Hillary unable to call McCain out on Economics

[Parkbandit]

Hillary needs to get SOME business experience.. or just TALK to a businessman.. before she tries this retarded plan:

Clinton targets oil profits with gas tax
Herald News Services
Published: Thursday, May 01, 2008
Hillary Clinton targeted oil companies that are "making out like bandits" on rising gasoline prices and said her proposed gas-tax moratorium was only the first step of a plan to end subsidies for producers.

Campaigning in Indiana, which holds its presidential primary May 6, Democrat Clinton said her role model in taking on the oil industry is Republican President Teddy Roosevelt.

"I have no illusions about how tough this will be," the New York senator told about 30 employees of a steel products manufacturer in South Bend. "But you've got to start somewhere."


Clinton also waded into the controversy over her rival Barack Obama's former pastor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, saying in a Fox News interview that the preacher's remarks about the U.S. were "offensive and outrageous."

She and Obama, an Illinois senator, are campaigning today and tomorrow in Indiana largely focused on economic issues. Indiana is a crucial state for Clinton, who is trailing Obama in the number of delegates needed for the nomination.

______________________________________

Did a Presidential nominee (abiet a longshot to win the nomination) just say that she believes she would have the right to just take profits from a private company? Come on.. is she really, REALLY this dumb?

[Gan]

Populism at its finest.

[Some Rogue]

I didn't really see her plan listed there...but it said she wants to cut the gas tax...the government is the one fucking taxing it, not the oil companies.

[ClydeR]

I understand how the gas tax holiday would reduce gasoline prices. But I don't understand how a windfall profits tax would help. It might be fun to stick it to the oil companies for a change, but it's hard to see how it would lower gas prices.

[CrystalTears]

I didn't really see her plan listed there...but it said she wants to cut the gas tax...the government is the one fucking taxing it, not the oil companies.

Yeah her plan is to remove the gas tax from the consumer and tax it to the oil companies, which IMO is a dumb idea. Just keep the taxes as they are. If you make the oil companies pay more, they'll just want to charge more. It won't make it any better.

[Some Rogue]

Lower price would just increase demand which would just drive the price back up. Also, this isn't limited to Hillary, Obama wants a windfall tax too.

[Stanley Burrell]

Yeah, she sucks.

[Parkbandit]

Lower price would just increase demand which would just drive the price back up. Also, this isn't limited to Hillary, Obama wants a windfall tax too.


I hadn't heard that Obama proposed the same thing, but I'm not surprised. All 3 are considered economic retards in my book.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<Lower price would just increase demand which would just drive the price back up.>>

Gas doesn't have a very elastic demand; the demand is going to stay the same (relatively), no matter what the cost is. Evidence: Gas prices are up a huge margin compared to before, and people are still buying it.

[Back]

I understand how the gas tax holiday would reduce gasoline prices. But I don't understand how a windfall profits tax would help. It might be fun to stick it to the oil companies for a change, but it's hard to see how it would lower gas prices.

I can’t believe I am doing this but she is talking about putting this nation on the same page. You mention it might be fun to stick it to the oil companies...

Hmm. As fun as they stick it to the middle class of the nation they profit from? Yep. Turnabout is fair play and this is just me talking but cry me a fucking river. Of gasoline.

[CrystalTears]

<<Lower price would just increase demand which would just drive the price back up.>>

Gas doesn't have a very elastic demand; the demand is going to stay the same (relatively), no matter what the cost is. Evidence: Gas prices are up a huge margin compared to before, and people are still buying it.
They may be still buying it, but because of the current costs, people are making daily changes to their lifestyle that would require them to use less of it, therefore, not as much of a demand.

[Bobmuhthol]

That's a lower QD, not a lower D. Demand will never go away for gasoline under our current system: all transportation requires it.

[Back]

The food you buy at the grocery requires it. Which means you pay for it.

[Danical]

Awesome pic sig, PB!

I have nothing else to contribute.

[CrystalTears]

Gas demand is still down in the last two months because of the current gas prices.

[Some Rogue]

Hmm, every article I've seen shows demand is down at least 4% over the last two months.

[Bobmuhthol]

1) Consumer demand might be down, but again, the real change is in quantity demanded, not demand. Nothing is completely inelastic, so 4% isn't exactly a counterpoint.
2) Industry demand can't go down.

