¡Bienvenido a los Foros de Univision! Participa, intercambia mensajes privados, sube tus fotos y forma parte de nuestra Comunidad. | Ingresa | Regístrate Gratis
Mensajes: 90,636
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: Obama’s Complete and Utter Stupidity

Obama's Canadian Pipeline Blunder

By John Donaldson, MD

   President Obama and his advisers seriously misread the effect of the delay of the Keystone XL pipeline.  The alternative Northern Gateway pipeline is not a dream, but close to a reality which can ship oil to China and expand the use of B.C. Natural Gas.

   The Keystone XL proposal would build a pipeline from the tar sands of Northern Alberta through Southern Saskatchewan into Montana and south to the Texas Gulf for end use of the recovered crude oil.  Its ultimate capacity would be 900,000 barrels per day and would significantly reduce imports to the USA from OPEC nations, none of which can be considered friendly or stable, making American energy supply and prices hostage to the whims of international politics.

  With a major voter support group opposing the construction of Keystone from the Canadian border to refineries on the Gulf Coast, Obama again voted "present" on the issue, delaying any decision on permitting its construction until after the next election.  The foremost vocal opponents were the environmentalists, who continue to proclaim that this pipeline poses a threat to an aquifer in Nebraska, that the tar sands oil is "dirty," and that any hydrocarbon-based energy production contributes to global warming and/or climate change.

   Currently, the Keystone Phase 1 pipeline is completed and able to deliver crude from the tar sands to Patoka, IL and refineries at Wood River, IL.  A side branch delivers crude to Cushing, OK for distribution to refineries in Kansas and Oklahoma via Keystone Phase 3.    The line is capable of supplying 435,000 barrels daily.  An interactive map can be found.  Note that if all four phases are completed, the USA would receive 1.3 million barrels per day from a stable neighbor.


It is no secret that China is energy-hungry.  Anyone who has visited China, particularly in the cooler months, can testify that they have no interest in subscribing to any of the global warming fraud.  They are pursuing energy worldwide, including via the tar sands, where they have invested around $15 billion, mostly through their government arm PetroChina.

    To get that oil to their market will require a pipeline to the Canadian West Coast, specifically Kitimat, British Columbia from a terminal near Edmonton.

  Plans are well underway for Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline to build two parallel lines, an eastbound 20-inch line to bring "condensate" B.C. natural gas to the terminal to dilute the viscosity of the heavy crude, thereby facilitating transmission via the westbound 36-inch line for transshipment via supertanker to China.  Around 500,000 barrels per day will be exported and inject roughly $20 billion per year into the Canadian economy.


If the USA is center-right-leaning, Canada would be centrist in nature.  Prime Minister Stephen Harper is an Albertan and a Conservative in a country where that means about the same as a RINO in the USA.  Harper represents a Calgary West riding, the oil capital of Canada, often referred to as Houston North.  An economist professionally, he has been prime minister since 2006, the first five years walking the tightrope of minority government.  In 2011, Canadians rewarded him with a majority government in return for turning around the economy by cutting spending and government debt without gutting the social programs.  Harper did this in the face of the entire opposition to his left.

   Traditionally, Canadians have welcomed politicians who conduct themselves in a nationalistic fashion and who avoid being labeled as lackeys of the USA or accusations of turning Canada into the 51st state (58th for Obama).  Pierre Elliot Trudeau was a perfect example of a politician who was essentially anti-American, while Brian Mulroney was considered part of Wall Street.

    Harper, on the other hand, has pursued a Canada First policy and has led Canada to be Israel's number-one supporter with absolutely no apologies to Obama.  He has pursued policies which strengthen economic ties outside the USA-Canada relationship.  He has refused to jump on the global warming bandwagon.  Rejecting any "obligatory" sale to the U.S. in favor of China will substantially strengthen Harper politically without public fanfare.

Harper has kept control of the Northern Gateway Pipeline in federal hands.  The Liberal British Columbia premier probably welcomed the chance to dodge the issue given the province's California Lite reputation, the need for job creation, and the development of B.C. energy resources the project will bring.

The pipeline has the backing of some of the more outspoken members of the environmental lobby.

The tar sands contain about 1.7 trillion barrels of recoverable oil.  Obama has again opted out of energy independence, as he did on the Gulf development and all the other energy projects that would make U.S.-recovered hydrocarbons available domestically.  His non-decision has demonstrably treated Canada as a client-state while catering to the Green base of his own party.

   Politically, the decision defies logic without a presumption of the president and his inner circle as radical leftists.  Obama killed the project in the face of support from organized labor that envisioned 20,000 construction jobs and over 100,000 spin-off jobs which are likely to be permanently lost.  The environmentalist left have nowhere else to go next November, while labor needs something to offer its unemployed members, who are the most likely voters to stray from the Democratic plantation.

   Obama's message to Canada was, "Be good little children and wait until our election is over!"  His advisers certainly misread the Canadian mindset.  Harper is not going to stand around and wait for a leftist U.S. politician to determine Canadian economic development.  Canada has a valuable product to sell and a hungry Chinese economy willing to purchase it.  He has a pipeline project that is viable financially and safe environmentally ready to go to the coast.

