Tuesday, July 7, 2009

Where Are The Tea Parties Now?

So, when taxes go up by some 3%, all the conservatives (as well as a few white supremacists and anti-Semites) gather together to pretend they are patriotic. Never mind that said tax dollars would go to paying to get the country out of the recession that the Bush administration left us in, as well as annoying little things like police, firefighters, snow plowing, and social services, to name but a few things.

But when the power company wants to raise their rates by 7%, just so that they can maintain their profit margin and keep their already wealthy CEOs and stakeholders wealthy, these "patriots" are nowhere to be seen.

17 comments:

  1. You've hit the most ulcer inducing story of the day. We are told to conserve, so we conserve, and now because we conserved, we will have to pay 7% more for less.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It is pretty asinine for you to link the tea baggers to this. I highly doubt that any of them approve of this. If anything, your buddy Doyle is the one that gives companiesthe green light to shaft us this hard.

    Not only that, but this story broke about ten hours ago. Not really musch time to orgamnize a protest you silly, simple thinking lib!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Did you even read the article?

    "The rate case is one of several that will be ruled on by late this year by the state Public Service Commission. The three members of the commission, all appointed by Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle, will be deciding rate cases for all five investor-owned utilities at a time when the 2010 gubernatorial campaign is likely to be off and running."

    Your team really has some misdirected frustration... you, Schmitz, and Jay constantly harping on conservatives while your frustration should be directed to the team you helped elect that keeps bending you over a table.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Publius-

    It is not the PSC that is looking for the raise, it is the power company. Their reason? They want to preserve their profit margins.

    What is so hard to understand?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Your Doyle appointed PSC has to approve the rate increase. Still confused?

    ReplyDelete
  6. It's Schmitz here.

    capper makes an undeniable point. Taxes have hardly kept up with inflation and yet you on the rad right are mute when you take it up the behind from the private side of the economy. A buck out of your pocket is a buck out of your pocket, whether it is vacuumed out by a company or by the government.

    There are so many ways we can pick this apart. I've got a theory, to be explained over beers.

    ReplyDelete
  7. See, that is why reading is fundamental. I wrote that the power company WANTS to raise the rates.

    Capiche?

    ReplyDelete
  8. And Heaven forbid We-Energies fulfill their fiduciary responsibilities to their shareholders!

    How many We-Energies union retirees and pensioners do you think would like to see a dividend paid this year compared to the losses they've incurred to date from the weak economy?

    ReplyDelete
  9. So shareholders are more important than you or me? Sorry, I'd rather get something more for my money, than knowing I kept a wealthy person wealthy.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Or a pensioner secure in their retirement? Way to speak for the little guy. You do realize that over 60 percent of American household own some form of investment, right? And without those rich guys, whose going to fund your social programs?

    And Schmitz, the adults are having a conversation here...

    "Taxes have hardly kept up with inflation"

    Are you effing kidding me? Do you actually believe what you are saying? Between bonding and the growth of government (which HAS to be funded by taxes either today or tomorrow), taxes FAR outstrip the growth of inflation.

    Do you just plug your ears and cover your eyes when every expert - including those inside the Obama administration - say that we are running perilous levels of debt?

    ReplyDelete
  11. The reasoning presented by the utility was not to preserve the pensioners' pensions. It was to preserve their profit margin.

    And if it came down to the two, I think you're bright enough to know which side I'd come down on.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Apparently not the pensioners who worked their whole lives to amass a nest egg comprised of WE stock options and other investment vehicles. And like teachers, I'm sure they exchanged other fringe benefits for the reassurance of a sound retirement.

    Frankly, I'm surprised. As a would-be pensioner yourself, you should recognize those concerns, but, your remark, "The reasoning presented by the utility was not to preserve the pensioners' pensions. It was to preserve their profit margin," shows that you lack a modicum of understanding how stock, investments, and compound interest works.

    And that's too bad, because it is what feeds your class warfare dogma and forsakes the very constituency that you allege to be looking out for.

    Your remarks here are illustrative of the timeless conundrum that contemporary liberalism always faces: competing self interests in a vacuum of ideology. Take a look at, for example, the teacher's union fighting against the autism insurance mandate in Madison because it will cause the cost of their healthcare benefits to increase substantially. But ultimately, the class warriors won out because to them, they made the political calculus that it was more important to pander to mommies and stick it to "Big Insurance" than to protect the very people who delivered Democrats to power, the teachers. "Teachers. The new black voter - after all, who else are they going to vote for...?"

    ReplyDelete
  13. Frankly, I don't buy into the "We get our profits or the pensioners get it in the back" mentality. The retired workers worked their lives in agreement for their pensions.

    That is a contract issue. Unless the shareholders bought their stock with a guarantee of a certain percentage profit, they are taking a chance.

    Sometimes they win, sometimes they lose.

    It is not as if the utility is not going to make a profit, they just want to make sure they get theirs, and screw the consumer to do so.

    BTW, regarding taxes vs. profits, I can vouch that the taxes on the northern castle dropped $200 in '09. Meanwhile, the electricity went up $600 (same or less usage, mind you) and propane went up another $700.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "Meanwhile, the electricity went up $600"
    Damn, that is a castle if you are using that much electrcity. For me, in Vegas, that $600 is about 7 months of electicity for my 3 bedroom apartment, including the summer months.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Dan-

    In my comment, I pointed out that we are using the same, or often less, electricity than the previous year. They jacked up their rates by 50%.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Power Companies in this country, while private are heavily regulated by the government, which has pretty much driven any sort of competition out of the market and allowed a monopoly to exist. A big thank you to big government. That's the true consequence of government. They hinder the natural market and allow only big businesses to thrive.

    You know what they say, you gotta pay to play.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Power companies will raise their rates no matter what. They raise it saying too many people are using electricity, and supply cannot meet demand. When people cut back and conserve, they now ask for another raise because people aren't using enough to maintain the luxurious lifestyles of their CEOs and stockholders.

    But glad to see you, Anonymous, are willing to put profit before people.

    ReplyDelete