[Back]

Hmm, every article I've seen shows demand is down at least 4% over the last two months.

Its April/May. Wait until June/July.

[Some Rogue]

Yeah, because in past years, there wasn't a bump in april/may consumption...oh wait, there was.

[Parkbandit]

Awesome pic sig, PB!

I have nothing else to contribute.

Thanks.. just got it done today for Age of Conan. BETA OPEN TODAY (When the fucking servers get back up) Unfortunately, I go to Ironman tonight.. so it'll be a late night and a long day tomorrow :(

[Some Rogue]

.. so it'll be a late night and a long day tomorrow :(

Old Country Buffet 4pm
Movie 5pm
Bed by 8pm
Wake 4am

yeah, sucks to be you.

[Parkbandit]

More like:

Dinner at 6
Stand in Ironman like at 7
Watch movie at 8
Get home at 10:45
Play AoC Beta until 2:00am
Get up at 6:00am

[thefarmer]

So what is there that can be done to help with gas prices? Anything short of say, invading the entire middle east and claiming the territory for the US...

[Renian]

1) Consumer demand might be down, but again, the real change is in quantity demanded, not demand. Nothing is completely inelastic, so 4% isn't exactly a counterpoint.
2) Industry demand can't go down.

When did you start taking economics?
+1

[Bobmuhthol]

<<When did you start taking economics?>>

Spring semester last year at Syracuse University.

[Parkbandit]

So what is there that can be done to help with gas prices? Anything short of say, invading the entire middle east and claiming the territory for the US...


Increase domestic production by raising current production levels as well as drilling in known reserves like the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska. Stop letting the environmentalist dictate our energy policy. Increase pressure on oil producing countries to increase their output or we start decreasing our aid to those countries. Give meaningful incentives instead of threats to oil companies to boost their production. Increase refinement of shale and coal into oil.

[Keller]

Gas is extremely inelastic. Tax the fuck out of it, save efficient markets!

[thefarmer]

Increase domestic production by raising current production levels as well as drilling in known reserves like the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska.

I thought that the majority of our domestically available oil falls under the 'reserve' category? Meaning that the idea was to use our own oil as a last resort (WW3 in the middle east or whatnot).


Stop letting the environmentalist dictate our energy policy.

How does this affect the rising cost of oil prices? The only way I'm familiar with is making oil companies refine their products in a 'cleaner' way.


Increase pressure on oil producing countries to increase their output or we start decreasing our aid to those countries.

Has this ever worked? Do we (US policymakers) have the balls to back that up if we threaten OPEC and they just jack up the prices more?



Give meaningful incentives instead of threats to oil companies to boost their production. Increase refinement of shale and coal into oil.

Don't they already get alot of incentives? Would giving them more really do that much?

[Gan]

<<Lower price would just increase demand which would just drive the price back up.>>

Gas doesn't have a very elastic demand; the demand is going to stay the same (relatively), no matter what the cost is. Evidence: Gas prices are up a huge margin compared to before, and people are still buying it.
People will still continue to buy until the trade off is eat or gas. Then adjustments (lifestyle) will be made such as a change in jobs, types of cars, etc. There is a utility threshold - and some people are already experiencing it, and changes are already evident in transitions of employment and consumption related activities (driving habits, vacations, vehicle changes, etc.) Yes, peope will still buy - but the quantity demanded will decrease.


They may be still buying it, but because of the current costs, people are making daily changes to their lifestyle that would require them to use less of it, therefore, not as much of a demand.
:yes:


That's a lower QD, not a lower D. Demand will never go away for gasoline under our current system: all transportation requires it.
QD? are you talking about overall quantity demanded (market demand) vs. individual demand? And all transportation does not require gasoline petrolium for fuel - I've already seen a few new LP stations pop up.


1) Consumer demand might be down, but again, the real change is in quantity demanded, not demand. Nothing is completely inelastic, so 4% isn't exactly a counterpoint.
2) Industry demand can't go down.
See question above. Industrial consumption of course will differ (industrial demand) but again - thats even more sensitive to consumer behaviors than personal (individual) consumption (demand), so here I disagree that industry demand cant go down... it can - and in a big way if we get to a point where price pushes out participation or shifts demand over to the next reasonable alternative (substitute good).