  There is talk about a new route to the USA to the west of the Nebraska aquifer, but at best this is to keep labor at bay, given the huge job loss from shelving the project.  By the time that project would be approved, Canada could build the Kitimat route and, if supertanker dock space is available, double the line to 900,000 barrels per day.

   Personally, I would love to see Harper build a series of refineries and coal-fired power plants along the American border from Alberta to Ontario and ship the finished products of electricity and refined petroleum products to the USA.  That might just prove to be a great "Envirowacko-Free" outlet for the North Dakota oil and gas, as well as additional Canadian production, circumventing the EPA and other radical hindrances to American energy development by reversing the energy flow.

Dr. Donaldson is a dual citizen of Canada and the USA and practices in Florida.

Mensajes: 90,636
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: Obama’s Complete and Utter Stupidity

On a $4M Vacation, Michelle Seeks $3 From Backers

by Keith Koffler on December 30, 2011


Speaking from her paradisical $4 million Hawaii vacation, Mrs. Obama wants to know: Do any of President Obama’s supporters have $3 to spare for his reelection?

This is approximately like coming upon Warren Buffett on a street corner with a McDonald’s cup asking if he can have 15 cents.

Michelle’s request was part of an email sent to the Obama 2012 list today.

Over the next 11 months we’ve got an organization to grow, voters to register, and people to get fired up.

I hope you’ll close out this year by donating $3 or more now to help make sure we’re ready for the next one . . .

Thank you so much, and happy new year,



The obscene juxtaposition of the first lady on a $4 million vacation while asking what would have to be middle to low income earners for three bucks – who else would they be targeting with such an appeal? – is yet another example of lack of perspective the Obamas seem to be gaining while in power.

Mrs. Obama takes extravagant vacations to Spain and southern Africa. The president golfs obsessively and is currently dining at Honolulu’s ritziest restaurants. All while asking their fellow Americans to “sacrifice” during this time of not plenty.

And they blow $4 million – mostly taxpayers’ money – on a vacation, while wondering if the small people can come up with $3.

What about renting a beach house next year at the Jersey shore? I mean, if we’re all going to sacrifice.



For the first time in my life, I am really proud of this country.

"Let the little people eat their peas, right Barry? Someone want to pass some more of that $100/lb Wagyu Beef?"
Mensajes: 90,636
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: Obama’s Complete and Utter Stupidity


Mises, Rothbard, Hayek... por fin en Bachillerato

Por Juan Ramón Rallo

Para bien o para mal, bachilleres y universitarios se han acostumbrado a estudiar las distintas materias curriculares a través de vistosos y coloridos manuales. Dejada atrás la época de la abundante y fría letra de los tratados, el vehículo de divulgación educativa por excelencia son en la actualidad los libros de texto.

Hasta la fecha, la Escuela Austriaca carecía de un manual de Introducción a la Economía que contuviera y estructurara la mayoría de sus ricas aportaciones de acuerdo con los planes de estudio vigentes. Muchos han sido quienes a lo largo de los últimos años ha demandado que algún economista con ganas, tiempo y conocimientos emprendiera esta fundamental tarea para transmitir y difundir, en un formato agradable y convalidable al de otros manuales, las en ocasiones complejas teorías de Mises, Rothbard o Hayek.

Afortunadamente, ese indudable vacío ya queda cubierto de manera exitosa con esta obra de Jordi Franch Parella, supervisada por Jesús Huerta de Soto y publicada por Unión Editorial. A lo largo de 16 unidades temáticas, trufadas de imágenes en color, cuadros-resumen, actividades y ejercicios de repaso, el doctor Franch Parella expone los principales temas que debe conocer todo aquel que desee introducirse en el apasionante mundo de la ciencia económica: los distintos agentes que intervienen en un sistema productivo, la organización interna de las empresas, la interacción de consumidores y productores en el mercado, la rivalidad competitiva entre las compañías, la determinación de los precios de los bienes de consumo y de los factores productivos, la existencia o no de fallos del mercado, los principales problemas macroeconómicos –como las crisis, la inflación o el desempleo–, el papel que desempeñan los bancos, el comercio internacional o los fundamentos del crecimiento y el desarrollo a largo plazo.

Aunque personalmente sigo prefiriendo que la visión y el aprendizaje general de la Economía se obtenga a través de tratados exhaustivos que muestren a través únicamente del texto argumentativo las muy diversas interrelaciones del sistema económico, no parece haber incompatibilidad alguna ­­­­–más bien, bastantes complementariedades– entre los tratados clásicos al uso y este libro de profesor Franch Parella. Es más, puede que en muchos casos la llama del interés por la ciencia económica no llegue a prender con fuerza a menos que la carta de presentación sea un manual como éste.

Pero, más allá de la utilidad que la obra posea para despertar el interés y fortalecer el conocimiento sobre la economía austriaca para el público general, su otra gran ventaja es que, como hemos indicado, cumple con las directrices y requisitos básicos para superar de manera exitosa la prueba de Selectividad, de modo que puede emplearse en todos aquellos institutos de enseñanza superior que así lo deseen. El doctor Franch Parella posee una dilatada experiencia docente no sólo en la enseñanza universitaria, sino también en la preuniversitaria, esto es, en bachillerato y los ciclos formativos. Es por ello que este libro se ha redactado pensando en la labor que deben desempeñar en el día a día tanto el profesor como el alumno.

Confiemos, pues, en que este texto se convierta en una herramienta de trabajo habitual de todos aquellos profesores y estudiantes de bachillerato (o incluso, en cierto modo, de primer curso de universidad) que deseen ofrecer y recibir una visión de la economía más realista y ligada al empresario. Nuestra libertad y nuestra prosperidad sin duda lo agradecerían enormemente en el largo plazo.


JORDI FRANCH PARELLA: ECONOMÍA. Unión Editorial (Madrid), 2012, 400 páginas.



Mensajes: 90,636
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: Obama’s Complete and Utter Stupidity

Crecen deportaciones bajo la Administración Obama – Univision


En los tres últimos años fiscales, el gobierno del Presidente Barack Obama ha quebrado récords con la deportación de casi 1.2 millón de de inmigrantes indocumentados, de acuerdo con cifras del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional (DHS). Con esta cifra, Obama ha deportado más latinos que todos los presidentes estadounidenses anteriores. El mensaje a los hispanos: ¿Votar para que te boten?


Mensajes: 90,636
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: Obama’s Complete and Utter Stupidity

Mensajes: 90,636
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: Obama’s Complete and Utter Stupidity

A Cynical Process: Part II

(Thomas Sowell on Obama's reelection)
Creators Syndicate ^ | May 1, 2012 | Thomas Sowell



A small headline in the 2nd section of the Wall Street Journal last week told a bigger story than a lot of front page banner headlines. It said, "U.S. Firms Add Jobs, but Mostly Overseas."

Just as there is no free lunch, there is no free class warfare. Some people may be inspired by President Obama's talk about making "the rich" pay their undefined "fair share" of taxes, or taking away corporations' "tax breaks." But talk is not always cheap. It can be very costly to those working people who are looking for jobs that the Obama administration's anti-business policies are driving overseas.

According to the Wall Street Journal, "Thirty-five big U.S.-based multinational companies added jobs much faster than other U.S. employers in the past two years, but nearly three-fourths of those jobs were overseas." All these companies have at least 50,000 employees, so we are talking about a lot of jobs for foreigners with American companies overseas.

If the Wall Street Journal can figure this out, it seems certain that the President of the United States has economic advisers who can figure out the same thing. But that does not mean that the president is interested in the same thing.

In this, as in so much else, Barack Obama is interested in Barack Obama. Whatever bad effects his policies may have for others, those policies have had a track record of political success for many politicians in many places.

To put it bluntly, killing the goose that lays the golden egg is a viable political strategy, provided the goose doesn't die before the next election. In this case, the goose simply lays its golden eggs somewhere else, so there is no political danger to President Obama.

Unemployment may remain a problem to many Americans, but that only provides another occasion for the Obama administration to show its "compassion" with extended unemployment benefits, more food stamps and various interventions to save home buyers from mortgage foreclosure. This can easily be a winning political strategy.

Franklin D. Roosevelt won his biggest landslide victory after his first term in office, during which the unemployment rate was never less than twice what it has been under Barack Obama.

The "smart money" inside the Beltway says that a high unemployment rate spells doom at the polls for a president. But history says that people who are getting government handouts tend to vote for whoever is doing the handing out.

The Obama administration has turned this into a handout state that breaks all previous records. Lofty rhetoric about "stimulus," "shovel-ready projects," "green jobs" or "investment" in "the industries of the future" all give political cover to what is plain old handouts to people who are likely to vote to re-elect Obama.

At the local level as well, history shows that some of the most successful politicians have been people who ruined the local economy and chased job-creating businesses away. Mayor Coleman Young of Detroit in the 1970s and 1980s was not worried when affluent whites began moving out of the city in response to his policies, because they were people who were likely to vote against him if they stayed.

Of course they took their taxes, their investment money and the jobs they created with them. But that was Detroit's problem, not Coleman Young's problem. Barack Obama may win re-election by turning the United States into Detroit writ large.

Something similar happened in earlier times, when James Michael Curley served 4 terms as mayor of Boston, and 2 terms in prison. As the non-Irish left the city, in response to Curley's policies, that increased Curley's likelihood of being re-elected.

This kind of cynical politics is even more likely to succeed when political opponents fail to articulate their case to the public. And Republicans are notorious for neglecting articulation.

The phrase "tax cuts for the rich" has been repeated endlessly by Democrats without one Republican that I know of saying, "Folks, I don't lie awake at night worrying about millionaires' tax problems. Millionaires have lawyers and accountants who get paid to do that. But I do worry about jobs being lost to millions of American workers because we make the business climate here worse than in other countries. That's a high price to pay for rhetoric."

The case can be made. But somebody has to make the case.