At least someone is doing something about gas prices

[sinewave]

^I'm operating under the assumption that he's assumed a Stephen Colbert-like character. It makes me laugh.

let's hope so. i mean, yeah harris got a boobjob, but no amount of plastic surgery can make that soulless bush-skank even remotely attractive.

 

[sinewave]

Gas prices aren't going anywhere but up. This is just like when people complained taxes on bush 1 in early 90s. Then Clinton came in, and (no) surprise, taxes were still there and just as high. In fact, from what i hear (and i live around oil people), don't expect things to really level off until it gets to $4.00 to $4.50...

This is a scenario where "the rich get rich, the poor get poorer" slogan seriously applies. Folks w/middlelower to lower incomes aren't going to be afforded the same luxuries anymore. There are big changes afoot in our economic culture and we'll see more and more of that in the next few years.

And a recent report shows that hybrids are no where close to saving people ANY money right now, so...

which "recent reports" are you referring to? i know for a fact that there's at least one company in california that's been experimenting with new types of batteries that can boost the gas mileage in hybrid cars to around 200mpg, and they are slowly making this available to consumers.

 

[Man-Thing]

I'm a Democrat and I even like Specter's move here.

Specter is a Democrat in sheeps clothing.

 

[Man-Thing]

Reaganomics is a joke. Businesses don't pay taxes, they pocket the extra money while keeping prices the same. At any rate, the oil industry certainly isn't passing its record high profits onto the consumer right now.

I love Reaganomics.

You don't have to be a economics major to understand that if a company IS NOT taxed as much to realize that more revenue is earned. When more revenue is earned, the company will re-invest it back into the company through R&D and more jobs. Michael Dell said that the .com boom of the ninetys was a direct response from Reagan's tax cuts in the 80's. It just took 10 or so years for it to come into frutition.

Since companys and corperations are considered and entity (they have a tax ID #, which is the same as a SS#), they should be taxed equally to the citizens.

Or better yet, let's just abolish the IRS and install a national sales tax. Even better than that, let's abolish Government charities and Government subsidies.

 

[Admiral_N8]

I love Reaganomics.

You don't have to be a economics major to understand that if a company IS NOT taxed as much to realize that more revenue is earned. When more revenue is earned, the company will re-invest it back into the company through R&D and more jobs. Michael Dell said that the .com boom of the ninetys was a direct response from Reagan's tax cuts in the 80's. It just took 10 or so years for it to come into frutition.

Thats why we had such huge growth compared to every other nation on Earth during that time....not sure about Mars though...

 

[cass]

let's hope so. i mean, yeah harris got a boobjob, but no amount of plastic surgery can make that soulless bush-skank even remotely attractive.

Mmmmmmm....namecalling. The one defense you have.

 

[War Lord]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=axsSLmjPMsdg&refer=us

Go Specter

If you're going to tax profits, why would the oil companies bother trying to increase supply since by increasing supply would lead to more profits that would simply be taxed?

 

[War Lord]

If you're going to tax profits, why would the oil companies bother trying to increase supply since by increasing supply would lead to more profits that would simply be taxed?

The better solution is to cut down on how much you drive and consider your options.

 

[War Lord]

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/thomassowell/2005/11/16/175725.html

A newspaper headline -- "Lawmakers Struggle to Define Gasoline Price 'Gouging'" -- shows how phony the current Congressional jihad against the oil companies is. "Price gouging" is one of those phrases that evoke strong emotions but have no definition.

Where particular states have passed laws against "price gouging," their different definitions reveal how slippery and arbitrary the concept is. Kansas attempts to define price gouging as selling at prices more than 25 percent higher than they were before some disaster. Georgia makes it illegal for prices to rise after the state government has declared a state of emergency, unless the seller can prove that his costs have gone up.

What all this boils down to is that prices higher than what observers are used to are called "gouging." In other words, prices under normal conditions are supposed to prevail under abnormal conditions. This completely misunderstands the role of prices.

