Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
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.
First off, China, India and the other developing nations are using oil and gas in unprecedented amounts with those numbers to continue to increase substantially. The most positive outlook show greehouse gases able to continue at its present rate. These will not decrease for many years, period, short of a major breakthrough. We all must deal with that reality.
Currently the world is close to its maximum possible oil flow. Added to that is the fact that alternative energy sources that could replace oil in any volume appear to be decades away, at least. Had we OK'ed new drilling, refining and nuclear plants years ago we wouldn't be in the place we are at.
I would love to see the day that we can kiss oil and gas goodby, but it won't be for decades. I believe we should all conserve, but drying up the economy to do it is the wrong way.
By the way, if we pump more oil, the money stays in the US. We don't make our enemies rich, we keep the money in our economy making it far better not worse.
Ask Al Gore to cut back. He used 10% more energy on his house than he did the previous year (over 20 times the average US household) . He flies around in private jets and claims he is carbon neutral. Like many rich environmentalists, saving energy is for the little guy.
Every nuclear plant is a multi-billion dollar investment. They are ALWAYS subsidized. They leave toxic waste for tens of thousands of years. They LEAK, constantly. Three Mile Island was a big leak, but tiny/small leaks are constant. Where will all that go? Into the air, into the ground, or who cares as long as the investment community gets more of our tax dollars and a high return on the initial investment?
Because as a long term investment they stink. The reason they declined is because they are too expensive to run (unless they get immense subsidies.) However they would be delicious to build, and that is the point right now.
If we as a society need to subsidize energy even more, which we will need to if we increase nuclear capabilities, we as a society can invest better and safer and we don't need to pander to Wall Street and some very large private companies who are itching to bleed us dry even more and continue feeding at the public trough while wailing about "socialists".
Thank you for providing some needed perspective on the issue of offshore drilling. My first reaction was that we should allow it in light of the high gasoline prices. However, your commentary changed my mind. High gasoline prices hurt everyone but if we can make the adjustment now, we will have a better future.
Already, I see changes where I thought I wouldn't. When I first bought my hybrid 2 years ago, it was mainly a curiosity among my many relatives. Now, my brother bought one and others are trying (having trouble unloading their large SUVs though). I see people making changes to their lifestyle, including me, which is resulting in less pollution and greenhouse gas generation. So, there is a good side to the high gas prices.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
