As an economist I'm uncomfortable with the fact that so many politicians either honestly don't understand basic micro- and macroeconomic principles or just don't care about them because demagoguery gains votes, honest economic positions don't.

We've got a huge building full of lawyers, executives and medical doctors setting this nation's economic policies.

I sure wish some economists would get elected.

Politicians become, through trial and error, experts at getting elected. They become, through design, experts at STAYING elected.

All else - the subcommittees, chairmanships and so on - are designed to give credentials so they can STAY elected.

In all honesty, I'm not surprised she didn't seem to have a clue.

This dumb bunny is my Senator.

I expect her to win re-election with at least 53% of the vote.

My other Senator got 55% in 2004, and she's even dumber.

MKH:

I apologize (actually, I'm more embarassed than anything) for my hapless state senator, Maria Cant(DoAnything)Well.

Hopefully and with any luck, she'll be replaced by former Safeco CEO, Mike McGavick, this Novermber. In fact, if he fails to use this weak grandstanding moment by Cantwell to thrust himself into the limelight, it'll be a missed political opportunity.

Unfortunately her ignorance comes as no surprise...also, and more unfortunately, she doesn't stand out in the crowd...Boxer, Schumer, Feinstein, Wyden...the list is long, all pretty much ignorant about all matters unrelated to, as JL above points out, getting re-elected. Additionally, merc is dead on, economists need to reside everywhere in our government, not just behind the curtain in OZ. We have come to understand how many independent factors impact our economy...no just the Fed.

The writings of Drs. Sowell and Williams should be required reading of all politicians before they begin running their mouths. Imagine how our lives would be with informed elected officials.

I know, I know. I can dream, though.

I keep trying to explain this sort of thing to people, but Econ 101 doesn't seem to be high on the "took it in junior college" list.

On the other hand, I got to hear Steven Levitt speak about Freakonomics this morning (after seeing Ben Stein yesterday).

No joke. I'm always trying to teach my college-grad friends economics. You can easily get through with no idea what supply and demand are.

Cantwell=Durbin yep lump them together..note progressives say Lady Cant is a sell-out but If ya wanna go lumping Dukester/Ney/whats-his-name-fromTexas=all Republicans in the House...As for Eco 101 I know one thing if you are going to spend more than you earn you gotta serve somebody ...and our somebody is Communist China and the Saudis...see most folks don't respond until they are directly effected/affected ...well gas prices do that..I love the Republicans thinking we can be bought for $100 ...I love the skyrocketing electric bills this summer kinda like the Enron manipulation in CA...see most citizens do not get capital gains realized by companies laying off or outsourcing because,; we are out of a job..most citizens, pick a poll any any poll, do not believe in this economy..most citizens are learning that deregulation does not make things cheaper..anybody running for office whose platform is how our great economy is making things better will be defeated. But hey..keep on spinning..those of us with children have seen how they love to spin..until they lose balance and fall down..

Drew, learn to punctuate, capitalize, and divide your writing into paragraphs.

It's simple courtesy, for God's sake. I don't expect good writing; I'm talking about basic stuff like ending a sentence with a period (one period, Drew, not two or three according to choice) and starting the next sentence with a capital letter. This is stuff which any reasonably intelligent nine-year-old already has a good handle on.

I'm sorry if this sounds like I'm The Man tryin' to harsh your buzz with all my fascist rules, duuuuuuuude, but expecting people to wade through drivel like the above is just plain rude.

Supply and demand? Is that like the tinkle down theory? Yep! Anyone remember Beanie Babies? People were actually paying more than $50 for a small stuffed toy because of the demand. Is that supply and and demand? ...Standard Oil created supply and demand..until the last Republican with balls TR said enough..I am waiting for someone to post here supporting supply and demand who owns no stocks..I really dislike communisim...it pisses me off that our supply and demand is controlled by them...I am also not a big fan of the Saudis who had their citizens crashing our planes on 9/11 and Iraq did not..We have had a Republican President/Senate/Congress ...hmmm where is the good life? At what point in time will you point at Republicans, at any level, who are responsible?

Grammer? Yep... I can do that. I can indent paragraphs. I appreciate your comments. At the very least it is a positive. However,; I must go back and check out other diatribes. I do not doubt for a monment that you have addressed them in a like manner.
You know I respect a back to basics approach. I believe the downfall of grammer came when commie teachers did away with diagramming sentences. However,; that brings us to the crux of the matter. What is more important, what a person says or how they say it?
How do you convince someone not to write irregardless? Say what you will about English only, our language and structure is difficult because of the hodgepodge gathering of languages.
I will, however, attempt to pursue a more generally accepted structure. I realize that perhaps there are those that don't bother to read the message because they deem the message poorly written and not worthy of further exploration. i(written in the spirit of e.e. cummings) will take that into account in future postings.

