rollback of the ethanol mandate as salve for family food budgets..The group wants to "amplify" the links between the ethanol mandate and rising food prices as often as possible and use the media's heightened focus on these issues to pressure Washington to turn back the clock on ethanol, according to a memo written by the association..The industry see stories of global food shortages and price spikes creating a perfect window of opportunity to "change perceptions about the benefits of bio-fuels and the mandate and, ultimately, to build a groundswell in support of freezing or reversing some provisions" funding ethanol production from grain..Iowa Senator Charles Grassley, a firm supporter of ethanol subsidies, got a hold of the group's memo and published it online last week. Grassley called the group's campaign a "misinformation campaign" and railed against the "scapegoating of ethanol."."The Grocery Manufacturers Association has an obvious self-interest in launching this campaign. They need to blame someone for high grocery bills, and they've aimed their fire, I think, at a false target," Grassley said at a Thursday press conference..A political price to pay?.To unseat support for ethanol the food and beverage industry believes it has to convert progressive Democrats, pro-business Democrats, and Republicans and Democrats from non-farm states who supported the ethanol mandate. "Environmental, hunger, food aid, poverty, development, senior, children, business, nutrition, farm, consumer and labor groups" are all natural allies in the fight, according to the memo drafted by the group..The Glover Park Group, a Washington lobbying agency, drafted a strategy proposal for the Grocery Manufacturers Association for taking on ethanol. In the memo, the lobbying group said "we must demonstrate to policy makers at the state and federal level that there is a political price to allowing ethanol policy to drive up the cost of food.".That price is constituent ire stemming from pocketbook and kitchen table issues like food and gasoline prices. The lobbying group suggested that the food companies take their campaign to "average voters."."Average voters understand perfectly well what increased food prices mean and with the right messaging are fully capable of drawing the connection to corn-based ethanol," the lobbying group said..A broad Democratic offensive against ethanol would certainly be threatening to the federal mandate for ethanol production and some pressure is already landing on lawmakers. Yet Congress -- and Democrats who have made curbing foreign imports of oil a top national priority -- hardly seem prepared to turn their back on domestically grown biofuels just yet.."The issue is complicated, and Chairman [Jeff] Bingaman thinks that it's wise for folks to catch their breath and get better educated on the complexities before charging ahead with changes," Wicker said, referring to the the chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Bingaman sent a letter to Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman and Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer this month asking them for more information on the connection between crops and food prices..All of this has pro-ethanol groups waging a vigorouos defense of their industry. But ethanol is certainly not on the ropes.."For reasons both political and strategic we think Congress is unlikely to dismantle anytime soon the renewable fuels standard," according to a new report from the Stanford Group Company..The ethanol industry warns that if lawmakers undo the ethanol mandate they'll have a lot of explaining to do to consumers when grocery bills don't drop significantly. It contends there are only small amounts of corn in grocery store products, saying the impact is measured in cents not dollars. With crude oil prices now above $130 a barrel, the food and beverage companies are still going to face dramatically higher energy prices that will continue to be passed along to consumers, they argue..States stake out biofuels positions.That's what makes the states the real battleground in the ethanol fight, something anti-ethanol groups realize.."[A]s long as state and federal decision makers and their staffs can comfort themselves with the thought that current ethanol policy makes sense on the merits, it will be difficult to get them to take up the fight," the Glover Park strategy memo said..In the absence of a Washington about-face, Texas is prepared to be a test case in the ethanol war. Texas Governor Rick Perry, a Republican, asked EPA last month to curtail the amount of ethanol from grain that must be blended into gasoline supplies by half. This month EPA announced that it is accepting comments on the request..Texas has to prove that the renewable fuel standard would "severely harm the economy or environment of a state, region, or the entire country, or if EPA determines that there is inadequate domestic supply of renewable fuel." EPA has 90 days to decide if it will grant a state waiver..Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison recently introduced a bill, S. 3031, that would freeze federal ethanol production mandates at 2008 levels. Ten other Republican senators, including Republican presidential nominee John McCain, R-Ariz., signed on as co-sponsors of the legislation.Needless-to-say the biofuels debate isn't going away anytime soon
I would only add that wayward Congress members have been adequately warned and that November could be a real problem for those who put corporate interests ahead of their voting constituents’ interests. Greedy corporations cannot cast a single ballot at the ballot box but they can only try to buy elected politicians who must stand for election every 2 or 6 years and their constituents are paying closer attention like they haven't in many years now. So be warned Senator "Half-measure" Hutchinson and Senator "Gotta watch closely" Cornyn!
Buffett sees "long, deep" U.S. recession
Warren Buffet, a U.S. investor and purportedly the worlds richest man is predicting that the current recession he believes that America is in will last much longer and run much deeper than many people currently believe.
Buffet asserts that America is
"already in recession" and added: "Perhaps not in the sense that economists would define it" with two consecutive quarters of negative growth.
Buffet went on to say;
"But the people are already feeling the effects," said Buffett, the world's richest man. "It will be deeper and last longer than many think."
While I do not necessarily think his ability to read the crystal ball as an analytical economic forecaster is infallible I do value his opinion on the subject as do millions of others around the globe. He has managed to amass a rather sizeable fortune and he must know something about economic indicators and markets to keep from losing his amassed fortune. I’d suggest that you go and read for yourself the article. It is based upon an interview published in German magazine Der Spiegel on Saturday.
Perry having second thoughts on ethanol
Seems that Texas Governor Rick ‘Goodhair’ Perry is starting to sense the growing public and worldwide angry backlash against using Americas corn, a very basic food commodity, for making ethanol fuel for cars and SUV’s instead of using the corn for what God put it on earth for, for feeding hungry people here and also reducing the amount of corn for export to other nations who are starting to realize increasing shortages in their food and feed supply.
By some estimates the amount of corn being used to make ethanol has diverted about 22% or more from the annual corn crop yield and that has led to increased costs for just about every food product derived from corn as well as greatly driven up the cost of feed for our nations livestock thus driving many cattle, hog, poultry and other animal producers who rely on corn in their feed supply either out of business or into near bankruptcy in many corners of the nation. Ranchers are finding it extremely difficult if not impossible to keep their doors open due to the extreme high cost of animal feed. Predictions are now that pork and chicken will be the next items in very short supply as a result.
This has naturally caused many Americans much financial pain at the grocery store checkout as well as this corn diversion has lead to skyrocketing wholesale food costs which are quickly passed on to you and me almost daily now if not weekly. There naturally are other things going on in the economy that are helping to raise those costs such as oil and gas, labor and greedy speculators but the diversion of corn is one of the leading contributors.
Perry's ethanol resistance catches on in U.S. Senate
AP - WASHINGTON — Following the lead of Texas Gov. Rick Perry, Senate Republicans today asked environmental regulators to use their power to halt the country's ethanol output expansion plans amid rising food prices.
Twenty-two Republican senators, including presidential candidate Sen. John McCain of Arizona, sent a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency suggesting it waive, or restructure, rules that require a five-fold increase in ethanol production over the next 15 years.
Congress passed a law last year mandating a ramp-up to 15 billion gallon of corn ethanol by 2015 and 36 billion by 2022. But McCain and other Republicans said those rules should be waived to put more corn back into the food supply for livestock, and to encourage farmers to plant other crops.
"This subsidized (ethanol) program — paid for by taxpayer dollars — has contributed to pain at the cash register, at the dining room table, and a devastating food crisis throughout the world," said McCain, in a statement.
Despite tough rhetoric from lawmakers, analysts say Congress is unlikely to roll back such a popular program during an election year.
It is only "popular" to those corporate interests like ADM and others who benefit by millions and billions of dollars in Federal subsidies in this major scam. If this ethanol program was so hot and so good for America why isn't private corporations doing this with their own dollars? That should be the yard stick with which to measure this boondoggle.
Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co. analyst Kevin Book argued in a recent note to clients that Congress will not "turn on the corn belt" because of the significant number of votes held by ethanol-producing states. Ethanol subsidies could face greater risks, however, in 2009 and going forward, according to Book.
Last month, Perry made waves when he asked federal regulators to relax rules requiring use of corn-based ethanol in the nation's fuel supply, arguing the mandate is driving up world food prices and harming the Texas economy.
In an April 25 letter to the EPA, Perry asked the Bush administration to waive 50 percent of the federal mandate for production of ethanol derived from grain.
Federal law requires that the nation use 9 billion gallons of renewable fuels this year and 11 billion gallons in 2009.
Ethanol is blended into more than half the gasoline sold in the United States, including in Houston and other cities struggling with the worst air-quality problems.
Farmers have responded to government ethanol incentives by planting the largest crop of corn in 60 years, leaving fewer acres for soybeans, oats and other agricultural staples.
Tighter crop supplies means higher production costs for food processors of all types. In one recent example Pilgrim's Pride Corp., the nation's largest chicken producer, said costs rose $200 million in the quarter on higher corn and soybean feed.
And Americans are paying those higher costs at the grocery store, where egg prices have jumped 40 percent in the last year and flour prices have risen 50 percent since January, raising the price of bread and other baked goods.
The EPA has the power to waive or restructure the requirements if they cause unintended harm to consumers or the environment.
"We don't think it's the right move to make," said Liz Friedlander, a spokeswoman for the National Farmers Union.
The group said ethanol production has helped lower fuel prices by reducing demand for gasoline.
It has? You got to be kidding me if you think Americans are so gullible as to swallow that load of pig swill.
Farmers and ethanol producers have defended corn-based production of the alternative fuel, saying its impact on the rising food prices has been relatively small. Instead, they blame food price inflation on higher fuel prices, poor weather conditions and dwindling stockpiles of wheat and other crops.
If you really believe that Mr and Mrs corporate corn farmer then tell me, if Congress took away all your Federal subsidies would you still be parroting your corporate party line? Heh heh, I didn't think so and neither does the American public.
While nearly all experts agree increased biofuel production by companies such as Archer Daniels Midland Co. and Pacific Ethanol Inc. has contributed to the run-up in food prices, there is little consensus on the scope of its role.
The ethanol industry says ethanol and other biofuels account for just 4 percent of the price surge, while the Department of Agriculture says the figure is closer to 20 percent.
Last week a group of international scientists recommended halting use of crops for biofuel, saying it would cut corn prices 20 percent.
OBTW. Most of the Senators that signed this petition are most of the same ones who originally enthusiastically passed this legislation but being an election year they have to appear as if they're really concerned for you and me.
Bush say's it isn't his fault
So it it's not his fault or the fault of his administrations policies or of past administrations that America is facing in the looming and growing food price crisis according to Mr. Bush himself. Seems it is the fault of the growing middle class of India according to the President and his Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice this past week.
She goes on to say that China is also at fault as well. She said that improving incomes and prosperity in India and China were responsible for the rising food prices. It would appear that Bush and his people will go to any length to keep from owning up to his administration policy shortcomings on how much corn, wheat, rice and other basic crops, how much to grow and not grow and a failure of a coherent and viable energy policy to make us more self-sufficiengt and less dependent on foreign oil imports. Like Clinton, don't get caught between Mr. Bush and his legacy rebuilding. It would appear that Mr. Bush learned at least one valuable lesson from the Clinton's and that is to, "deny, deny, deny" when things aren't going your way.
Probably one of the biggest boondoggle's of President Bush's administration is the ongoing bio-fuel scam being perpetrated against not only the people of the United States but on the world as well is the diversion of, so far around 3 billion bushels of corn to make 9 billion gallons of ethanol which equates to around 25%-30% of the current American corn crop. AND THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT WANTS AT LEAST 35 BILLION GALLONS PRODUCED IN TEN YEARS, WHICH WOULD TAKE NEARLY THE ENTIRE AMERICAN CORN CROP ACREAGE TO PRODUCE. Americans had better wake up and demand of Washington to stop and reverse this bio-fuel scam before America is reduced to a third world nation having to beg for food for its very day to day exisience.
Bush blames India's middle class for food price hike
WASHINGTON, May 3: US President George W. Bush on Saturday blamed the ‘wealthy’ lifestyle of India’s huge middle class for the spiralling global food prices.