Its April/May. Wait until June/July.
wow - Backlash hit on the reporting lag with accuracy. Hold the phones!

So what is there that can be done to help with gas prices? Anything short of say, invading the entire middle east and claiming the territory for the US...
Consumption behavioral shift will help in minor ways. The largest impactor would be a strengthing dollar. Once the dollar recovers you'll see gas prices lower at a simliar rate.

Increase domestic production by raising current production levels as well as drilling in known reserves like the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska. Stop letting the environmentalist dictate our energy policy. Increase pressure on oil producing countries to increase their output or we start decreasing our aid to those countries. Give meaningful incentives instead of threats to oil companies to boost their production. Increase refinement of shale and coal into oil.
This is the interesting thing. Our current powers that be will always hold copious amounts of petrolium in reserve simply because it will be a national security matter if we ever run out of available fuel for the infrastructure needed to keep the government running or the country protected. And until technology catches up to the point where the new deeper oil field discoveries can be tapped at production rates - you wont see our reserves depleted as long as OPEC and other entities which are less than sympathetic to the US control those resources.


Gas is extremely inelastic. Tax the fuck out of it, save efficient markets!
Actually, I say tax the hell out of it simply for the accellerated effect it will have on the development and availability of substitute goods to petrolium fueled transportation.

[Mabus]

Has this ever worked? Do we (US policymakers) have the balls to back that up if we threaten OPEC and they just jack up the prices more?


A bushel of wheat for a barrel of oil.

Don't like the trade? Eat your fucking oil.


We could be filing complaints with the WTO, which most OPEC nations are members of. The oil producing nations meet for price-setting and production setting, and acting as a monoploy in an attempt to control prices.

I am not a WTO fan, but the same organization was used against us when we tried to tariff imported steel. I agreed with those tariffs, as I see steel production as a needed part of national security. We will not be able to order tanks from China if we are at war with them.

But the way we backed off the tariffs might show that no, we do not have "the balls" to stick to a trade war.

[Warriorbird]

Hillary and McCain are much the same on economics.

Their only principle is what gets them votes.

[ClydeR]

I can’t believe I am doing this but she is talking about putting this nation on the same page. You mention it might be fun to stick it to the oil companies...

Well they've certainly been sticking it to us. If you watch Bill O'Reilly, you know that he has been reporting on the oil companies' excessive profits for more than a year.

My problem is that I do not understand why a windfall profits tax would not lead to an increase in gas prices. Clinton may be correct that the tax would not increase gas prices, but she has yet to explain how that works. If you increase the oil companies' taxes, then the oil companies will increase the price of their products to offset their increased tax bill.

I would like to believe that Clinton is correct that there is a way to suspend the gas tax and force the oil companies to make up the lost tax revenue. That's what I would like to believe, but that's not how things work.

McCain wants a gas tax holiday but no windfall profits tax. Clinton wants both a gax tax holiday and a windfall profits tax. Obama wants a windfall profits tax but no gas tax holiday. I am concerned about how the windfall profits tax might affect the price I pay for gas. I couldn't care less about the gas tax holiday, because it's just a gimmick that will injure our infrastructure.

[Daniel]

Wrong.

The WTO can't force a country to produce a good.

Simply going balls to the walls on oil production is just as stupid too PB. It's very short sighted and won't fundamentally change the problems that are causing prices to get so high.

The best idea on these boards is to tax the every loving fuck out of it so that people will be forced to actually make changes.

In fact, that's what they did in Europe..guess who has better efficiency and is less dependent on oil? Now, guess who's currency is not hitting the shitter right now?

Hmm.

[Some Rogue]

It's a lot easier to be less dependant on oil when your country is 40 times or more smaller than the U.S. in land area and has about 1/5 or less the population.

[Daniel]

It's a lot easier to be less dependant on oil when your country is 40 times or more smaller than the U.S. in land area and has about 1/5 or less the population.

You know what's easy? Making gross exhaggerations to make a point.


Land mass of EU: 4,324,782 km&#178;

Landmass of US: 9.83 million km&#178;

So, 40 times or more smaller comes to about 2.


Population of EU: 498 Million

Population of America: 250 Million.

So about 1\5 of the population comes to about twice as much.

[Warriorbird]

Republicans luv math.

It's up there with Bush faulting the Democratic Congress for spending increases after 10 years of Republicans tripled spending and the massive spending hole that is Iraq.