A US senator without a clue???

SAY IT AIN'T SO!

Drew E.,

Actaully, Beanie Babies (and other extreme fads and panics of that sort) are economics as practiced by fools who don't understand how supply and demand works. They can't judge supply, they don't really understand the demand, and they're hoping that they can find other folks who have even less knowledge then they do before the market collapses. It's closer to a pyramid scheme than true market forces.

The Standard Oil example is a bad one for you, since it was (mostly) not a coercive monopoly, but one based on competition (indeed, oil prices dropped by about 50% during the time of the Standard Oil "trust"). The Roosevelt moves versus Standard Oil came well after real competition reduced Standard's market share from the 90% level. In other words, due to competition and innovation, the "invisible hand" worked.

By the way: "our supply and demand" aren't controlled by "them," because we control the demand, and "them" consists of many countries (the largest supplier of oil to the US is Canada).

I tried to indent but whatever you are using would not let me... no, I really tried..for example I just pressed the tab..if you notice nothing is indented although i am sure the poster do indent...(hey try it yourself)

And that's the beauty of supply and demand. Demand for gasoline dropped 1.3% in March when gas was still relatively cheap. Wait until April numbers come in. I'm guessing a 3 or 4% drop in demand. And assuming Congress doesn't do something stupid to cause an artificial shortage, gasoline prices will plummet 80 cents in June.

"What is more important, what a person says or how they say it? "

In this case, due to your incredibly bad way of saying what you thought you said, you didn't really say much of anything.

Drew, the accepted way of separating paragraphs on the Internet is with a blank line. When you reach the end of a paragraph, hit your ENTER key twice.

No indenting necessary.

Next lesson: The proper use of the period (.) and the ellipsis (...).

Drew, the accepted way of separating paragraphs on the Internet is with a blank line. When you reach the end of a paragraph, hit your ENTER key twice.

No indenting necessary.

Next lesson: The proper use of the period (.) and the ellipsis (...).

Canada? I am sorry you are going to have to give me a link that supports your contention.

Hey, I got it. I just have to space between paragraphs. Canada? If I were you I would contact a major media like FOX. This is a break through story.

As of 2004:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/rankings/crudebycountry.htm

Mexico is #2.

Drew:

Try Googling "united states oil supply canada" (without the quotes, of course). Many cites.

Canada is the single largest supplier, at about 15%.

That's another bit of info that should clue you into why one single supplier or group of suppliers can't really "control" the international oil market.

It's not a breakthrough story for anyone except people who don't understand how markets work.

Oh, Drew. You're delightful. Grammar is spelled with an "a" and "irregardless" is not a word.

...Standard Oil created supply and demand..

Drew, you are ignorant.

When the Tulip Bubble Burst
TULIPOMANIA
The Story of the World's Most Coveted Flower

http://www.businessweek.com/2000/00_17/b3678084.htm

Tulip mania differed in one crucial aspect from the dot-com craze that grips our attention today: Even at its height, the Amsterdam Stock Exchange, well-established in 1630, wouldn't touch tulips. ''The speculation in tulip bulbs always existed at the margins of Dutch economic life,'' Dash writes. After the market crashed, a compromise was brokered that let most traders settle their debts for a fraction of their liability. The overall fallout on the Dutch economy was negligible. Will we say the same when Wall Street's current obsession finally runs its course?

....not that there's anything wrong with that.

Drew E: "I am waiting for someone to post here supporting supply and demand who owns no stocks."

Count me in. If you don't believe in it, you will have plenty of what you don't want, and none of what you do.

I made squat last year, and own no stock. Good thing the market now delivers, nearly for free, what in the past would be luxuries of kings.

Go educate yourself.

Compare the price of a gallon of milk to a gallon of gas and the associated capital investment into the end product and gas seems like a bargin.

Here is the letter I received from Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter on the gas problems today. We should vote the bums out NOW!

Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 16:27:49 -0400
From: Senator_Specter@Specter.Senate.gov
Subject: Re: Gasoline/Natural Gas Prices
X-Originating-IP: [156.33.203.25]

Thread-topic: Gasoline/Natural Gas Prices
Thread-index: AcZrAjeZgMbmToBDQPamaGr3W3MC8A==
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Apr 2006 20:27:49.0555 (UTC)
FILETIME=[37B80030:01C66B02]

Dear Reverend:

Thank you for contacting my office regarding gasoline prices. I appreciate hearing from you on this matter.

