Letters to the Editor
-
wrong about wrong -more for the super rich oil companies by his own estimation
So this gentleman says consumers will see about 5 cents a gallon in savings from an 18 cent tax reduction? That means that the oil companies will receive a 13 cent tax rebate- a rebate that used to pay for roads and bridges for us. Obama isn't wrong about the tax. This man needs to understand that Hillary will get 18 cents worth of political mileage, while the average consumer gets stranded...
-
incoherent, irresponsible, and ignorant
Normally I wouldn't say something so strong writing under a pseudonym, but there's a reason that Mr Strong's credentials don't mention anything about economics, which is that he doesn't know what he is talking about. Every economist across the spectrum laughs at the gas tax.
Here's the first incoherency. If $30 to $50 is a lot of money to many Americans (over the course of a summer!?), then it can not be true that the cut, if passed on to consumers, will not stimulate demand. Either the amount of money is economically significant to consumer behavior or it isn't. Not one of each.
Even trucking associations know that the cut (little of which will end up in their pocket, because the analysis of why it will be passed on to consumers is faulty) is bogus. They don't support it.
I'll believe in the corresponding Windfall Profits Tax when I see it. Everyone knows that part of the Clinton proposal is DOA. So talking about a gas tax cut paired with a Windfall Profits Tax is just more of the Find A Magic Pony drivel we've gotten from the Bush Clown Show. On the other hand, Clinton has no alternative means for replenishing the Highway Trust Fund.
In summary, this article is to economics as Creationism is to evolution.
-
I keep giving Salon the benefit of the doubt...
But the articles with headlines designed to take potshots at Obama keep on coming. The last time I wrote a letter was to Alex Koppelman's War Room article about Obama "pandering" by promising to go after profiteering gas stations. The sad thing on that posting was that the quote Koppelman cited to support his argument actually undermined it.
This article follows along the same vein - it conveniently ignores that the reason most economists don't think the federal gas tax holiday will translate to a real benefit to consumers is because (UNLIKE the Illinois tax) it is not charged at the pump.
It would be one thing if one writer made an honest mistake while writing a blog post, but this article was written with the explicit purpose of bolstering Clinton's wrongheaded idea and validating it, all sane arguments be damned.
It is a lot harder to give this article the benefit of the doubt. It makes me wonder if there is some truth to the accusations from hardcore Obama supporters that Salon is biased towards Clinton when they publish opinion pieces such as this one.
Is it possible that in the zeal to appear as "tough" on Obama as it purportedly has been on Clinton, the media is swinging too far out the other way?
Where is Salon's objectivity? Is it too much to ask for Salon to take their writers to task when they write opinion pieces unsubstantiated by nuanced facts?
I must clarify that I am not a US Citizen, just a Legal Permanent Resident of this country. As such, I cannot vote. But I do support Obama because he exhibits the qualities I value in great leadership: vision, passion and the courage to confront situations on their merits rather than what s/he thinks people want to hear.
-
@holleyc
Broke or not, if you're a college student, PLEASE learn to use these things called paragraphs... it'll really help your grades.
-
Belorussian Accounting, here we come!
Frost suggests: Make it against the law for oil companies to pass the price of the windfall profits tax on to consumers, and then audit the oil companies' books. It is not a difficult accounting exercise to tax excess profits above a certain gross percentage per barrel of oil, or gallon of gas.
This sounds an awful lot like accounting in Belarus. Looney Tunes. Trust me, it was absolutely Looney Tunes. And hopelessly inefficient.
When you enact a tax, companies read the rules and do their best to avoid it. If this causes them to change their accounting procedures in stupid ways, they'll do it.
In short, this suggestion is just another way to score points with voters who know nothing about economics or accounting.
-
Yes, Virginia, he does take money from "big oil."
According to an April 23 article in the LOS ANGELES TIMES, Senator “I don’t take money from oil companies” Obama has raked in approximately $300,000 in contributions from oil executives, employees and family members since last year. In March he received a total of $46,000. Might that have something to do with his change of stance on the issue?
Contributors to his campaign, according to the article, include Ross Matthews, Sinclair Oil President, and John B. Hess, chairman of Hess Corporation. (Hess’ wife, Susan, contributed $14,000 to Obama's Senate campaign in 2003.) In addition, Robert L. Cavnar of Milagro Exploration (and wife Gracie) helped raise $50,000 for Obama last year. (Yes, Hillary has gotten money from oil folks too, but I haven’t heard her deny it.)
Thanks to salon.com for giving the proposal some consideration. At least, we are discussing a real honest-to-god campaign issue in a somewhat reasonable manner rather than simply emoting about our favorite candidate and his love of truth and hope and change, etc.
Oh, and by the way, I am so impressed that I will subscribe to replace one of those irate people who have announced they are writing you off.
-
yeah, right!
Strangely, inventories are not high, and they are fixed for the next four months at least. Thus, if demand increases; then price will as well. Similarly, even if you divert oil from other projects, they will not be refined in time; and even if they are, can trucking survive the shockwave this would create in deisel prices.
One of the biggest differences between now and 2000 is the value of the dollar. A weak dollar is parabolic to the price of oil.if we wanted to lower the price of oil we would focus on trying to prop up the greenback. until this happens there will be no relief for the consumer.