- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Andrew Leonard's article is tripe for ignorant socialists. I feel sorry for anyone who can't see it for what it is. California townships have discovered that encouraging people to drive hybrids led to decreased tax revenues at the pump, so they raised the gas tax to make up for the lost revenue. So the demand decreases some, but people still pay the same amount. Perhaps it ultimately prolongs the oil supply a bit, but gas doesn't get cheaper. The only way to bring oil prices down is to increase supply. Econ 101, folks. What are we doing to increase supply? Sen. Obama hasn't said anything new or proposed any solution; he's simply reading out of the democrat playbook of the past couple decades, calling McCain the 3rd Bush term, and saying failed policies of the past won't work. The failed policies of the past, ie, Geo.Bush Sr., Clinton I, and Geo.Bush, Jr.. to whit, not allowing drilling in ANWR or off the coasts of Calif and Florida, and not encouraging nuclear technology and development and alternative energy supply, haven't solved anything either. France supplies 75% of its power supply via nuclear power. When was the last French nuclear meltdown? If the French can master this technology why not the US? After the first oil shock of 1974, France decided to expand its nuclear power capacity. This decision was taken in the context of France having substantial engineering expertise but scant indigenous resources. Nuclear energy, with the fuel cost being a relatively small part of the overall cost, made good sense in minimising imports and achieving greater energy security. Critics say if we allow drilling in ANWR or elsewhere the oil companies will simply sell it to the highest bidder overseas. Well why doesn't Congress simply mandate that if they allow this drilling, X% of the oil & gas obtained must be sold within he U.S. ? Increase supply, lower the cost. Instead of giving each taxpayer $600 back as an economic stimulous (money we ultimately borrowed fm China and more debt we've taken on and passed to our children) why not take those billions of dollars and subsidize fuel prices, like China is doing? Back at ya, China! Or instead give a tax break for buying fuel-efficient US automobiles, if Congress really thinks this is a solution. At least this would allow complaining Americans to put their money where their mouth is, and help the ailing US auto manufacturers and decrease the domestic oil demand, although prices would stay the same b/c fuel taxes would increase. Anyway, these are just a couple hypotheticals. What's the point of a windfall tax on oil companies? 60% or more of the ownership of these companies is by US pension funds, like the teachers and fire-fighters. And corporations just pass taxes back to the consumer anyway. By doing this windfall profit tax, democrats are just punishing US citizens twice over. It's a disingenuous way of trying to appear like "they feel our pain" while solving nothing and costing the consumer more. Why not mandate that the local, state and federal fuel taxes are shown on every pump in the USA? Consumers deserve to know the truth, ie, who's really making the huge profits. It isn't the gas station owners! That's always been the way of Congress, to try to look like they care, like they're solving something, when they're solving nothing and ultimately making us pay more.