[Tsa`ah]

Unfortunately removing a fuel tax does more harm and offers little relief ... and let's face it, 0.184/gal isn't going to offer much of a relief at all.

Not to mention that even if a suspension of the gas tax is agreed upon, that's only going to open the door for each state to reconsider their tax and likely hike it.

There isn't an immediate solution, there are only long term solutions that would have to be implemented in stages.

I'd say you ...

1. Suspend or eliminate all subsidies to the oil industry.
2. Suspend or eliminate all ag subsidies for fuel.
3. Increase the federal (petroleum) fuel taxes.
4. Use the capitol gained from subsidies elimination and petroleum fuel taxes and invest in a working and sensible renewable infrastructure.
a. Penalize the use staple crops for fuel
b. Limit acreage used for fuels
c. Mandate the use of alternative fuel crops and offer subsidies or tax incentives.
d. Enact legislation to remove zoning limitation in rural area that prohibit wind turbines.
e. Enact legislation to require every fueling station offer a bio fuel
f. Place requirements on tax breaks and subsidies to the automotive manufacturing sector to make bio-fueled vehicles readily available to consumers at prices on par with standard offerings.

This does a number of things to reduce the demand on fossil fuels and as such reduces utility costs urban areas, keeps food costs in check, and opens up a job market that isn't readily prone to out sourcing.

[Celephais]

My stance has always been to tax the fuck out of gas... really tax the fuck out of it, 150% or whatever, make gas $10 a gallon. It'll hurt like balls to fill that tank, but you won't be driving two towns over because you like the hot chick at the subway there better than the one down the street you could have walked to.

The gas companies will have to respond by lowering the price if they don't want people to seriously change their habits and figure out alternatives.

Use the extra money to fix this shit in whatever acceptable method there is. (I might have some "methods" I think would help, but I'm not going to bother listing any because it'd detrace from my main point... and idiots like to grasp onto any part of an idea ignoring the main point).

[Parkbandit]

You know what's easy? Making gross exhaggerations to make a point.


Land mass of EU: 4,324,782 km²

Landmass of US: 9.83 million km²

So, 40 times or more smaller comes to about 2.


Population of EU: 498 Million

Population of America: 250 Million.

So about 1\5 of the population comes to about twice as much.


I didn't realize we can now make all of Europe into one country now. You make them sound like States in one country, instead of individual countries under an economic agreement.

[Daniel]

I didn't realize we can now make all of Europe into one country now. You make them sound like States in one country, instead of individual countries under an economic agreement.

Which changes, what, in regards to oil consumption?

[Back]

Well they've certainly been sticking it to us.

Getting off the oil teat is in our best interest. Unless you love Saudi teat...

When the oil companies tell you differently, its not free-market capitalism, its self preservation. Invest green and we are all good to go until the asteroid comes. Then we should all invest in asteroid-defense systems.

[Keller]

Getting off the oil teat is in our best interest. Unless you love Saudi teat...

When the oil companies tell you differently, its not free-market capitalism, its self preservation. Invest green and we are all good to go until the asteroid comes. Then we should all invest in asteroid-defense systems.

What would Stanley say?

[Tisket]

What would Stanley say?


We wouldn't understand.

[Tisket]

Stan sent me a pm recently titled "ah". It consisted of one word: "agh". No fucking idea what it means.

I am going to save it. Everyone needs a little mystery.

[Keller]

We wouldn't understand.


That was my subtle way of saying, "Backlash, I don't like jumping on the bandwagon because I want to be nice to you -- but you're fucking retarded."

[Apathy]

I hadn't heard that Obama proposed the same thing, but I'm not surprised. All 3 are considered economic retards in my book.

McCain and Clinton are in favor of a suspension of the fed. gas tax while Obama opposes it.

- the more I see about Obama's and McCain's economics the more I'm beginning to think that the true 'lesser evil' really is Obama.

[Gan]

That was my subtle way of saying, "Backlash, I don't like jumping on the bandwagon because I want to be nice to you -- but you're fucking retarded."
:rofl:

[Tisket]

That was my subtle way of saying, "Backlash, I don't like jumping on the bandwagon because I want to be nice to you -- but you're fucking retarded."

The "bandwagon" has been expanded. It can now support the population of a small city.