Why do prices exist at all? To cause things to be produced and made available to the public -- and to cause consumers to limit how much they consume. Why then do prices suddenly shoot up? Because there is either less of a supply available or more of a demand, or both.

When hurricanes knocked out both oil drilling sites and refineries around the Gulf of Mexico, there was suddenly less supply of oil. That meant higher prices and higher profits.

What do higher prices do? Force people to restrain their own purchases more so than usual. What do higher profits do? Cause more money to be invested in producing whatever is earning higher profits, and this in turn expands output. Isn't a larger supply of oil and a reduced consumption of it what we want?

Whenever there have been sharp rises in gasoline prices, whether nationwide or locally in California, Senator Barbara Boxer has loudly demanded an investigation of the oil companies. These repeated investigations over the years have repeatedly failed to turn up anything other than supply and demand.

The real irony is that it has been precisely liberals like Barbara Boxer who have been the chief obstacles to increasing the supply of oil because they are dead set against drilling for oil in more places and against building more refineries.

When you refuse to let supply rise to meet rising demand, why should you be surprised -- much less outraged -- when prices rise?

Yet there was Senator Boxer on nationwide TV, decrying the high salaries of oil company executives, who are making perhaps half of what a number of baseball players make or a tenth of what movie stars make. The insinuation is that their salaries and oil company profits are what drive up gasoline prices. But there were no hard facts to back up either insinuation.

Given the enormous sums of money involved in the production of oil, even if all the oil company CEOs worked for nothing, there is no hard evidence that this would be enough to reduce the price of gasoline by even one cent per gallon. As for oil company profits -- representing "greed," as the Barbara Boxers call it -- these profits per gallon of gas are much less than federal taxes per gallon of gas. But the government is never called "greedy" by liberals.

These political circuses have a cost that can be even greater than the high cost of gasoline.

We went through all this before, back in the 1970s, when oil company executives were also hauled up before Congress and denounced on TV by politicians. Inflammatory but vague and unsubstantiated charges went flying hither and yon in the media.

This demonization of oil companies made it politically inconvenient to remove price controls on oil when other price controls from the Nixon administration years were repealed.

The net result was that the shortages which price controls produce disappeared for other things but remained for gasoline. Motorists had trouble finding gasoline and sometimes spent hours waiting in long lines at filling stations. This was the hidden cost of political demagoguery.

Anyone nostalgic for those days of waiting in gasoline lines, which sometimes reached around the block, can jump on the bandwagon for gasoline price controls or other laws to crack down on "Big Oil." Just be aware that there is a cost. There is no free lunch -- and no free demagoguery.

 

[Mentok]

We are in another oil crisis and we have two main reasons (Not the only reasons) for that.

1- High demand in a rapidly expanding Chinese economy.

2- Instability in the Middle East (Which we have the Bush administration to thank for).

 

[redmarvel]

The best way to lower gas prices is to reduce the demand for gas.

The best way to reduce the demand for gas is insist that all car companies (foreign or domestic) build a hybrid or non-gas (alcohol, solar, etc.) powered vehicle that costs the same as their cheapest vehicle to buy and that seats at least 2 adults and 2 children under the age of 16.

 

[XwolverineX]

I don't have a car...

 

[redmarvel]

which "recent reports" are you referring to? i know for a fact that there's at least one company in california that's been experimenting with new types of batteries that can boost the gas mileage in hybrid cars to around 200mpg, and they are slowly making this available to consumers.

"Experimenting" would be the key word here. Currently it costs a ridiculous amount of money to buy a Hybrid and you know you'ld have to buy a completely new car in 10 years because it would cost the same as trying to replace the battery. (We own a 1984 Cadillac Seville and a 1994 Dodge van, so as you can see, any vehicle that isn't good 10 years later isn't one we're likely to own).

 

[redmarvel]

I don't have a car...

Why don't you own a car? It may not be a bad thing. You may not need one. I use transit more than the cars we own. I also enjoy walking or biking to where we want to go. I only just got my license (passed my second test yesterday, now I can drive without a co-driver) because Hubby wasn't allowed to drive for a year (for medical reasons). Believe it or not, I never really wanted to drive.

 

[Calvin]

I don't plan on owning a car ever again. Haven't had one since high school. Public transportation all the way.

 

[Milkman95]

From one Michigan-der to another:

You're wrong.

Nah, my opinion is never wrong, because it's mine......

 

[Erzengel]

Gas is up to $2.79-$2.83 for regular around me.

 

[redmarvel]

On a semi-related topic, with Hydro costs going up, Hubby and I were discussing what we could do to generate our own electricity.

Photovalic (?sp?) [solar panel] cells on the roof or a wind turbine were our two main options. However trying to find anyone in Toronto who installs either proved to be extremely difficult. We still have no idea what it would cost to install nor what the eventual savings would be.

 

[Milkman95]

$2.99 around me - hilarious.

I can laugh because I have a company car and gas card......I go to the most expensive stations ON PURPOSE.

 

[Darthphere]

$2.99 around me - hilarious.

I can laugh because I have a company car and gas card......I go to the most expensive stations ON PURPOSE.

Good job then, nature will come back and kick you in the nuts. Hurricanes are on your way.

 

[lazur]

Senator Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat, said President George W. Bush should call oil company executives to the White House and tell them he'll support a new tax on their profits unless they lower prices.


YEAH.....LIKE THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN ; BUSH IS THE PRIMARY REASON THIS IS HAPPENING TO BEGIN WITH.

Has anyone even considered the rising gas prices are a major catalyst to finding alternate energy sources, and that the oil executives know there are a lot of initiatives in place to more or less kill their primary revenue stream? Maybe this hike in gas prices is their last ditch effort to cash in before the crash happens and new fuel sources take over.

Maybe the high gas prices are actually a good thing because it'll motivate people to DO SOMETHING about it. Maybe the President isn't the one to blame??

And while, yes, the President *might* be able to exercise his influence to *try* to get prices reduced, I honestly HOPE you people aren't seriously sitting here and calling for the President to regulate the prices being charged. That is a very slippery slope and not very becoming to a FREE MARKET.

Just a thought.

 

[Milkman95]

Good job then, nature will come back and kick you in the nuts. Hurricanes are on your way.

It probably will come back to get me - I am paying for gas for my other two cars and my motorcycle if that makes you feel better.............Hurricanes don't come close to Michigan by the way..........

 

[Darthphere]

It probably will come back to get me - I am paying for gas for my other two cars and my motorcycle if that makes you feel better.............Hurricanes don't come close to Michigan by the way..........

You dare tell God what he can and cannot do. Blood clots are on the way.

 

[Milkman95]

You dare tell God what he can and cannot do. Blood clots are on the way.

Thanks for the well wishes........have a nice day too....

 

[Matt]

I love Reaganomics.

You don't have to be a economics major to understand that if a company IS NOT taxed as much to realize that more revenue is earned. When more revenue is earned, the company will re-invest it back into the company through R&D and more jobs. Michael Dell said that the .com boom of the ninetys was a direct response from Reagan's tax cuts in the 80's. It just took 10 or so years for it to come into frutition.

Since companys and corperations are considered and entity (they have a tax ID #, which is the same as a SS#), they should be taxed equally to the citizens.

Or better yet, let's just abolish the IRS and install a national sales tax. Even better than that, let's abolish Government charities and Government subsidies.

Ok, ignoring the virtues of Reaganomics for most corporations...(which doesn't work, corporations simply pass the surplus profits onto themselves )...it certainly does not work for oil companies. Oil companies haven't been being taxed hard for years and how have they passed their record high profits onto the consumers? Answer...they haven't.

Personally I think the government should be giving relief on their side. My friend is in the military...he told me he only has to pay 2.40 or something for gas on a military base because its not taxed. The government could offer relief really easily by just eliminating that.

As for Bush's responsibility in it, Jonty, if he opened the oil reserve consumers would not only get relief, oil companies would lose money, forcing them to pass on their record high profits to the consumers.