Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do tell how you "funnel" money into alternative energy. Which ideas do you support? Should we have a planned economy? You know like the USSR once had?
Of course we should have a planned economy. Lurching from bailout to bailout from crisis to crisis is preferable? The Soviet model is the only one possible?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Humanoid
The bailouts are trying ease the credit markets. Without functioning credit markets not much is going to happen in the business world. You seem to think that if the government instead started to allocating resources things would be better.... Are you an advocate of communism?
Are you an advocate of plutocracy? Should we continue to allow our government to be corrupted by corporate lobbyists and their million$$$? What's good for GM is good for America? I think it's becoming pretty clear that doesn't work.
“A temporary drop below $25 a barrel is possible if the global recession extends to China and significant non-OPEC cuts are required,” Blanch said. “In the short-run, global oil demand growth will likely take a further beating as banks continue to cut credit to consumers and corporations.”
Jesus............maybe $25 for a barrel.
I guess that looks nice to people. But really may show how weak the world economy. And the weakness may put me and alot of others out of work. So cheap oil price ain't going to save a lot of folks.
Hmmmmm....cheap gas............nothing to do because of unemployment????????????................ROADTRIP TIME!
I don't mind creating a sort of externality charge with higher fuel taxes so long as the Government is not directing what happens with the tax revenue. Its just the idea of the Government "funneling" money into alternative energies that is a bit scary.
Greetings Humanoid,
I completely agree. I want it to be revenue neutral. I don't want any direct investment from the Feds. All this should come directly back as rebates to tax payers. This would fix the problem that the oil glut caused when alternative energy went bust and encourage savings in the form of energy economy.
Wow, that stinks - at least the part about getting hit on your bike! Sorry to hear that.
Hi Filet Mignon,
Yeah it does. I cannot ride a bike the same way anymore. Every time a car comes behind me I think of it. I guess in some ways I am lucky because I got a warning. I still don't know how I stayed on the bike.
I have a 2006. Great inter modal transportation but suburban streets are murderous. My advice to anyone is a rear view mirror, it helps a lot. Also ride the center so they can see you and then drift right to allow them to pass.
Where should they funnel it, into the pockets of well connected military contractors? Oh, wait, that's been done. If they're going to funnel it somewhere it might as well be where we get a good return on investment here in this country instead of over there killing people. Infrastructure, energy efficiency, public transit, rail service, alt.energy seem like good investments for the future.
Investment in killing and thievery machines is the only kind of effective direct investment any government is capable of. Any other sort of "market" experiment on the part of the government is bound to fail.
If there's going to be a higher tax on gasoline, the only thing it should fund is road maintenance (if we're still to insist on the idea of "free" roads that are owned by the state) and lowering other taxes that are a real drag on economic development - especially income and capital gains taxes.
On a side note, why is rail a good investment anyway? Are you proposing that we build tons of railways that nobody will use? Humanoid has said this before - this is America, not Europe. No amount of foolish government meddling is going to change the fact that we have a car culture, not a mass transport culture.
Where should they funnel it, into the pockets of well connected military contractors? Oh, wait, that's been done. If they're going to funnel it somewhere it might as well be where we get a good return on investment here in this country instead of over there killing people. Infrastructure, energy efficiency, public transit, rail service, alt.energy seem like good investments for the future.
The point is that the money should not be funneled anywhere. If they raise taxes on fuel then there should be tax cuts else where. There really is a good argument for raising fuel taxes even above and beyond trying to get people to use alternatives. Burning fossil fuels has a lot of externalities, such as pollution.
which is close to the april prediction of 'on way to $34 a barrel by years end'
Quote:
Oh yea, oil is gonna go to two hundred you say. Hey, it is your money, go ahead and gamble it like a moron. It will start dropping back down on its way to 34 bucks a barrel by year's end (it will eventually get to 34, not at years end, but heading towards it on its way down.)
This is feeling so good when you fill up your tank...but be prepared...it could go up. If you need a new car, remember that the prices where up and could go up and when I filled up my tank for $ 80.- it didn't feel so good as it does right now.
I just wonder how long it will last before they gouge us again
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
