BajaNomad - GAS PAINS.......ONE POSSIBLE EXPLAINATION

GAS PAINS.......ONE POSSIBLE EXPLAINATION

DENNIS - 1-6-2017 at 07:09 PM

If this is repeatedly redundant, forgive me.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/01/02/mexico-de...

Skipjack Joe - 1-6-2017 at 08:36 PM

Nothing that a Tums tablet couldn't fix.

Gulliver - 1-7-2017 at 07:43 AM

Since the year I started coming down here in 69, the government has seldom been distinguishable from a criminal conspiracy.

It's a bit better at the local level as the local cops are part of the communities so there are some limits to their behavior.

A far deeper problem is the lack of any sort of a progressive tax system that actually yields any money from the sometimes rather well to do.

Generally the richer you are the more you are subsidized by the government. (Gee! Sound like at home.) Got money? You get the street fixed in front of your house.

Gas prices don't matter much at all to me but they sure affect the panga fishermen! And a shortage stops them dead. They have no resources or facilities to store any significant quantity of fuel.

I'm a guest here and I try to be a good one. Refuse change much of the time. Pay top dollar for workers. Tip generously.

I get cranky with a few of my neighbors who whine about what I pay. "Ohh! You'll drive up their expectations!" Like $3.50 an hour is going to feed much of a drug habit?

I'm a violent opponent of predatory capitalism but in my 73 years I have never seen a centrally planned economy work. Life is too complicated.

Enough snorting and complaining. Time to go riding.

chuckie - 1-7-2017 at 07:55 AM

Good read Dennis....I agree with most all of it...Thanks

Nashville Frank - 1-7-2017 at 08:46 AM

Thanks Dennis! Great article. When you add this to the selling off of nearly a $billion USA to stabilize the Peso, this week, you see Mexico is serious about their economic woes.

I wonder if it wouldn't be better to use their refineries more and then sell the good stuff instead of the crude? It would require an investment in more machinery, but it would provide jobs, and bring in more money than the crude. Thus getting more money to the people. Or, most likely, that money may just stay in the pockets of big oil, so no go!

DENNIS - 1-7-2017 at 09:19 AM

Quote: Originally posted by Nashville Frank

I wonder if it wouldn't be better to use their refineries more and then sell the good stuff instead of the crude? It would require an investment in more machinery, but it would provide jobs, and bring in more money than the crude. Thus getting more money to the people. Or, most likely, that money may just stay in the pockets of big oil, so no go!

I believe there's a compound problem here, Frank. Mexico doesn't [as they claim] have money for an upgrade of the oil infrastructure.
Add to that, the emotional outcry from the citizenry to avoid foreign investment in the oil industry. It wouldn't go well, especially on Expropriation Day. Throwing out the foreigners was and is a national symbol.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_oil_expropriation

Nashville Frank - 1-7-2017 at 09:31 AM

Quote: Originally posted by DENNIS

You are correct. I know of this xenophobic tradition, I learned about in my school boy days in California. But its not healthy.

Didn't it also lead to the ejido land structure that gives everyone fits?

DENNIS - 1-7-2017 at 10:59 AM

Same president, same left of everything solutions........government control of everything.

Mo Mex Woes on the Way

MrBillM - 1-7-2017 at 05:06 PM

Wait until they get the Bill for the Wall.

Gulliver - 1-7-2017 at 05:09 PM

As of noon today 1-7-17 all stations in Santa Rosalia are pumping with no lines.

DENNIS - 1-7-2017 at 05:26 PM

Maybe they didn't get the memo? :lol:

monoloco - 1-8-2017 at 10:20 AM

The article doesn't take into account that 1/3 of the fuel price in Mexico is taxes. The country is taxed to death, much of which goes to line the pockets of corrupt politicians, if they really wanted to get their fiscal house in order, they would tackle that problem, instead of constantly trying to squeeze more out of the people.

DENNIS - 1-8-2017 at 12:45 PM

Well...I don't get it. The price of gas goes in two directions. Part goes to the station franchisee....a large part in fact, to make their investment profitable, as well as encourage new investment in station franchises, making station operation unnecessary for Pemex,...and the second part goes to Pemex. All of that portion must be considered tax since a tax by any other name is still a tax.

