Politicians are an unusual breed. They think smarter than us. Senator Smith is a case in point.
Having grown up as heir to a frozen food magnate in Eastern Oregon, Smith graduated from law school, worked as an attorney for a while, then took over the family business. Not a bad move for a fledgeling attorney as Smith is now the
Northwests wealthiest senator. $37-million. Not bad.
The point isn't that wealth is bad. The point is experience as an attorney, then walking into the front office of his dad's business doesn't guarantee that the senator has a working man's experience in the day-to-day operations of the canning business. Otherwise, the current fetish of the senator would never be promulgated to the media.
The production managers of his own business must be scratching their heads over this:
Smith: Innovation A Must In Energy Bill
Washington, DC - U.S. Senator Gordon H. Smith (R-OR) is advocating for more efficient appliances, tax incentives that promote alternative energy such as wind, solar and wave as well as increasing the use of Oregon biomass. The Senator has proposed these initiatives as additions to the energy legislation currently being debated in the Senate to ensure the bill responsibly meets America’s energy needs.
“We need to create tomorrow’s energy sources today,” Smith said. “We depend too much on foreign oil. Our energy policy should lead to new solutions that keep energy affordable and available. Our highest priority should be to diversify energy supplies and employ new technologies to make energy production more efficient and environmentally friendly for the sake of our economy, our environment and our national security.”
The proposals Smith is championing to advance alternative and renewable energy production and to promote energy efficiency include:
establishing new energy and water efficiency standards for home appliances and providing manufacturers’ tax credits for developing highly efficient home appliances
extending and expanding the investment tax credit for solar and fuel cell facilities and allowing individual taxpayers a tax credit for residential energy efficiency expenditures that are certified to achieve certain levels of energy savings
providing credits for the installation of wind energy property and promoting investment and innovation in clean energy technologies
providing parity for renewable energy such as biomass, providing tax-exempt financing for qualified renewable energy facilities and to make wave and ocean energy technology eligible for production tax credits
establishing ocean energy research centers in Oregon at institutions of higher learning
The U.S. Senate began debate on the bill this week. A number of the tax incentives are expected to be considered next week. Debate of the bill will likely conclude late next week."
The political hubris of this amendment require notice. To point out the absurdity of the bill, let us assume a bill that would require, just for giggles, a 25 percent reduction of energy usage in the canning industry. Could be a "laudable" goal. If anything other than low price, high quality foodstuffs where the goal of the canning industry. (For a brief report on capacity utilization, look at this
FAO report on fishing.)
What the report attempts to point out is that there are a myriad of factors influencing the management of resource based yields. And that the complexity is a function of many factors in the production process. What Smith's amendment produces is a laughable ignorance of the market process. What the consumer needs to know is, "does it work?" and "is it affordable?"
What Smith attempts is enviro-lefty curtain dressing. He's running for election and as such has pretty much thrown over any of the basics of defending the free enterprise system to pander to votes of his fellow ignorant and unknowing lefties. When governments add external requirements to the market it is in direct opposition to the men, women and children who choose to purchase the products of that market. With the cost of water going up I want a washing machine that will save me money by purchasing it. But I also want a washing machine that is affordable, that I can rely on for 15 years of use, and that I can afford to repair. But most importantly, bundled together with the above wants, I want a price at the store that I can afford.
In other words, I don't want to pay for a $795.00 washing machine that doesn't clean clothes. What kind of savings are there if you have to run your clothes through the wash cycle twice, just to clean your clothes? False economies?
Smith imagines an industry that is incompetent to operate itself. If only government had stepped in earlier to mandate energy and water efficiency standards earlier, we would have more efficient washing machines today. The engineers at White-Westinghouse have to be scratching their heads. It had never occured to them to produce an efficient washing machine before.
Goverment mandates create grey/black markets for consumers. Want a big, gas-guzzling machine? Put it on a truck chassis and step around the CAFE standards. How can this be? Because the market decides what it wants. The manufacturers either produce what the market demands, or goes broke. Implementing Five Year Plans will help neither producer or consumer. But maybe comrade Smith doesn't understand any of this.
OregonGuy
