If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
GM's Chief pushing for higher gas taxes.
On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 02:31:02 +0000 (UTC), Brent
> wrote: >On 2011-06-07, Ashton Crusher > wrote: >> On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 14:02:20 -0400, "C. E. White" > wrote: >> >>> > wrote in message ... >>>> And, Washpost: 'Obama's phony accounting on auto bailout' 'Most >>>> misleading collection of assertions we have seen' >>>> http://www.drudgereport.com >>> >>>I am not a fan of the auto bailout (never was - terrible idea). I do beleive >>>we should raise taxes on imported oil significantly. >>> >>>Ed >>> >> >> >> >> There should be a floating tariff on imported oil so that any imported >> oil costs a minimum of $80 a barrel. That would provide a price floor >> for alternative energy sources to be developed against. Any source >> that would produce an equivalent barrel of energy would be able to be >> sold for at least $80 per equivalent barrel under such a system. OPEC >> would not be able to undercut the alterative sources because the >> floating tariff would prevent the import costs from ever going below >> the $80. If world oil prices dropped to $30 a barrel there would be a >> $50 a barrel tax. It's a win for everyone, even those of us paying >> the tax because it ensures alternative fuels get brought online which >> is what we need to happen in the long run. And we can easily afford >> to pay $80 a barrel, we've been paying at least that much for years >> now. > >All market manipulations must end. All of them. Proposing different ones >just changes the problems caused somewhat. > > It's not a market manipulation, it's strategic planning to ensure our countries security in the future. "Free" markets are great for most things but not everything - they tend to be somewhat short sighted at times and monopolistic at other times. There's a happy medium, which we are not at, there is currently too much gvt control and it goes way past market manipulation. If you really hold totally free markets as your holy grail then you are a one worlder because complete freedom of ALL markets makes ALL countries borderless. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
GM's Chief pushing for higher gas taxes.
On 2011-06-08, Ashton Crusher > wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 02:31:02 +0000 (UTC), Brent > wrote: > >>On 2011-06-07, Ashton Crusher > wrote: >>> On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 14:02:20 -0400, "C. E. White" > wrote: >>> >>>> > wrote in message ... >>>>> And, Washpost: 'Obama's phony accounting on auto bailout' 'Most >>>>> misleading collection of assertions we have seen' >>>>> http://www.drudgereport.com >>>> >>>>I am not a fan of the auto bailout (never was - terrible idea). I do beleive >>>>we should raise taxes on imported oil significantly. >>>> >>>>Ed >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> There should be a floating tariff on imported oil so that any imported >>> oil costs a minimum of $80 a barrel. That would provide a price floor >>> for alternative energy sources to be developed against. Any source >>> that would produce an equivalent barrel of energy would be able to be >>> sold for at least $80 per equivalent barrel under such a system. OPEC >>> would not be able to undercut the alterative sources because the >>> floating tariff would prevent the import costs from ever going below >>> the $80. If world oil prices dropped to $30 a barrel there would be a >>> $50 a barrel tax. It's a win for everyone, even those of us paying >>> the tax because it ensures alternative fuels get brought online which >>> is what we need to happen in the long run. And we can easily afford >>> to pay $80 a barrel, we've been paying at least that much for years >>> now. >> >>All market manipulations must end. All of them. Proposing different ones >>just changes the problems caused somewhat. >> >> > > > It's not a market manipulation, it's strategic planning to ensure our > countries security in the future. No. It's market manipulation which always has some excuse like that so insiders can profit at the expense of outsiders. > "Free" markets are great for most > things but not everything - they tend to be somewhat short sighted at > times and monopolistic at other times. There's a happy medium, which > we are not at, there is currently too much gvt control and it goes way > past market manipulation. No single person or small group of people can know enough to manage a market without causing distortions. There is no "happy medium" of intervention. Once the first intervention is made it sets things on a path to total government control. Each intervention causes problems which needs more interventions which cause more problems that need interventions to fix which cause yet more problems... government is always considered the solution to these problems government causes so you get more and more and more government. > If you really hold totally free markets as your holy grail then you > are a one worlder because complete freedom of ALL markets makes ALL > countries borderless. Did you pull a muscle making that stretch? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
GM's Chief pushing for higher gas taxes.