MitchMan - 1-8-2017 at 01:25 PM

Government corruption will not end spontaneously any time soon or ever, unless and until the people, the majority of the electorate, decide to do something about it.

It is entirely within the Mexican electorate's power to do something about the corruption in their government. They collectively and with adequate popular consensus have to first "decide" to do something about it with their vote and then do the work and exercise requisite vigilance and scrutiny of future nominees and current office holders and then vote accordingly. That all takes a majority group "will" to do that by the people themselves.

So far, the collective interest and will of the Mexican electorate are not currently sufficient, nor have they ever been sufficient to do the work of nominee scrutiny nor has the majority of the Mexican people been willing to do sufficient and adequate vigilance and scrutiny of current office holders.

A successful democracy takes work, majority will, vigilant information gathering and perpetual scrutiny of current and future elected office holders and the intelligence, knowledge and understanding of the salient issues and a collective will to consistently accept the results of the elections by recognizing the right of the victors to hold and execute the duties of the office that they were elected to, whether they were from their party or not.

So far, as in the past, I do not and have not seen evidence of the will of the majority of the Mexican electorate to do the work that is required about their corrupt government in meaningful terms as described above.

It's on them, the people, the electorate.

A democratic government does not change spontaneously. Government corruption only reduces when the people elect corrupt free politicians on a perpetual basis...and that takes work and vigilance by the electorate.

I normally do not support slogan philosophy, but the old saying that "people get the government that they deserve" I believe has some gravitas regarding this issue.

[Edited on 1-8-2017 by MitchMan]

MitchMan - 1-8-2017 at 02:06 PM

Part of the reason that Mexico ranks so badly in the world with regard to wealth disparity is because of their taxing practices. A 16% IVA together with hiding the IVA by inclusion in the total of stated and advertised prices, AND their leniently low marginal income tax rate, not to mention the packing of the price of gasoline with taxes are all measure that are so "regressive" that they perpetuate the aforementioned disparity.

Severe disparity of income and wealth itself are giant downers to the economy...any economy, as the vast majority of accredited economists world wide have noted.

BTW, Mexico is in the top 2 in the world with income disparity...the USA is number 3. But, what is worse is that the USA is #1 in the world in wealth disparity.

[Edited on 1-8-2017 by MitchMan]

DENNIS - 1-8-2017 at 02:12 PM

Up to 60% of Mexico’s workers don’t pay taxes and the government doesn’t dare go after them..................

https://qz.com/125708/why-mexicos-tax-reforms-wont-apply-to-...

[Edited on 1-8-2017 by DENNIS]

rts551 - 1-8-2017 at 02:18 PM

Quote: Originally posted by monoloco

The article doesn't take into account that 1/3 of the fuel price in Mexico is taxes. The country is taxed to death, much of which goes to line the pockets of corrupt politicians, if they really wanted to get their fiscal house in order, they would tackle that problem, instead of constantly trying to squeeze more out of the people.

Taxed to death? Little income tax (and huge underground economy), little property tax..... does not equate to taxed to death.....

Fraud yes, Huge capital and business/corporate tax yes, IVA that hits people hard yes.......

MitchMan - 1-8-2017 at 02:36 PM

For those 60% who are poor, the government should adopt a tax policy that exempts them from income tax, all else should be pursued with reasonable collection policies. Those poor in the 60% already pay 16% of their income in the form of IVA as much of their expenditures are subject to IVA at point of sale.

"Up to 60% of Mexico’s workers don’t pay taxes and the government doesn’t dare go after them.................."
All the more reason to tax the wealthy even more in order to make up for lost uncollected revenue. This would make taxation policy more practical. As a previous tax analyst, the income tax policy, rules, codes and regulations use "practicality" or more correctly stated, "wherewithal" as one of the several tenets that tax law is predicated upon. Then, when Mexico comes down in world ranking in income and wealth disparity, then changes to tax policy would be in order to maintain a decent world ranking (together with other policies) instead of the indecent shameful world ranking it currently has.

Did I mention that the USA ranks #1 in the world for wealth disparity?

Russ - 1-8-2017 at 03:29 PM

Taxes??? my property taxes went from $2,000 to $15,000 this year. I'm in the process of having that changed but HOLY _ _ _ _ what are they thinking? GRINGO!

monoloco - 1-8-2017 at 03:32 PM

Quote: Originally posted by rts551

Quote: Originally posted by monoloco

The tax rate in Mexico is very low, but with IVA and excise taxes it's the lower end of the socio-economic scale that picks up the majority of the tab. While the rich are able to shield most of their income from taxation, the poor effectively pay 16% of their income in IVA and other taxes. This is much like the national sales tax scheme some Republican wheels out every couple of years. It's really nothing but a scam to shift the tax burden onto the poor and middle class.

[Edited on 1-8-2017 by monoloco]

monoloco - 1-8-2017 at 03:37 PM

Quote: Originally posted by Russ

Taxes??? my property taxes went from $2,000 to $15,000 this year. I'm in the process of having that changed but HOLY _ _ _ _ what are they thinking? GRINGO!

A bet that you appreciate all the services those taxes buy you though? Oh wait :?:

Lol.

DaliDali - 1-8-2017 at 04:34 PM

Quote: Originally posted by monoloco

Quote: Originally posted by rts551

Quote: Originally posted by monoloco

How exactly is it that the wealthy, or anyone for that matter, can escape the countrywide 16% sales tax rate when they buy goods at any market?

One could bet his last peso that the wealthy pay far more in sales taxes annually than does a radish picker in SQ.

I am all in on hoping more and more people get wealthy to pay the freight it takes to support us malnourished, no account, career teat suckers.

rts551 - 1-8-2017 at 05:03 PM

Quote: Originally posted by monoloco

Quote: Originally posted by rts551

Quote: Originally posted by monoloco

So maybe inequitable instead of "Taxed to death"

yumawill - 1-8-2017 at 06:01 PM

Is Jimmy Carter in charge down there? Put on another sweater and get in the gas line.

Spearo - 1-8-2017 at 06:15 PM

I agree with the articles author that the sooner energy markets are deregulated and globalized the sooner we will see diversification and sustainability. We are guilty of the same crime in the states, just look at farm subsidies and the tax subsidies we give to our own energy, manufacturing, tech companies. Its only socialism if it helps everyone. If it just helps the rich then they call is capitalism. Trickle down the back of your neck.

His analogy with the gold mining is pure tripe and I'm surprised it made it past the editors. The Mexican govt is selling its locally produced fuel to its residents at a subsidized rate. All exports are marketed globally and are subject to the greater fuel market and pricing. The gold mine is selling its gold to its workers at cost and the rest is sold at market rates. I'm sure that Pemex is doing just fine.

DaliDali - 1-8-2017 at 07:13 PM

Quote: Originally posted by MitchMan

All the more reason to tax the wealthy even more in order to make up for lost uncollected revenue.

Tax the wealthy more to make up for what a government lacks in tax revenue collection abilities?

The loss of uncollected tax revenues is squarely on the shoulders of a government and their inability to collect sufficient tax revenues.

For the government, any government, to confiscate taxes from some people, to make up for their own shortcomings is insane.

BajaTed - 1-8-2017 at 07:17 PM

When the political parties transition they always leave the regional govt. kitty dry, Nothing new
Gotta pay the bills and paychecks, so incoming party raise the taxes.

MitchMan - 1-9-2017 at 11:25 AM

What is meant by referring to "leniently low marginal tax rate" refers specifically to the highest personal income tax rates in a graduated income tax rate schedule. The Mexican personal income tax rates start out at approx. 2% (which applies to taxable income (TI) of $0 to $6000 MXN) and go to a highest rate of 35% (which applies to above $3 Million MXN). There are six different graduated rates in between the two just mentioned herein. So, the marginal tax rate is the highest rate which, in this case is 35%, and, for those very wealthy Mexicans, that is a windfall lenient rate.

Now, that rate may be suitable for a Mexican that has $3 to $5 Million in TI, but for the very wealthy that have incomes way more than that all the way up to the top, that is a low rate that is arithmetically, and therefore macro-economically bad for the economy itself, therefore bad for society, snow balls the damaging effect of disparity of income and wealth as a function of time and is a principle cause for much of the economic malaise in Mexico. The very same applies to the USA.

Dali, your comment is so full of nonsense, un-truths and gibberish that smacks of total incoherence and ignorance of even basic economic principle, let alone basic math, that I am in a bit of a quandary as to whether or not it merits a comment. Well, I will give it a try any way.

There is a maxim in economics called "Engel's Law" and it goes something like this: As the amount of personal income increases, the proportion of income spent on food falls. This principle applies to other basic needs as well such as clothing, housing, etc. Now, Dali, I want you to take a moment to absorb this simple principle. Question your brain on it a bit; ponder it. Explore the 'mathematics' of it, then maybe you will begin to understand some of its application to the wrong things in your comment.

I will help you out with an example. Most peoples' net worth is principally in their home equity and the price of the home is usually multiples of their annual income. A middle class family with a household income of $100,000 USD per year can afford to buy a home that costs $600,000. That would be 600% of their income. Bill Gates' home originally cost him $127 million, that would be about 4.2% of his income (and only 1/5th of 1% of his net worth).

When it comes to sales tax, the poor spend every penny they earn and much of those expenditures are subject to IVA, therefore, they pay a lot of sales tax compared to their income compared to a rich person who spends a much smaller portion of their income on items subject to IVA and therefore spends a much less proportion/percentage of their income paying IVA, even though that rich person spends more on IVA items than the poor person does.

That's why the sales tax is regressive; it takes a larger % of a poor person's income that from a rich person's income. Get it yet, Dali? Regressive taxation proportionally puts a larger burden on the poor than on the rich. That is why the Greedy Rich always selfishly push for regressive taxation. Low marginal income tax rates have a similar affect as does the regressive sales tax. The worst of the worst regressive taxation policy which would really accentuate a ravishingly heavy burden on the poor and middle class would be a flat income tax; something the greedy rich can hardly wait to impose on the working class.

Take note; the top 1% of the wealthiest people in the USA pay about 46% of the income tax. But note that the same 1% have the same 46% of the nation's wealth in spite of paying that 46% of the income tax. IOW, they still make out like bandits and the middle class and the poor (98% of the USA population) do not have enough money to pay for necessities. Marginal tax rates are way too low.

The wealthy are getting egregiously and profanely way more benefit out of the economy than the top 1% while the bottom 99% do all the work. That's true in both Mexico and in the USA.

[Edited on 1-9-2017 by MitchMan]

DaliDali - 1-9-2017 at 01:39 PM

Despite your long winded lessons on economics, you missed the entire intent.

Again.....why should anyone, wealthy or not, capitulate and be forced into paying more taxes to a government system that is rife with corruption and the utter failure of administrators to put in place a "hacienda" that can effectively and fairly, collect taxes?
This "hacienda" is a joke.....it is pure play to pay and with enough pesos in one's pocket, the tax burden suddenly disappears or is heavily reduced.

It is the total failure of the government "hacienda" to collect taxes and enforce tax law, that begat the 16% sales tax.
I can hear them laughing now..."If we can't enforce them to pay up, we'll just jack up the VAT and hit everyone"

But with certainty, you could always send the hacienda a check to backup your redistribution theories.

And in the future, if you wish to comment on my comments, have the courtesy to at least be less condescending.

Gulliver - 1-9-2017 at 01:44 PM

I and all of my Mexican friends spend all of our income on things that are hit with the sales tax. That's true back home in Washington State also. One of the more regressive taxation systems in the country.

Mr. Slim and his friends including the new U.S. cabinet members pay almost nothing in taxes.

I find it amusing to see that in every jurisdiction where the minimum wages have been increased radically, the little businesses that pay that new wage are doing better. Why? Because their customers are getting paid more and can buy more stuff.

Henry Ford figured that out almost a century ago when he pretty much doubled his assembly line worker's pay. They gotta make enough money to buy the stinking cars. The rich don't put their money into consumption which, like it or not, is the central driver of ALL modern economies.

The rich dump their money into overpriced cars and homes which don't do jack to create jobs or do a thing for the G.N.P.

So we have a new regime in the states. Mussolini redux. Welcome to feudalism.

[Edited on 1-9-2017 by Gulliver]

MitchMan - 1-9-2017 at 02:08 PM

My point is that the wealthy should pay more so that the working 98% pay less. You apparently didn't get that. Another reason for the wealthy to pay more (or any) is that the government needs more to spend more on the public services...there isn't enough being spent now. A third reason for the wealthy to pay more is that the wealthy are the very people that support the current corrupt government the most. Often the corrupt politicians come from the ranks of the wealthy. So, according to your contention that the corrupt government is pocketing the tax revenues, then it is justice to make the wealthy pay more than everybody else since the injustice is perpetrated by those in the ranks of the wealthy for the most part.

Do you actually think if the Hacienda did an honest and efficient job of tax collecting that the corruption would magically go away? Hmmm? Not only is that an unrealistic expectation, it's naïve.

Your post brings up another misconception by many people who say that those who think that the wealthy should pay higher tax rates, that those people should just send in a check to the taxing authority...as if that is the solution to the problem. Again, you miss the point...seemingly consistently. My contention is a "macro-economic" policy solution to a "macro-economic" problem. My sending in a check to the Hacienda would be a micro step to a macro-economic problem. You don't solve a Macro problem with one micro step. Don't be foolish and simplistic. That's as bad as advocating vigilantism to a cure for crime. No responsible mature reasonable knowledgeable person would advocate with that. Simplistic solutions only fly in beer bars, not serious discussion.

Is that being to condescending? Reminds me of a quote attributed to Harry Truman when people were telling him to "Give 'em hell, Harry" and he responded "I never gave anybody hell, I just told the truth and they thought is was hell".

GULLIVER, you are right on point. Great job. You speak irrefutable truth and the economic principles you allude to are spot on. Economics 101. Too bad many people don't know this. It is an economic truth that if the minimum wage were increased especially now in this time of record breaking great income disparity, employment would soon increase, sales and profits for businesses across the board would increase as demand increases from the minimum wage. As the minimum wage increases, it yields an upward and immediate pressure on other wages to increase, thereby fueling even more demand. The problem in world, Mexico, and USA is that there is a lack of sufficient and adequate demand.

Here is the big picture. An increase in the minimum wage causes a healthy movement of money from the wealthy to the working class which reduces (though not at all eliminates) income and wealth disparity.

People who talk disparagingly of "redistribution" of wealth from the rich to the poor thru a higher marginal income tax rate completely discount and omit the fact that the redistribution of wealth from the working class to wealthy occurs first by not paying the working class a fitting wage.

IOW, the value of labor in the finished product's sales price is underpaid to the employee thru low wages and that unpaid value goes to the owner, top executives, and shareholders disproportionately. That is where the real transfer of wealth is redistributed in the first place. It happens way before the wealthy pay taxes. In our economy, and in Europe's and Mexico's economy, the only practical way to get that money back into the hands of the working class is thru higher marginal income taxes on the wealthy and making sure that the minimum wage is sufficiently and adequately high enough. There are other measures, also.

I bristle when people say that taxes are an improper unfair redistribution of wealth from the wealthy. That totally ignores the fact that they got that inordinate inequitable lopsided disparate wealth and income from an economy that obviously has over rewarded them and just as obviously under compensated the people that did all the work. The economy and the wealth that it produces is a zero sum game.

I sincerely hope this isn't all too "condescending"

[Edited on 1-9-2017 by MitchMan]

David K - 1-9-2017 at 02:37 PM

Wow, where did you guys go to school, in Cuba?

"The rich dump their money into overpriced cars and homes which don't do jack to create jobs or do a thing for the G.N.P."

Is this real? WHO builds the cars, sells them, services them, make parts for them???
Who builds homes, furnishes homes, landscapes homes, makes lumber, appliances, carpeting, paint...

Seriously???!!!

I beg for rich people, more rich people... because a poor person never hired me!!!
Taxing rich people at higher, punitive rates is akin to punishing them for doing GOOD and being SUCCESSFUL and creating JOBS.
This crazy way of thinking has killed America the past 8 years... *** * **** ** ** *** **** ********* ******, *** ********** ********* ****.

[Edited on 1-11-2017 by BajaNomad]

DaliDali - 1-9-2017 at 03:10 PM

Now you have gone from just another condescending know it all......directly to being an outright preek.

Your assessment of all that is wrong with an economy is the EXACT reason your kind got smacked down last November.
Not only the Presidency, but the Senate, the House, Governorships, and State legislators.

rts551 - 1-9-2017 at 03:22 PM

David, you are a life in contradiction. You say the rich provide jobs, but as long as I have "known" you (which goes back to Pre Nomad days), you complain about not have enough employment and blame the governement. There are plenty of rich people around......why won't they hire you?

Gulliver - 1-9-2017 at 04:34 PM

The cars that the rich buy are ten to one hundred times more expensive than the ones I buy. But I have spent my life fixing and building cars and I know more about the insides and technology of automobiles than all but an extreme minority of people. The expensive cars are at best two to three times as well built as an inexpensive one. The difference is artificial scarcity and the frantic attempts of the filthy rich to differentiate themselves from the rest of us. And the building and selling of those expensive cars doesn't do any more for the economy than building and selling a less expensive car.

This applies to housing as well. God forbid that the rich live anywhere near someone who has a darker skin or makes less money than they do. The result is what every realtor refers to as, "Location, location, location." This means that the rich live in houses that are, at best a couple of times as well built as the rest of us, but sell for ten times the price per square foot. The rest of the difference is in floor area. And the building of these houses provides more jobs? I think not.

In clothing as well, there was a time when quality clothing was for the well to do. Then production methods meant that anyone could afford decent quality and good looking clothing. So the reaction of the rich was to start dressing like bums. And the reaction of the culturally poor was to imitate the rich and dress in rags. This war of action and reaction has been going on since clothing was invented. BUT IT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING FOR THE COMMON GOOD! And yes, I'm yelling.

What modern civilized people expect their society to do is provide for the common good. The best job of doing that so far sorted out has been the social democracies of Northern Europe.

Every argument so far put forward against social democracy has boiled down to The Divine Right of Kings. In most circles except sports bars, that's been pretty much discredited.

So lets hear it for income inequality and the return of the gilded age and child labor and wars over colonies. Let's get it right out there. Kiss the stinking whip. I love hearing silly excuses.

You're damned right I am condescending as hell to my inferiors.

mtgoat666 - 1-9-2017 at 04:51 PM

Quote: Originally posted by rts551

David, you are a life in contradiction. You say the rich provide jobs, but as long as I have "known" you (which goes back to Pre Nomad days), you complain about not have enough employment and blame the governement. There are plenty of rich people around......why won't they hire you?

The rich get richer. The poor get poorer. And the rich manipulate the poor so they fool themselves into blaming govt for their sorry lot.

Let them eat cake!

******************************************************************?

[Edited on 1-11-2017 by BajaNomad]

Gulliver - 1-9-2017 at 04:55 PM

Time for anyone who doesn't already own a DVD of it to sit down and watch the movie Idiocracy. Dead on.

Beavis and Butthead take over the world.

DaliDali - 1-9-2017 at 04:59 PM

Those dastardly wealthy folks......the sheer gall of them to have more money than you......

They should immediately divest themselves of 75% of their wealth and just hand it over to you? They have too much as it is.....so gimme some!!
Not you personally ok?.....but if the shoe fits ok?

This is insanity!!

Instead of beating down the wealthy, you should encourage more people to seek the highest goals they care to attain.
But no....here you are wanting to feed, care and support those who DO NOT want to work and make their own way by demanding the wealthy pony up and the liberals support it all with their call to tax someone more.

Feeding the monster always make him drool for more......don't fall into that trap of more is better.

Your beef should be with that class of folks who suck off of all working people rather than those who have done well.

Take care to define those who will not work with those who cannot ok?

The USA has turned into a "how much can I beat the government out of" rather than setting the alarm clock and getting a damn job.
After all, the liberals are touting millions of new jobs created.....so there should be plenty to go around si?

Now it's cute to berate those who have more than you.....i smell the stink of jealousy.

chuckie - 1-10-2017 at 03:10 PM

KUM BY YA--KUM BY YA......

ELINVESTIG8R - 1-10-2017 at 03:27 PM

I knew I had this Gif from years back when I was part of the Baja Nomad Team!

chuckie - 1-10-2017 at 03:45 PM

Can't we just get along?

rts551 - 1-10-2017 at 03:46 PM

Quote: Originally posted by chuckie

Can't we just get along?

Hummmmmmmmmmm. Hummmmmmmm. lets hold hands now and meditate. Maybe we can get into some group think circles.

chuckie - 1-10-2017 at 03:48 PM

Share the love, man!