I do keep hoping he would post something that would warrant defending but it's not happening :(

[Miscast]

Didn't this bitch already statistically lose months ago?

[Some Rogue]

You know what's easy? Making gross exhaggerations to make a point.


Land mass of EU: 4,324,782 km&#178;

Landmass of US: 9.83 million km&#178;

So, 40 times or more smaller comes to about 2.


Population of EU: 498 Million

Population of America: 250 Million.

So about 1\5 of the population comes to about twice as much.

I was obviously comparing individual countries.

Wooooosh


Republicans luv math.

Retard

[Daniel]

I was obviously comparing individual countries.


Retard

I was obviously referring to Europe.

[Miscast]

Getting off the oil teat is in our best interest. Unless you love Saudi teat...

When the oil companies tell you differently, its not free-market capitalism, its self preservation. Invest green and we are all good to go until the asteroid comes. Then we should all invest in asteroid-defense systems.
>prep 525

[Clove]

Dropping the gas taxes under the guise of economic relief is a foolish idea. As has already been said, it will fail to provide any significant relief while it succeeds in choking needed tax revenue.

Tax the fuck out of gas.

Gas is inelastic because there aren't any significant substitutions.

As long as gas is convenient (too cheap) there won't be any interest in creating substitutions. Businesses won't invest enough to make them viable and consumers won't demand them.

Tax the fuck out of gas until our consumption shrinks enough for domestic oil supplies to adequately meet demand.

[Back]

That was my subtle way of saying, "Backlash, I don't like jumping on the bandwagon because I want to be nice to you -- but you're fucking retarded."

Ok, professor Keller. Whats your take on the whole thing?

[Keller]

Ok, professor Keller. Whats your take on the whole thing?

There are people with billions of dollars of capital that are willing to THROW it at any reasonable "alternative" to oil. It's obviously going to be the next major movement for capital accumulation. If you figure out how to replace oil, you'll be a VERY wealthy man.

To say something like "Getting off the oil teat is in our best interest. Unless you love Saudi teat... When the oil companies tell you differently, its not free-market capitalism, its self preservation. Invest green and we are all good to go until the asteroid comes" as if you've got some novel idea makes you look retarded.

I don't know how oil companies tell us it's in our best interest to suckle the oil teat and further, I don't know a single person who believes them even if they do. Free-market capitalism is what happens everyday when people put billions of dollars into research and development for alternative energy sources. People with more skill, knowledge, and ambition than any of us dedicate their lives to that. And to have you say some ignorant shit like, "let's invest green and get off the oil teat" as if it's not fucking common knowledge makes me :facepalm:

[Parkbandit]

I was obviously referring to Europe.


No shit Sherlock.. but I'm fairly sure Some Rogue wasn't. Maybe when you are responding to someone's post, you should actually respond to what they post, instead of something even you knew he wasn't referring to.

[Daniel]

No shit Sherlock.. but I'm fairly sure Some Rogue wasn't. Maybe when you are responding to someone's post, you should actually respond to what they post, instead of something even you knew he wasn't referring to.

I'm pretty sure I was referring to Europe when Some Rogue responded to me. So, how's that foot taste there buddy?

[Keller]

I'm pretty sure I was referring to Europe when Some Rogue responded to me. So, how's that foot taste there buddy?

This is where, if he was a reasonable human being, PB would say he was wrong.

But rabid dogs don't admit inaccuracy. They post jpegs.

[Daniel]

This is where, if he was a reasonable human being, PB would say he was wrong.

But rabid dogs don't admit inaccuracy. They post jpegs.

:rofl:

[landy]

It still suprises me when people are suprised by Hillary's lack of political depth. Despite our current hardships, people are still willing to vote for a name rather than the person wearing it.

[Parkbandit]

I'm pretty sure I was referring to Europe when Some Rogue responded to me. So, how's that foot taste there buddy?

Dipshit.. hope I don't lose you, but here it goes. Read it slowly, maybe you will keep up:

1) Some Rogue posts about size of US vs. Size of individual countries in Europe.

2) You say "U R DUM, EUROPE R BIGGER THAN 40x SMALLER"

Here's where you clearly got lost before, so pay the fuck attention... Some Rogue was referring to individual countries in Europe.. those being places like France, Germany, Spain... understand? NOT THE ENTIRE CONTINENT.. JUST THE INDIVIDUAL COUNTRIES.