"Brent" > wrote in message ... > All market manipulations must end. All of them. Proposing different ones > just changes the problems caused somewhat. You don't think the Saudi's (and OPEC) manipulate oil prices? Get them to stop, then the oil companies would do it directly. Ed |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
GM's Chief pushing for higher gas taxes.
"Tegger" > wrote in message ... > "C. E. White" > wrote in > : > >> >> > wrote in message >> ... >>> And, Washpost: 'Obama's phony accounting on auto bailout' 'Most >>> misleading collection of assertions we have seen' >>> http://www.drudgereport.com >> >> I am not a fan of the auto bailout (never was - terrible idea). I do >> beleive we should raise taxes on imported oil significantly. >> >> Ed >> >> >> > > > > Why don't you just start voluntarily paying more tax? The IRS has a > procedure for exactly that. I don't want to pay more taxes. I want to discorage Americans from funding terrorists and wackos by paying exhorbitant prices for their oil...and then turning around and spending more tax dollars defending us from the terrorist that we are funding by buying their oil. The Saudis or ExxonMobil or whoever can jack-up gas prices by $0.50 or more in a month and the DA Republicans mostly say little or nothing (and certainly do nothing) - but let someone propose adding $0.01 to the gas tax and the Republicans start squealing like stuck pigs. Makes me wonder who they are working for.... Ed |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
GM's Chief pushing for higher gas taxes.
"Tegger" > wrote in message ... > "Congress shall make no law...". > > Music to my ears. You left out a whole bunch of stuff in the Constitution that qualifies that snipet and renders it mostly irrelevant.... In this case the following applies: "Section 8 "1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." The way I see it, we are spending billions on wars that are a direct result of our use of imported oil. Seems only fair to pay for these wars with a tax on imported oil. Ed |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
GM's Chief pushing for higher gas taxes.
C. E. White wrote: > > I am not a fan of the auto bailout (never was - terrible idea). I do beleive > we should raise taxes on imported oil significantly. Won't that simply subsidize domestic producers? Why not instead raise the federal gas tax, which has remained at 18.4 cents/gallon for 17 years? The cost of maintaining the Interstate Highway System hasn't stayed constant over that time. I'm normally against corporate bailouts, but the economy went into such a big dive in 2008 that the federal takeover of GM and Chrysler was probably a lot cheaper than the alternative, and if those companies had folded, even temporarily, suppliers would have collapsed as well, and that would have affected even Ford, despite that company being in sound financial shape. At least the auto bailout wasn't mishandled like TARP, which had few strings attached, so instead of putting money back into the economy, much of the federal funds were just pocketed by the big banks. The federal government actually has an unusually good overall track record at bailing out companies, maybe because it does it so infrequently, and when it is done, the government acts like an investment banker, rather than a bleeding heart social worker. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
GM's Chief pushing for higher gas taxes.
"larry moe 'n curly" > wrote in message ... > > > C. E. White wrote: >> >> I am not a fan of the auto bailout (never was - terrible idea). I do >> beleive >> we should raise taxes on imported oil significantly. > > Won't that simply subsidize domestic producers? > > Why not instead raise the federal gas tax, which has remained at 18.4 > cents/gallon for 17 years? The cost of maintaining the Interstate > Highway System hasn't stayed constant over that time. > > I'm normally against corporate bailouts, but the economy went into > such a big dive in 2008 that the federal takeover of GM and Chrysler > was probably a lot cheaper than the alternative, and if those > companies had folded, even temporarily, suppliers would have collapsed > as well, and that would have affected even Ford, despite that company > being in sound financial shape. At least the auto bailout wasn't > mishandled like TARP, which had few strings attached, so instead of > putting money back into the economy, much of the federal funds were > just pocketed by the big banks. The federal government actually has > an unusually good overall track record at bailing out companies, maybe > because it does it so infrequently, and when it is done, the > government acts like an investment banker, rather than a bleeding > heart social worker. I am still trying to figure out why some people think letting GM and Chrysler die would have been a good thing. To lose manufacturing capacity of that magnitude, and the number of jobs directly and indirectly lost, and the subsequent shift of purchases to even more foreign product would have been disastrous from both an economic and a national security standpoint. I'd like to hear someone's reasoning for this in more specific terms than the usual sloganeering. mg |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
GM's Chief pushing for higher gas taxes.
