Yet another way to GIVE oil companies money
Yesterday, President Bush “decided” he was going to make it look like he cares about the rising cost of gas. (Up $.23 in 2 weeks!) Here are some options he could have chosen to make the price of gas lower:Place a cap on gas prices
It’s not uncommon in a time of war
Require more fuel efficiency for cars and trucks
They could take the gas company subsidies and give them to the car manufacturers as an incentive to make more fuel efficient cars
Raise taxes on oil companies' profits
That might reduce the deficit, and discourage oil companies from price gouging.
He could actually believe in science, and invest in it!
We should have renewable energy by now. The technology is out there.
What did he choose?...
The “decider” decided to ease the environmental regulations on oil companies!
Thank goodness. I’m sure people around the country were thinking, “You know why gas prices are so high? No, not because the oil companies are raking in profits. It’s because the oil companies aren’t allowed to pollute the environment as much as they want to. We should lower their regulations. Thanks President Bush.”
I guarantee there will be no results from this move by Decider Bush. All we will have is more exhaust, harmful fumes, and ever higher profits for gas companies. Expert analysts have said that it will have only a marginal affect on prices. The decider’s response: “every little bit helps.” No, it doesn’t. This is price gouging! Sure, it’s not $5 per gallon, but it’s $3 per gallon and the oil companies are making billions of dollars of profit every quarter. Profit!
A Democratic proposal is to waive the federal gas tax for a few months. That saves $.18. The federal gas tax is not the problem. The problem is the oil companies. They are criminals! Let’s come up with a real solution. Congress is in the pocket of the oil companies. We need new leaders who will actually hold them accountable.
The newest idea: To buy off Americans so oil companies can drill in Alaska's wildlife refuge! The plan is to give millions of tax payers a $100 rebate. That will essentially give 100's of millions of dollars to the oil companies over the next 2 months with no windfall profit tax!
Election update: Summit county voting machines now have
By terra - 4/26/2006
29 Comments:
Americans pay far less for gas than people in other countries, so we should either buy fewer SUVs or stop complaining. However, the oil companys are taking historically huge profits. That's the problem I see.
Good point about how much cheaper gas is in America. It certainly appears to be price gouging, but without actually restricting what oil companies can charge I don't know how you would stop that. Petroleum is nearly an inelastic good in so many people's eyes these days that they are willing to pay these extremely high prices and there is zero incentive for any gas station to lower its prices. I feel very fortuate that I use public transportation to get to work everyday and can either use that same transportation or walk in order to do most everything else I do on a daily basis. I am very glad I don't drive the 80-100 miles a day I once did with prices at the level they are. Regulating prices would seem like the only option, but form what I have been reading, that could give rise to soem fairly serious international trade reprecussions because two of the biggest oil companies doing business in the US are foreign based and have simply stated that it is unfair for the US to try and regulate what thay can charge seeing as prices here are already soem of the lowest in the world.
We should really just start working on pressing shale and use that to supplement our oil supplies until we can more heavily produce and market superior fuel sources.
I agree with all you two have said.
Some other odd comments:
Picture trade resuming with Cuba- The sugar can capital of the Carribean. Now picture all that cane processed into ethanol.
Brazil has long used ethanol - there is an example for us.
Imagine all out US distilleries helping us out by cranking out 95% Ethanol.
How about an excess profits tax on the oil Robber Barons - applied to the above two options.
Just imagine replacing 20-30-40% of imported oil with ethanol.
Also, factor in the REAL cost of mideast oil - war, dead, maimed...so forth
I say ETHANOL NOW!
All my Bush/Cheney supporter associates:
Tell me....this is not reaping the whirlwind of Cheney's secret energy policy set by Oilmen in 2001...
Tell me that this same oilmen robber/cabal does NOT include our executive branch of Govt. and that what we are hearing from Bush is NOt just lip service.
Tell me that we will NOT "Stay the course" until we kill each other over the very last drop of oil.
Tell me that you still , in good conscience, support Bush.
Tell me that, if the oil price continues up unchecked and unregulated (remember the DEREGULATION plank in the Republican platform?), We will NOT have a recession/Depression.
That's a great pic...
Otherwise, I agree that we do pay less than the rest of the world for a gallon of gas. I also agree that we buy/drive too many SUVs. However, a lot of the world has better/more reliable public transportation and our oil companies are taking ridiculous profits. So, I guess the blame goes both ways.
In other news... I am defineatly voting absentee for the November election...
Quit your bitching, nail polish is $1,175.00 per gallon.
I'm suprised there's been no mention of the Exxon exec who got a severance of 150k/day,......150,000 per DAY for someone who's already a fat millionare. If we could put that back into gas we could probably knock the price down at least 10 cents per gallon.