I really hope that clears it up for you.

[Parkbandit]

It still suprises me when people are suprised by Hillary's lack of political depth. Despite our current hardships, people are still willing to vote for a name rather than the person wearing it.

Of the 3.. who has more? It's debatable that McCain does.. but Obama certainly doesn't.

[Keller]

Dipshit.. hope I don't lose you, but here it goes. Read it slowly, maybe you will keep up:

1) Some Rogue posts about size of US vs. Size of individual countries in Europe.

2) You say "U R DUM, EUROPE R BIGGER THAN 40x SMALLER"

Here's where you clearly got lost before, so pay the fuck attention... Some Rogue was referring to individual countries in Europe.. those being places like France, Germany, Spain... understand? NOT THE ENTIRE CONTINENT.. JUST THE INDIVIDUAL COUNTRIES.

I really hope that clears it up for you.

:epic facepalm:

[Parkbandit]

Let me guess.. Keller responding to one of my posts?

Like a fucking comic book.. with 1 page.

Seriously.. I'm beginning to think I really hurt your feelings. Let it go man. Your wife will be home soon.. hopefully this will alleviate your need to stalk me.

[Back]

There are people with billions of dollars of capital that are willing to THROW it at any reasonable "alternative" to oil. It's obviously going to be the next major movement for capital accumulation. If you figure out how to replace oil, you'll be a VERY wealthy man.

To say something like "Getting off the oil teat is in our best interest. Unless you love Saudi teat... When the oil companies tell you differently, its not free-market capitalism, its self preservation. Invest green and we are all good to go until the asteroid comes" as if you've got some novel idea makes you look retarded.

I don't know how oil companies tell us it's in our best interest to suckle the oil teat and further, I don't know a single person who believes them even if they do. Free-market capitalism is what happens everyday when people put billions of dollars into research and development for alternative energy sources. People with more skill, knowledge, and ambition than any of us dedicate their lives to that. And to have you say some ignorant shit like, "let's invest green and get off the oil teat" as if it's not fucking common knowledge makes me :facepalm:

Of course. I suppose I should post a little more seriously... but then again, this is the PC.

[landy]

Of the 3.. who has more? It's debatable that McCain does.. but Obama certainly doesn't.

This is why I'm not a fan of the way our media covers elections, and henceforth the way our politicians run their campaigns. Politicians rarely run on their policy, preferring instead to wage character war and trusting in campaign managers to dig up more harmful garbage than their opponents get on them.

[Mabus]

Politicians rarely run on their policy, preferring instead to wage character war and trusting in campaign managers to dig up more harmful garbage than their opponents get on them.
You really cannot blame McCain or Clinton for Wright or the "clinging to guns and religion" comment.

You cannot blame Obama or McCain for "dodging sniper fire" comments or a uncontrollable husband making comments.

You cannot blame Clinton or Obama for "I’m not an expert on the economy" or "100 years" comments.

Policy only goes so far. Judgement, character and ability to lead and inspire are also major parts of what a president should show.

[Daniel]

Dipshit.. hope I don't lose you, but here it goes. Read it slowly, maybe you will keep up:

1) Some Rogue posts about size of US vs. Size of individual countries in Europe.

2) You say "U R DUM, EUROPE R BIGGER THAN 40x SMALLER"

Here's where you clearly got lost before, so pay the fuck attention... Some Rogue was referring to individual countries in Europe.. those being places like France, Germany, Spain... understand? NOT THE ENTIRE CONTINENT.. JUST THE INDIVIDUAL COUNTRIES.

I really hope that clears it up for you.

Seriously. Are you retarded? Go back and re-read the thread. SLOWLY. Then come back to me.

[Some Rogue]

Europe, that could mean the EU, that could mean all the individual countries of Europe....Guess which one I chose it to mean?

[Daniel]

Neither?

The *smallest* of those entities, all of Europe and the EU, is what I quoted.

I said EUROPE and I specifically refered to the EURO, not GERMANY or FRANCE.

It's an irrelevant point in any case; Europe is not dependent on oil because they do something about it, not because they are a loose federation of economically aligned countries.


France has just as much power to levy a tax on its citizens as Mississippi. In fact, if you want to get technical...they have even less.

So what's the excuse?