Skip to content

….Turned me into a NEWT !

January 25, 2011

Bloomberg: “It’s natural for people to be concerned about rising commodity prices, especially since food and energy costs are creeping up,” Cooley said. “But with people like Plosser and Fisher, the Fed will be very wary of any inflationary pressures. I don’t think the Fed will take its eye off the ball.”…

.Cooley argues that one reason food prices are rising is because of strong demand from emerging markets. Translation: A rebounding global economy is leading to higher prices.

Too bad that the bread basket of California has been turned into a newt smelt. We could address those food costs – and export food even!

Unfortunately someone weighing as much as a duck turned the wheat, avocados, grain, and citrus into a smelt when we weren’t looking, or perhaps it was turned into “green energy jobs”…

Given Cantor’s message – will they choose to “get better?”

Advertisements
8 Comments leave one →
  1. January 26, 2011 10:33 am

    With that said, most of the vehicles that are “tuned” to us E85 or some other blend typcially have more robust fuel systems (i.e. pressurized and made mostly of metals) to avoid the gasket problems. It makes for better engines… and more costly cars. Oh, the mileage still goes down because ethanol has less energy like was said before. Hey, but we’re paying for it in taxes!

    If we drop all subsidies for energy, then everyone gets to compete “fairly.” I’m all for that. But realistically, I’d bet if you looked at it like “subsidy dollars per joule of energy produced” you’d see a solid advantage to existing infrastructure. That’s no surprise, because they’ve figured out how to maximize the return. If alternative energy soruces want research grants, then there’s a separate bucket for that.

    • January 26, 2011 11:03 am

      I would concede your point on the newer vehicles with the E-85, which is a whole ‘nother ball of wax. In fact, if your car or truck isn’t made to specifically use E-85 fuel, you can’t use it. I think there’s a law or something. Most people I know don’t have newer vehicles. (I drive a ’97 GM Sonoma truck and my wife has a 2000 model Ford Explorer Sport, both of which get around 20 mpg around town and 24 on the freeway.) And not all new cars and trucks are made to burn E-85. I think it’s an expensive option.

      Mike

  2. January 26, 2011 10:03 am

    Dear ThatMrGGuy,

    I lost a seventh of my gas tank’s mileage through being forced to purchase 10 percent ethanol fuel.

    Which is larger? A seventh or a tenth?

    What these whizzes can’t figure out is, that per mile, I buy more gasoline qua gasoline now than before the imposition of the ethanol mandate. And this is better how?
    .

    • January 26, 2011 10:11 am

      Oregonguy,

      No it’s not better and that’s my point. I live in South Carolina where we actually have gas stations that don’t sell gasoline with ethanol additives. I buy my gas from them when I can. My mileage is better as well as my truck’s performance. Another thing, fuels with ethanol additives are extremely bad for two and four cycle engines. It rots the gaskets and seals in the engines if left in the tank for any extended length of time along with the gunk it produces. Ethanol also attracts water and we know how good that is for internal combustion engines.

      Mike

  3. January 26, 2011 9:57 am

    It’s a fair cop

  4. January 26, 2011 8:58 am

    Speaking of newts and Newt…Did y’all see where Newt Gingrich is all for federal subsidies for ethanol producers? He thinks the government should force car companies to build the “flex fuel” cars. It costs more than it’s worth to make ethanol and it’s bad for most internal combustion engines plus the fact that fuel with ethanol additives cut down your mpg by 20 to 25%. ( Personal anecdotal evidence.)

    Personally, I’m against all federal subsidies. The one thing Obama said last night that I agreed with was when he said he wanted to stop the subsidies to the oil companies.

    Mike

  5. January 25, 2011 10:07 pm

    you’d think they would have followed that – given there were riots in Mexico over corn tortilla prices…but then again, that assumes they can track ACTUAL cause & effect instead of finding evidence of their hoped-for-outcome…

  6. Anonymous permalink
    January 25, 2011 8:58 pm

    And too bad many of the fields in the midwest have been converted to crops grown for the production of ethanol and not food. They have signs along the road next to the fields stating that.

    I wonder if the government considered higher food prices would be a consequence of providing generous subsidies to convert fields to grow crops for ethanol.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: