Category: Free Markets

PROGRESSIVES PREFER MURDER’S OIL

A man with his hands crossed in front of him.Progressives prefer murder’s oil over America’s oil. More specifically, the left, communists, socialists, progressives, liberals, and Democrats prefer murder’s oil over oil drilled and refined in the United States. This is based on the actions, not the rhetoric, of the left including progressives. Since oil is financing much of Putin’s Russian war against Ukraine, the west, especially the United States, needs to cut off all sales of Russian and their allies oil on world markets. This must include removal of Russian and their allies oil transactions from the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (SWIFT) system. The Biden Administration is sending representatives or third-party negotiators, like Russia, to try to negotiate increased oil production for export to the United States from murderous dictators in counties like Iran, Saudi Aribia, and Venezuela. The Administration, including the President, is also unsuccessfully requesting increased oil exports from other Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) like the United Arab Emirates. These actions show that the Biden Administration and progressives prefer murder’s oil over America’s oil.

The Biden administration and progressives think the We the People of the United States are to stupid to understand that all greenhouse gases are the same regardless of the source of the carbon during their transition to renewable energy. Progressives also believe that energy inflation is an acceptable tool to reduce carbon energy use in the United States. Perhaps the Biden Administration and progressives are the stupid ones. They believe that it is economically sound to pay other countries, many controlled by murderous dictators, for oil. This strategy also ships good paying oil jobs to foreign countries robing We the People of these good paying jobs. Our enemies, both military and economic, use energy as a weapon. Progressives and the Biden Administration fail to understand that the United States, with the largest energy reserves in the world, especially our petroleum reserves, should use energy as a weapon to crippler or destroy the economies of our enemies, especially Russia which invaded Ukraine without provocation and is committing unprecedented war crimes against the Ukrainian people.

Unfortunately, for the United States and the world, the Biden Administration, from the President to Cabinet Secretaries and regulators in the Environmental Protection Agency, The Federal Reserve System, banking, treasury, commerce, energy, and transportation at virtually every level have stated their intent to eliminate carbon-based energy produced in the United States, especially petroleum, as quickly as possible. Â This policy eliminates the possibility of using our petroleum as a weapon against tyrants like Putin and his nation Russia. The policy also guarantees continued gas price inflation into the future, at least 2024, unless Republicans win veto proof House and Senate majorities in the 2022 elections. The energy policy of the Biden Administration demonstrates that Biden and progressives prefer murder’s oil over America’s oil.

Hopefully, Putin’s Russian invasion, war, and war crimes against Ukraine and its people will show the freedom loving, independent, democratic people of the world that that murderous dictators like Putin cannot be tolerated any longer. The free world should unite to destroy the economies of dictatorships, like Putin’s, before they have the economic power to wage wars like Putin’s Russian war against Ukraine. To accomplish this goal, the free democratic countries of the world must be unified economically by enacting true free trade agreements which excludes the dictatorships of the world.

The Biden Administration’s energy and foreign policies plans are totally inept, short sighted, and strategically lacking. The potential wars of the future are not being considered by this administration, progressives, and globalists. The Biden Administration does not understand that China and Russia are uniting to wage the current and upcoming economic energy wars. When the Biden Administration acted to immediately curtail carbon-based energy production, primarily petroleum, in the United States, Russia, the world’s third largest petroleum producer, could finance its invasion and war against Ukraine with oil revenue from the United States and the rest of the world. This was because we reduced Unites States oil production and became an importer rather than an exporter of oil. Our reduction in production reduced global supply and increased the global market price for oil increasing Russian oil profits. More actions demonstrating that progressives prefer murder’s oil over America’s oil.

In addition, the Biden Administration lacks foreign, environmental, and energy policies that ensure the long-term ability to secure the rare earth minerals and capacity to produce the Lithium-ion batteries needed to power the electric vehicles that they are forcing on We the People in the United States. However, Tesla does manufacture its lithium-ion batteries in their Panasonic plant in California. The minerals needed to produce lithium-ion batteries are lithium, graphite, nickel, cobalt, manganese, copper, and aluminum (bauxite). According to United States Geological Survey information summarized in the article, Where do batteries come  from? And where do they go?, the natural reserves of these minerals in the United States do not rank among the top five countries of the world. In contrast, China is among the top three producers of lithium, graphite, copper, and aluminum (bauxite), and the United States is not listed as a top producers of these minerals in the world. Additionally, according to the 2020 United Nations publication using 2018 data, COMMODITIES AT A GLANCE Special issue on strategic battery raw materials, Commodities at a Glance: Special issue on strategic battery raw materials (unctad.org), China controls trade of critical duratives of the world lithium, cobalt and manganese supplies by aggressive import of raw materials and refined exports and produces most of the world’s graphite. The 2019 article, How Electric Car Batteries Are Made: From Mining To Driving states that mining lithium and cobalt causes harmful environmental pollution, and cobalt mines in the Congo use child labor with extremely low wages and deplorable conditions. The Biden Administration foreign, environmental, and energy policies do not provide a long term strategy to secure supplies of the essential minerals needed to produce lithium-ion batteries in the United States. This failure will make our electronic vehicle industry supply chain issues controlled by military and economic enemies, especially China. Just as progressives prefer murder’s oil over America’s oil, progressives prefer enemy murder’s lithium-ion battery mineral supplies over America’s and our ally friend’s lithium-ion mineral supplies.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your Patriot Visions, start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

 

 

 

THE HEALTHCARE PLAN ISSUE

 

A magnifying glass over the word healthcare.
The healthcare plan issue is the difference between socialistic government dictated plans and capitalistic individual based plans.

The healthcare plan issue is the difference between the socialistic approach to healthcare and the capitalistic approach to healthcare. Consequently, the Democrat socialistic healthcare plan must articulate every aspect of their plan for coverage. With a Democrat plan, everyone is covered at no cost to individuals or families, pre-existing conditions are covered for all; costs are  paid by the government through taxation, and the price, type and availability of treatment or medication is determined by healthcare bureaucrats. A Democrat healthcare plan requires thousands of pages of regulations to implement and rarely fully understood by the citizenry. A Democrat plan is a government controlled one size fits all plan so every aspect can be articulated.

In contrast, a Republican capitalistic healthcare plan is based on individual choice. Capitalistic plans reduce taxes and allow the individual to choose their personal plan based on their personal health profile and risk tolerance. Consequently, a Republican plan lacks detail and specificity because there is no monolithic one size fits all plan. In reality, there cannot be a Republican Healthcare Plan because Republicans will allow We the People to develop our own personal healthcare plans that fit our personal or family requirements.

As a result, a Republican capitalistic healthcare plan or law must define the parameters that all private healthcare plans must include. At a minimum, the plan or healthcare law must require coverage for all pre-existing conditions, define the maximum age for covered dependents, define coverage limits for, hospitalization, specialist, physician, support staff, and medication related treatment of all diseases and chronic conditions. The healthcare law should also require complete cost transparency related to physicians, facilities, diagnostic procedures and equipment, supplies, medication both prescription and over the counter, and coverage related to eye, dental, and hearing health. The Republican healthcare law should allow home delivered meals, transportation for physician visits, and remote physician care for those who wish to pay for this coverage in their personal plan. This law should also allow individuals and families to form healthcare insurance cooperatives to compete with employers for insurance coverage prices in their area. Healthcare providers must be allowed to provide fully transportable healthcare insurance to customers in all 50 states, Washington DC, and all US Territories creating competition and lowering healthcare insurance costs for individuals and families. Unlimited Healthcare savings plans must be allowed in the Republican healthcare law. The Republican plan must also allow a range of low-cost plans allowing people to have a combination of healthcare savings plans with a range of catastrophic healthcare insurance plans that fit their health profile, risk tolerance, and ability to pay.

The Republican capitalistic healthcare law should also require complete healthcare provider transparency related to quality of care. The professional evaluations and disciplinary citations against all healthcare practitioners at every level and citations against healthcare facilities and their staffs should be publicly accessible to all. This is the only way the public can be sure that their care is the best available in their area. Such transparency would eliminate poor healthcare providers and reduce the overall cast of healthcare because medical liability insurance would go down. No one would go to a poorly rated practitioner or medical facility. Capitalism would eliminate the bad actors. Of course, medical practitioner groups and institution groups would oppose this level of transparency.

Meaningful tort reform is also necessary to control healthcare costs and must be included in Republican capitalistic healthcare laws. I am a good example of the added medical costs of our current tort laws. I was a truck driver with a heart condition. DOT regulations required me to have a tread mill stress annually. This test costs about $700; but my cardiologist would not approve my physical without a myocardial stress test which costs about $3,500. He required this test as a means of litigation mitigation in case I was involved in a heart related traffic accident while driving my truck; and he would be blamed for allowing me to drive with a defective heart. Physicians prescribe innumerable diagnostic tests as litigation mitigation measures. Meaningful tort reform would reduce such testing and reduce healthcare costs with little reduction in the quality of healthcare.

Healthcare and healthcare insurance comprise at least 17% of the US economy. Previously, several expansive and radical capitalistic healthcare and healthcare insurance proposals were discussed at America’s Crossroad. These proposals include A FORGOTTEN AMERICAN’S ALTERNATIVE HEALTHCARE PLAN which discusses employer provided plans, Obama Care, Medicare, Medicaid, VA Healthcare, and a unique proposal for dedicated Wounded Warrior Healthcare, TRUE FREE MARKET HEALTHCARE INSURANCE, IT IS TIME FOR THE HEALTHCARE RESPONSIBILITY ACT, and THE INDIVIDUAL HEALTHCARE TAX CREDIT. This discussion illustrates the fact that it is impossible to formulate a single comprehensive Republican capitalistic healthcare plan which gives individuals, families, and their practitioners complete control over their healthcare. For Democrats, a healthcare plan regulates every aspect of the healthcare system from costs to treatments and treatment accessibility requiring thousands of pages of regulations which are indecipherable to laymen. Accordingly, a Plan giving individuals and families control over the type and cost of their personal healthcare Plan ds not qualify as a healthcare Plan in Democrat circles. Therefore, healthcare based on free market capitalism can never qualify as a healthcare plan to Democrat socialists; and the healthcare plan issue cannot be resolved politically simply because Democrats and Republicans will never agree o the definition the word Plan as it pertains to healthcare.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your “Patriot Visions,” start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

GLOBAL ALLIANCES, FRIENDS, AND ENEMIES

 

Two horses running in front of a sunset.
Global alliances should be more than military alliances. They should also be reciprocal open, free trade alliances to be effective.

The United States of America is involved in numerous global alliances that are military and defensive in nature. Unfortunately, most of our military allies are not necessarily economic, free trade, allies, partners, or friends. When it comes to international trade and economic agreements, the unstated contention of President Trump is that the United States is primarily confronted by international trading opponents or enemies. In my opinion, true global alliances should be totally reciprocal, politically, economically with respect to trade and monetary policy, and militarily. After all, true allies or friends don’t take unfair economic and trade advantage of allies or friends. Allies do not drain the economic resources and strength of their allies.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is one of the largest military alliances to which the United States is a signatory. My contention is that the majority of the military allies in NATO are not economic friends of the United States. The European Union (EU) members of NATO, members of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and other trade partners act more like economic enemies. The same could be said of most Pacific Rim military allies. The Chinese, North Koreans, Iranian and other Middle East countries, and socialist South American nations are also trading advisories. With trading friends like these, who needs trading enemies?

Consequently, when our so called global allies threaten to challenge our proposed tariffs at the World Trade Organization (WTO), we should immediately challenge their existing tariffs, trade barriers, and subsidies to selected industries that provide a competitive advantage for their products on the world market with the WTO. To protect our agricultural products, if allies place barriers or tariffs on our agriculture products, we should not allow competing products into our nation to protect prices for our farmers. With the largest economy in the world, our allies need to trade with us more than we need to trade with them. Again, truly strong global alliances are fully reciprocal.

When critics and global free trade proponents say that it is bad policy to start trade wars with allies, they fail consider the possibility that military allies are not necessarily economic or trading allies or friends. These allies are already waging a trade war with the United States. They also fail to acknowledge that global free trade is a myth. Military allies that levy tariffs that are ten times what the United States levies on the same category of goods or erect trade barriers for United States products or commodities are not economic or trading partners and allies. Military allies that fail to contribute equitably to their military obligations within global alliances are questionable allies. Free trade and military obligation should be reciprocal in all areas.

The Merriam-Webster, On-Line Dictionary definitions of two terms related to this discussion are relevant. Globalism is defined as “a national policy of treating the whole world as a proper sphere for political influence.” Influence is defined as “to affect or change without use of direct force or authority.” In my opinion, globalism is currently used most often in reference to global trade or the global market that is not characterized by free trade. The reality of international trade is that the United States has little significant influence that positively affects our economy, manufacturing, labor force, and personal or family income. That is why the United States has a huge trade deficit. That is why President Trump is renegotiating most of our international trade agreements and putting America first. Consequently, globalism only applies to military and defensive alliances but not to economic and international trade agreements.

In my opinion, it is time that our global alliances are composed of military allies that are also our economic and international trade allies rather than our economic and international trade adversaries. Our allies need to stop depending on the United States to finance their defense needs and economies in general. The world needs open, fair, reciprocal, and truly free trade.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your “Patriot Visions,” start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

 

GLOBAL FREE TRADE: REALLY?

 

The idea of global free trade or that the global market place is an open free market place is a damn lie. This damnation is spread by the World Trade Organization, progressives, many of whom are closet capitalists, globalists, international conglomerate capitalists, so called free-traders, conservatives, RINO’s, business pundits, and most intellectual elites. The lie comes from deep in the elitist Washington, DC, globalist swamp.

A red and white background with the word globalization written in it.
There are at least 6 reasons that the idea of global free trade is a damn lie!

Global free trade does not exist when 1) countries refuse to allow any category of products made in the United States (US) into their country, and we allow the same category into our country; 2) countries impose high tariffs on any category of products imported into their country, and we impose tariffs that are a fraction of those imposed by so-called œtrading partners; 3) other countries subsidize production of categories of products, and we do not subsidize production of the same category of products; 4) other countries do not impose costly environmental, health, and safety regulations on energy and production facilities that are required in the US; 5) other countries tolerate theft of intellectual property for new or improved products from US businesses without paying for use of the intellectual property or imposition of penalties when these products enter US markets; and 6) other countries manipulate international money markets for their benefit. If the so called global free trade experts were honest, they could add to my list of real global free trade impediments. Whether or not the announced Trump Administration tariffs will be good for our economy and labor force in general, the argument that tariffs violate free market principles is void because global free trade does not exit. The argument is based on a lie. No true global free trade market exists.

The result of globalism, as now practiced, is global wealth redistribution. The $800 billion US trade deficit is global wealth redistribution. Virtually all of the so-called œFree Trade agreements involving the US constitute wealth redistribution since they result in trade deficits with the other countries involved. The reality is that the redistribution has cost the US labor force jobs, lost wages, and lowered benefits which were transferred to labor forces in developing countries.

In my opinion, most progressive policy initiatives are based on Marxist philosophy, especially wealth redistribution. Similarly, capitalists seek to expand markets and increase their profitability which requires decreasing costs and opening of new markets in developing countries or increasing income, especially disposable income, in new and existing markets resulting in increased customer purchasing power. Although the ultimate goal, increasing consumer or personal incomes and buying power, is the same for both progressives and capitalists, the method of accomplishing the goal is drastically different. Interestingly, globalism often unites progressives and capitalists when nationalism, protectionism, and tariffs are the subject of debate and discussions.

Unfortunately, US laborers have borne the brunt of the adverse effects of globalism, lost jobs lost opportunities, stagnant wages, and regional economic decline. Through factory relocations to the developing world, capitalists achieve their goal of reducing capital improvement and labor costs, and increased factory productivity. Progressive globalists achieve their goal of global wealth redistribution when new factory wages increase the standard of living, opportunity, and economic development in the regions where new facilities are opened.

Global free trade is a globalist myth. Until a global free market actually exists, the experts should stop insisting that tariffs will impede free trade. Global free trade does not exist. The œexperts should simply tell us that tariffs will increase costs and prices and are the same as taxes. However, if the threat of tariffs, force our so-called trading partners to open markets, reduce their own tariffs, end their subsidies, clean up their own environment, end intellectual property theft, and stop currency manipulation, then tariffs could start progress toward an unfettered global free trade where all the people of the world could move toward greater prosperity.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your “Patriot Visions,” start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.