“There are 350 million people in India who are classified as middle class. That’s bigger than America. Their middle class is larger than our entire population,” observed Mr Bush. ‘‘And when you start getting wealth, you start demanding better nutrition and better food. And so demand is high, and that causes the price to go up.”
The remarks, made in a speech on economy and trade, earned him an immediate rebuke from India where a spokesman for the ruling Congress party said Mr Bush’s analysis was “completely erroneous” as India is not a food importer but a food exporter.
Mr Bush, however, is not the first US leader to blame India. Earlier this week, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also expressed similar views. She said that improving incomes and prosperity in India and China were responsible for the rising food prices.
Other American officials also have indicated that people in these two countries were eating too much and a better quality food, which has forced world food prices to go up.
In India, a Congress party spokesman Manish Tewari told reporters that Mr Bush’s assessment was wrong.
“The facts speak otherwise. India is not a net food importer. It is a food exporter,” he said. “The assumption that local prices are increasing because of a changed India is completely erroneous.”
Mr Tewari instead blamed the developed world for the crisis. “Diversion of arable land in the developed world for ethanol production and changes in the climate pattern led to the crisis,” he said.
In the meanwhile the smart and prudent thing to be doing in the meanwhile is to be slowly stockpiling of the non-perishable foodstuffs derived from corn and wheat. For those that can they should consider putting in a victory garden and canning what they can. I rather suspect that it will likely get worse before it gets better. It won't be long before we will look back longingly to this period as the good ol' days.
Americans hoard food
This piece at TheWashingtonTimes certainly caught my attention. It caused me to think, ‘since when did Americans start hoarding food?’ And then it occurred to me, ‘why would Americans be hoarding food? In this day and age?!’ I know that food and gas has been on the increase over the past few years and it certainly has been making even larger increases at the pump and the checkout stand in recent months yet I wasn’t all that aware that we as Americans had been hoarding food, anyway not since the ‘Great Depression’ of my parents era.
But after reading on down in the article one soon becomes aware that what some rather wise and astute Americans, myself included have actually been doing is starting to read the tea-leaves and starting to buy and store extra foodstuffs and other related items we need in our daily lives otherwise known as ‘laying in extra vittles’. Okay okay, some might call it ‘stockpiling’ and maybe some might try to even stretch that to ’hoarding’. I wouldn’t quite go that far, personally.
Americans hoard food as industry seeks regs …. some Americans are stocking up on staples such as rice, flour and oil in anticipation of high prices and shortages spreading from overseas.
In all seriousness our basic food commodities supply have lately been showing signs of worsening with no real relief in sight for at least a couple of years or more according to some economists familiar with the world food supply numbers. Many world economists have been predicting that food and fuel will rise at least anywhere from 15% to 48% a year for at least the next couple of years. Even after that the prices will continue to rise but supposedly at a slower rate if some so called experts are right. Right now there are reports that these prices have already risen around 37% since just 2002-03. That’s about 6% - 8% per year. Now some are saying to expect double digit percentage increases each year of the next year or so.
With that being said I can certainly understand why some Americans are feeling the need to cover their families backsides just in case these dire predictions are only just half-right and there’s no way of knowing whether those numbers may actually be closer to 100% correct or anywhere in between. And with news items like this one that appeared in the WSJ recently, 'Load Up the Pantry' people have the right to be concerned in times like these.
In any event some people and I count myself in that group are just being careful and socking away certain non-perishable foodstuffs that will be needed no matter what happens and that these same foodstuffs will only continue to rise in price and keep rising for the foreseeable future especially with the continued weakening and dumping of the of the U.S. dollar worldwide and the continued meteoric rise in oil and gas with no end in sight which has a direct and devestating bearing on food prices at every level in our economy and the worlds economy as well because what happens in world markets elsewhere have at least an indirect domino-like impact on American consumers.
I call it an investment hedge against out of control worldwide basic foodstuffs supply and growing inflation. Never mind what the government tries to sell you and me we have some serious inflation woes staring us in the face with possible shortages in our food supply chain in coming months. The government does not include things like food, gasoline and oil and many other daily necessary commodities in the idea for figuring the inflation rate index but as a practical matter and as a consumer I do consider them when figuring the real world inflation numbers and how and where to spend my limited supply of money. - More later -
