Thursday, April 28, 2011

Gasoline Taxes Per Gallon Are Almost 7 Times ExxonMobil's Profit: 42 cents vs. 7 cents

The map above from API shows gasoline taxes by state (combined local, state and federal), which range from a low of 26.4 cents per gallon in Alaska to a high of of 66.1 cents per gallon in California, averaging 48.1 cents per gallon across all states. How does that compare to oil company industry profits per gallon?

According to this post on Exxon Mobil's Perspective Blog , "For every gallon of gasoline, diesel or finished products we manufactured and sold in the United States in the last three months of 2010, we earned a little more than 2 cents per gallon. That’s not a typo. Two cents."

Update: ExxonMobil is now reporting that for its retail gasoline operations in the U.S., it made an average profit of 7 cents per gallon during the first quarter of 2011. 

The chart below shows the difference graphically:

Saturday, April 23, 2011

Because They're Not Spending Their Own Money, Patients Aren't Consumers, But They SHOULD Be

Source: mjperry.blogspot.com/
















Paul Krugman argues in yesterday's NY Times that Patients Are Not Consumers (link is fixed now):

"How did it become normal, or for that matter even acceptable, to refer to medical patients as “consumers”? The relationship between patient and doctor used to be considered something special, almost sacred. Now politicians and supposed reformers talk about the act of receiving care as if it were no different from a commercial transaction, like buying a car — and their only complaint is that it isn’t commercial enough. What has gone wrong with us?

Medical care, after all, is an area in which crucial decisions — life and death decisions — must be made. Yet making such decisions intelligently requires a vast amount of specialized knowledge. Furthermore, those decisions often must be made under conditions in which the patient is incapacitated, under severe stress, or needs action immediately, with no time for discussion, let alone comparison shopping. 


That’s why we have medical ethics. That’s why doctors have traditionally both been viewed as something special and been expected to behave according to higher standards than the average professional. There’s a reason we have TV series about heroic doctors, while we don’t have TV series about heroic middle managers.

The idea that all this can be reduced to money — that doctors are just “providers” selling services to health care “consumers” — is, well, sickening. And the prevalence of this kind of language is a sign that something has gone very wrong not just with this discussion, but with our society’s values." 

MP: Krugman is correct that patients are not consumers, but for a completely different reason that Krugman misses entirely: Almost 90% of health care costs are paid with "other people's money" (insurance companies, government and employers, see chart above, data here), and only about 11% is paid "out of pocket" by patients.  So patients are no longer the "consumers" of health care, and they haven't been for a long time, because the "consumer" paying almost the entire cost of medical care is a third party.  Over time, the "consumer" paying the bill for health care services has gradually become third party payers, and the trends projected in the chart above indicate that it won't get any better in the future.

But Krugman seems to be arguing that regardless of who is paying for health care, "there’s something terribly wrong with the whole notion of patients as “consumers” and health care as simply a financial transaction." Krugman's further claims that “'Consumer-based' medicine has been a bust everywhere it has been tried."

Well, what about LASIK surgery, retail health clinics, concierge medicine, medical tourism and cosmetic surgery, to name just some of the successful "consumer-based" medical services?  

When we think about soaring health care costs in the United States, isn't one of the main reasons precisely because patients have NOT been treated as consumers spending their own money?  In that case, I think Krugman has it backwards.  If the goal is to control health care costs, that will never happen until patients are treated like consumers

Monday, April 18, 2011

Zac Brown and Jimmy Buffett

Jesse Jackson Jr. Blames The iPad For Killing Jobs

On the House floor back in March, holding an Apple iPad and an Amazon Kindle, Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. proclaimed "Let me be clear about a few things. These devices are revolutionizing our country — and they will fundamentally alter how we will educate our children." Now it looks like Rep. Jackson has flipped, and is blaming the iPad for being a jobs-killer:





Here's a great quote about this from Jonah Goldberg, "It’s not often one hears the case for Luddism made with so much earnestness and, not coincidentally, ignorance," in a post on the Enterprise Blog appropriately titled "Somewhere Ned Ludd is Smiling."

Friday, April 1, 2011

Julian Simon





U.S. Traffic Deaths Lowest Since 1949

Source: mjperry.blogspot.com

WASHINGTON -- "Americans spend more time behind the wheel of their cars than they ever have, but deaths from traffic accidents fell last year to levels not seen in more than 60 years, according to new information released Friday by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

The NHTSA estimated that 32,788 people died in accidents in the US, down by three percent from 2009 and hitting the lowest level since 1949 (see top chart). The agency estimated that Americans drove three trillion miles in 2010, up by more than 21 billion from 2009. Yet, the death rate per 100 million miles traveled dropped to 1.09 in 2010, down 25 percent from 2005 (see bottom chart)."

Sugar Cartel

From: mjperry.blogspot.com  


 The chart above shows that U.S. sugar prices have averaged twice the world price (28.1 cents per pound vs. 14.4 cents) since 1980 (data here), because of tariffs and quotas that restrict the amount of foreign sugar allowed to enter the U.S. and thereby protect domestic beet sugar producers against more efficient foreign producers of sugar cane.  I've estimated before that our sugar policy cost U.S. consumers of sugar $2.5 billion in 2009 and $4.5 billion in 2010.  


Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana) has introduced the "Free Sugar Act of 2011," which would "free Americans from government control of sugar prices," and "create a free market in sugar, free small businesses and consumers from paying government-inflated food prices, and free sugar producers from the commands of Washington."

Here's a recent op-ed by Sen. Lugar in the Washington Time titled "Sweet Deal for Big Sugar," where he writes:

"Our sugar policy imposes a hidden tax of billions of dollars annually on consumers and businesses and has destroyed thousands of U.S. manufacturing jobs. It substitutes the federal government for the private sector in basic decisions about buying and selling, supply and price.

This sweet deal for sugar producers is a sour one for consumers. Food and candy manufacturers are prominent victims, but also hurt are hundreds of thousands of small businesses, including bakeries, confectioners and restaurants. It makes no sense to place extra costs on small businesses, the main engines of job growth."

HT: Matt Bixler