First off, I saw some really cheezy commercials this morning--campaign ads for Sawyer and Blackwell (Sawyer's might be cheezier, but Blackwell's is definately scarier). I love Blackwell's main platform: He opposed Taft's tax increases (does anybody agree with anything Taft has done) and supporting Ohio's Marriage is a Man/Woman thing. I can definately see how this will all save Ohio and the country. I can't even believe this guy has a smile on his face during the ad. And then, just to give it a little greater absurdity, Blackwell nods his head at the end of the ad--why? Who's he nodding to. I didn't nod back.
Secondly, I propose invading Iran to decrease prices--worked with Iraq. Both instances are what's best for Donald Rums...I mean the American People.
Finally, my coffe tastes great today.
Isn't it the Government's job to bust monopolies?? Leftist Lady hit it on the head--Public transport--remember that light rail they were proposing that would follow I-71--I remember, and remember how popular it was, but our Republican run state failed us yet again..
Bush's 'new policies' are nothing new, and will have NO effect on our price @ the pump...ugh
My coffee is delicious!
When the price of gas went up after Katrina, the oil companies' profits were in the 10s of billions. I didn't see a public outcry. (Probably because the story was buried and you had to know when the quarter ends and go look for it) Now that it's almost $3 a gallon, people are getting upset. What will happen when it's $5 per gallon this summer? The oil companies will still be making billions and our president will be ho-humming around his office going back and forth between his sinking poll numbers and his oil friends telling him not to do anything real. Oil companies have a monopoly and they're holding us hostage. There is really nothing the public can do. We can't even buy alternative fuel cars because there are no fueling stations. I blame Congress and the Decider for that.
Hakos, I'm glad I didn't see those commercials. Unfortunately, people vote based on commericials. I've seen it.
Did you know this is "turn off your tv" week? We haven't watched tv all week. Coincidence.
If we switched to corn-based ethanol, it would revitalize the small farmer, and the Ohio economy. See Ted Strickland's website for his plans to use Ohio corn for alternative fuel. Awesome!
That's pretty cool that Strickland's website actually explains an idea. I wonder how many Ohio voters check out the websites of those running for office--prob pretty low. On Strickland's website, I think I would add a cross in the background and some bright light. The cross doesn't even have to be necessarily holy, just so long as it is a cross. This might subconciously enter viewers' mind and make them link Strickland to morality, therefore voting for him.
Terra - the argument against using corn-based ethanol though is that it is a non-sustainable resource, especially given the growing rate at which we as a nation consume fuel. We would be trading one problem for a different one, albeit a better one. I would like to see mid-Ohio's economy improve though, so as a temporary solution, corn-based ethanol would be a nice alternative.
Now the Republicans are actually trying to buy Americans' conscience! They want to send a $100 rebate check to millions of Americans, but that bill includes a provision to open Alaska's wildlife refuge to oil drilling!! They truly have no souls. Story here.
Also included in that bill though are measures to increase tax relief for people who buy and drive hybrid cars and the elimination of tax benefits for oil companies. $100 is meaningless though and it is a shame that the two usefull measures I mentioned will be lost in this shuffle because there is 0% chance the senate wil pass a bill to drill in Alaska.
The Senate shouldn't pass a bill to drill in Alaska, no matter what. It's a shame that the Republicans will only support hybrids or provide relief to consumers if they're allowed to destroy a wildlife refuge.
BTW the current tax credit for hybrid buyers only applies if you buy it new. If you buy a used hybrid, you don't get the credit. Why not? You're still buying a hybrid.
I didn't mean that they should pass the bill, I meant that I wish it was a separate matter, the drilling and the tax changes.
As far as the deduction is concerned, that is only for the current tax year - 2005. I would tend to agree that buying any hybrid last year should count, but the deduction is basically only for models that weren't sold until 2005 (3 exceptions). I belive part of the reasoning behind not allowing the deduction for used hybrid purchases follows the logic that: the vast majority of hybrid purhcases were new last year (roughly 2/3 but that data is hard to verify), and there is no way to verify a huge portion of used car purchases because they are not done through a dealer/business reporting the sales tax. Without reporting the sale though a dealership, etc, the only way for the IRS to actually see if used hybrid purchasers ar legitmate is to audit each and everyone of them - which isn't feasible. That is more of just a logistical issue, but if it was just as easy as saying "I bought a used hybrid this year" with no way of verifying it, how many people would claim that deduction?
For the tax year 2006, hyrbid purchases will instead result in a tax credit, something that is in the end more valuable(at least three times) than a deduction and though it is not set in stone yet, every indication I have gotten has been that it will be for any hybrid purchased after 1/1/06.
