Posted on 07/16/2022 10:15:27 AM PDT by John Semmens
In a bid to refute contentions that they are indifferent to public suffering at the gas pump, Democrats at both the federal and local levels are taking bold steps to limit how much drivers pay to fuel their vehicles.
US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen announced a global price cap on the price Russia will be allowed to charge for its exported petroleum. “Events since the start of the war in Ukraine indicate that our efforts to boycott Russian oil have been thwarted by other countries,” Yellen complained. “Instead of being hurt by their aggression against Ukraine Russia has been ‘profiteering’ by selling its oil to willing buyers at prices higher than we think proper. This is leading to higher prices for consumers. To counter this we are going to put a cap on the prices they can charge.”
Yellen’s announcement of the imposition of price controls neglected to specify the price that would be allowed. According to the Secretary, “this was intentional. By keeping the legal price secret we increase the uncertainty for Russia. Not knowing the price at which our nuclear deterrent will be deployed will paralyze their initiative and force them to yield to our demands. By forcing them to sell their oil at a loss we can keep the prices at the pump low while simultaneously sapping the income they need to continue the war.”
Meanwhile, some cities in California are banning the construction of new gasoline stations. Petaluma Councilwoman D’Lynda Fischer maintains that “by limiting the number of locations at which our citizens can be gouged by high fuel prices we are striking a blow for consumer rights. Sure, in the short term people can simply drive to a station in a nearby town to gas up. But over time, as the number of surviving fueling locations dwindle the effort to obtain gasoline will be become too time-consuming to bear. More people will be forced to switch to electric vehicles or public transit and a greener future will be assured.”
Unfortunately, the premise that electric vehicles or public transit are better for the environment may be incorrect. While, electric vehicles have no tailpipe emissions, the electricity they need is generated mostly by burning fossil fuels at the power plant. Their rechargeable batteries wear out and have to be replaced. Disposal of dead batteries entails its own set of environmental problems. In theory, public transit would be more environmentally benign if riders were willing to sacrifice more of their time to allow buses and trains to fill more of their empty seats. However, it is the value of time that led to to the long-term decline of public transit and its replacement by self-driven automobiles over the past century.
Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg lamented this trend, saying, “the personal value placed on saving time by the average person is one of the great inequities of our free society. Most people’s time is of little value to the future of the nation. That we have allowed individuals to freely choose to waste other resources in order to save themselves some time is shameful. They need to start conforming to the directives given to them by the government experts who have a far better grasp of the relative values of all of society’s assets—including the people themselves.”
If you missed any of the other Semi-News/Semi-Satire posts you can find them at...
https://libertyusa21.wordpress.com/semi-news-semi-satire/
Can anybody tell me what the proper price for oil is?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.