On 2011-06-09, C. E. White > wrote:
> > "Brent" > wrote in message > ... > >> All market manipulations must end. All of them. Proposing different ones >> just changes the problems caused somewhat. > > You don't think the Saudi's (and OPEC) manipulate oil prices? Get them to > stop, then the oil companies would do it directly. So your argument is because some other government varies production of oil in the territory it rules, the US federal government then has the right to manipulate the fuel markets here inside the USA? What's next, the argument that because North Korea's rulers do something, then it's ok for the US federal government to do it? Anyway, the Saudis would have been long out of power without the US federal government proping them up. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
GM's Chief pushing for higher gas taxes.
On 2011-06-09, C. E. White > wrote:
> I don't want to pay more taxes. I want to discorage Americans from funding > terrorists and wackos by paying exhorbitant prices for their oil...and then > turning around and spending more tax dollars defending us from the terrorist > that we are funding by buying their oil. "the terrorists", the ones that americans would need be concerned about, are products of, reactions to, decades of US federal government foreign policy. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
GM's Chief pushing for higher gas taxes.
"Brent" > wrote in message ... > On 2011-06-09, C. E. White > wrote: >> >> "Brent" > wrote in message >> ... >> >>> All market manipulations must end. All of them. Proposing different ones >>> just changes the problems caused somewhat. >> >> You don't think the Saudi's (and OPEC) manipulate oil prices? Get them to >> stop, then the oil companies would do it directly. > > So your argument is because some other government varies production of > oil in the territory it rules, the US federal government then has the > right to manipulate the fuel markets here inside the USA? What's next, > the argument that because North Korea's rulers do something, then it's > ok for the US federal government to do it? I want to the US Federal governemnt to address a security threart by cutting off the sorce of funding to most of the wackos in the world. Instead of just slapping an import duty on Saudi Oil, I would prefer to prohibit us doing buisness with them at all, but in the short run that is impossible. So as an alternative, I want to raise the cost of Saudi Oil to make domestic production / energy alternatives more attractive. Are you really comfortable sending billions to wackos like the ones in Saudi Arabia, or closer to home, Venezuela, or for that matter the Russians? The DA Republicans talk a good game when it comes to national security, but it seems to me they are the tools of the Saudis and the Military Industrial Complex. If you are in the arms business it is a perfect senario - we buy oil from the Saudis, who give a chunk of it to terrorists, who we then have to "defeat" by spending billions on the military. It is an insane game. > Anyway, the Saudis would have been long out of power without the US > federal government proping them up. True and they (the Saudis) spend big time to keep the Republicans in power (and Democrats too). And they are buying politicians with the money we send them. Wasn't it Lenin who said something like "The Capitalist will sell you the rope you hang him with?" Well it seems to me that is sort of what we are doing when we buy oil from the Saudis and other wackos. A lot of Republicans get really upset becasue we keep dealing with the Chinese, but to my way of thinking, dealing with the Saudis is just as bad. Ed |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Wall St. behind higher gas price | Frog Britches[_3_] | Driving | 6 | May 28th 09 01:56 AM |
Car Cartoons: Gas Fill-Up Financing with New 111th Congress Sliding Scale Gas Taxes Cartoon.jpg 98687 bytes | HEMI-Powered@[email protected] | Auto Photos | 0 | November 24th 08 02:05 PM |
Gas taxes at work. | Brent P[_1_] | Driving | 0 | August 24th 07 05:35 PM |
Gas prices, gas taxes and FL vs GA | necromancer | Driving | 2 | July 25th 07 04:19 AM |
My opinion about higher gas prices | James | Driving | 31 | April 22nd 05 09:28 AM |