The headlining proposal by the Republicans to give $100 rebate to taxpayers is absurd! The government doesn't owe us money - gas companies do. I really hope the public doesn't fall for this. $100 will probably fill up 2 family cars for 2 weeks. Gee, thanks. And in return, the oil companies get to drill in Alaska? No thanks. They can keep that blood money.
Besides, people will just use that $100 to buy gas, so essentially, the government is giving oil companies $100 for every taxpayer in America. Whoever thought that up will have a well-funded campaign for sure.
Frist scrapped the Democratic plan to instate a "windfall profits tax." Goodbye revenue, hello deeper deficit.
Well here I am again. How about getting the word out by a chain letter, people seem to love those cheesy things or how about send everyone one of those junk mail envelopes that say something like 5 years o % APR. When it's opened you read something like, hey lets just let them read the truth. I am way over in Oregon but do you guys over there put up billboard ads. There's a way to get your points across Terra Milo and G. A. Hakos. People love to read and drive at the same time. Give them something to read about. Signing off, Gramma Fishy.
The more I think about it, the less increasing the tax on oil co. profits makes sense as a deterrent to high prices. If you raise the tax on their profits they will just raise price even more to make up for the profit lost until they are making the same after tax profit as before. The federal government will end with more tax revenue to work with, but the average American will pay the price for it with gas at over $6 or something else ridiculous.
In fact, there is no way to actually get lower gas prices outside of statutory regulation of prices - that is assuming that there is no significant public backlash to the increasing prices, which to this poin there has not been, as people continue to drive nearly as much as they did before and use almost just as much gas. The only way to get lower prices is going to be for the government to tell the oil companies exactly what they are allowed to charge. Whether or not that will ever happen though I can't say.
Is oil getting more expensive just from supply and demand?
Or on rumours it is running out, some say we've passed Hubbert's
Peak internationally now.
darwal is right about ethanol, it really can't replace oil.
There's nothing known as easy (as cheap) to get at as oil.
All of Brazil growing sugar cane for ethanol would not meet
the demands.
Actually there is enough corn to replace a significant portion of the oil used for transportation fuel in America today. Combine that with the new processing technologies in cellulosic ethanol which allows ethanol to be produced from almost any plant material and our country is well on its way to having the raw material necessary to significantly enhance our energy security....
Again, not a sustainable resource - unless you consider scouring all vegetation until enough animals die and decompose to the point they are fossil fuels themselves and can be used. Yes, there may be enough corn today, but that is a short-sighted, temporary solution at best.
It's sustainable with a little work - there is over 1.3B tons of biomass (such as switch grass, wood chips, corn stover, paper pulp, saw dust)alone produced every year which would meet, based on current technology, around half of the demand for all US transportation fuel and more than enough to replace all the gasoline/diesel used in automobiles. That doesn't even account for gains from changing crop rotations, enzyme technology advances, etc.
There is nothing else out there today or in the next 20+ years that can come close to reducing our dependence on nonrenewable resources coming from unstable nations...
Yes - it would meet 1/2 the demand now - again if we devoted all that land and agriculture almost exclusively to it. Do you really want o see what happens to food prices when we are dependent on importing food? People complain about the cost of gas now - what happens when a loaf of bread is $12?
This biomass (which for the most part is a byproduct) is available today - no additional land or agriculture is needed to completely replace automotive fuel. No change in the agricultural production is necessary so there is no importing of food or any of that... This has no effect on the food supply in this country...
Clearly the President should just be like, "hey you guys, lower the price of gas." If he would just do that, it would work.
The United States Legislature should open up the issue of the CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) again. They should require that all sedans reach 40 miles per gallon, and that all "light trucks" reach 32.5 miles per gallon -NO EXCEPTIONS. They should stop oil companies from giving subsidies to auto manufacturers (to have them create vehicles under the current CAFE standard). They should heavily fine these vehicle factories if they create inefficient cars. If we can persuade these automobile makers to STOP MAKING VEHICLES THAT DO NOT ATTAIN THE CAFE STANDARD, then our dependence on oil will be reduced; and gas prices will fall. Americans will clamor for more fuel efficient cars once gas prices start soaring again. (Remember what happened with the oil embargo in 1973 -and the resulting economic crisis. It was the birth of the CAFE standard.) Perhaps it will take another energy crisis of the same intensity of that in 1973 to awaken Americans to their destructive consumerism. Until then, the CAFE standard should be in effect (if only to provide an extra incentive to keep gas guzzlers off the market).
Post a Comment
<< Home