Rising energy costs and increasing gasoline price volatility have had significant effects on our economy and are a major concern to America 's businesses, consumers, and Congress. Analyses show that the components that make up the price of gasoline are the market cost of crude oil (46%), federal and state taxes (24%), refinery costs (19%) and marketing and distribution costs (11%). Among the numerous factors that affect gasoline prices, only federal taxes and regulations for clean air standards and reformulated gasoline are within the direct control of the federal government. It is important to note that federal gas taxes are deposited into the federal highway trust fund, which is the federal government's main source of highway construction funding.

However, in light of the continuation of high gas prices and reporting of record profits by oil and gas companies, I believe the time has come for the Federal government to look past its limited controls on the energy market. Therefore, as Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I held two hearings in February and March of 2006 to consider the effects of consolidation in the energy industry and whether concentration had resulted in increased prices for gasoline, other petroleum-based fuels and natural gas. As a result of those hearings, I recently introduced S. 2557, the Oil and Gas Industry Antitrust Act of 2006. The purpose of this legislation is to require the appropriate antitrust agencies to further consider whether mergers within the oil and gas industry have violated antitrust laws and whether such mergers and information sharing among companies should receive closer scrutiny. Additionally, this legislation would address record industry profits and high gasoline prices by prohibiting oil and gas companies from diverting, exporting or refusing to sell existing supplies with the specific intention of raising prices or creating a shortage. S. 2557 also incorporates provisions similar to those of S. 555, the No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels (NOPEC) Act, of which I am cosponsor, which would enable OPEC members to be sued for violating United States antitrust laws by conspiring to fix the price of crude oil.

Furthermore, I have consistently been a supporter of increasing the domestic oil supply and energy efficiency to balance market discrepancies between supply and demand. I have been the lead Republican sponsor of an amendment to the energy bills of the 106 th and 107 th Congresses that would require the federal government to enact policies to reduce United States consumption of oil by one million barrels per day from projections by 2015 and supported a similar amendment to the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which was signed into law on August 8, 2005, that would have required a reduction of domestic oil consumption by 1 million barrels per day from projections by 2013. This modest goal was not included in the final bill, but I believe it could help to focus the federal government's attention on reducing oil imports in support of national security and lower trade deficits and I will continue to support such measures.

Additionally, I have supported the improvement of automobile fuel economy and reduction of vehicle emissions, which would also alleviate domestic oil consumption. The conference report of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 authorizes $3.5 million per year for fiscal years 2006 through 2010 for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to carry out fuel economy rulemakings. I also supported the incentives included for innovative clean coal technologies which hold the promise of replacing foreign imports of oil. For example, I have worked to secure a U.S. Department of Energy loan guarantee for a Pennsylvania plant, the first in the nation, which utilizes coal and coal waste to produce clean-burning diesel fuel.

Thank you for taking the time to bring your concerns about rising gasoline prices to my attention. This is an important issue deserving Congress' consideration to best serve the interests of consumers and our nation. If you have any further thoughts on this or any other matter, please do not hesitate to contact me or visit my website at: http://specter.senate.gov.

Sincerely,

Arlen Specter

My #2 son is on full scholarship to the University of Chicago thanks to John D. Rockefeller and other rich folks.

Trickle down works.

Any lefty can understands supply and demand and government interference in the market.

Just look at the market for illegal drugs.

You can't beat economics. No matter how many enforcers you put on the job.

BTW Republicans who understood economics would not support drug prohibition. A socialist price support system for criminals.

It is not just lefty's who are economically ignorant.

Now only if Specter et.al. would undo the byzantine legislation regarding ethanol and MBTE, and allow for refineries in differing regions to support each other where shortages exist (by relaxing oxygenation standards on a temporary basis), perhaps the industry might invest in new infrastructure as required to support demand.

Oh, demand...something legislators think is eeeeeeeevvvvvvvvillllllllllllllll...LOL

I share a last name with Maria; After reading these postings, I'm considering changing my name to "Cirby" or "Ham".

I really feel the need to bitch about this - but first I need to take a drink of my $1.60 beer, look forward to my $3.50 + coffee tomorrow as I sit under ~$200 + dollars per month of pure interest payments on revolving credit card debt and watch Tivo of crap of my $89 cable bill.

/meaningless bitching

What's in a name?... Peter F. correctly suggests that Maria has brought a black mark
(an apostrophe) upon the Cantwell Coat of Arms.

Nathaniel Hawthorne changed the spelling of his name by adding an "e" so as not to be associated with a relative, Hawthorn, the Salem Witch judge...In like fashion,maybe I could go back to an original spelling of Kentwell... Or drop an "L" as a symbolic gesture.

Better yet, the "Snowballs" moniker sounds kinda good.