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.
i don't think most of the posters are actually having trouble buying gas.
you seem to be missing the big picture that we (all of us) want a president who works FOR us- not sending our money to foreign countries to help them with their energy independence, while trying behind the scenes to stifle it here at home.
that is seriously messed up.
That's fair. I can agree with you on that. I'd rather have our government save their money and pay down the debt. And hopefully place a 100% tax on gasoline as well. If it's so cheap, we might as well tax it to pay off the debt. It's better than taxing income.
i don't think most of the posters are actually having trouble buying gas.
you seem to be missing the big picture that we (all of us) want a president who works FOR us- not sending our money to foreign countries to help them with their energy independence, while trying behind the scenes to stifle it here at home.
that is seriously messed up.
That's exactly correct.
Obama has been urging an energy policy that stresses electric cars and the Republicans criticize him about electric car subsidies; He says he wants high speed trains, that reduce jet fuel and auto fuel use and the Republicans criticize him and take it out of the budget; Obama urges higher CAFE standards and the Republicans criticize him. THEN, they complain he isn't doing anything!
It's like the first Dirty Harry movie, "everyone wants results but nobody wants to do what needs to be done to get those results."
Additionally, the fact that oil is supposedly a scarce commodity is a lie. The way they drive up prices is to shut down oil rigs. By the way, oil is not a fossil fuel. It is ABIOTIC and replenishes itself. The oil industry dreamed up that the public might buy the fact that oil was a fossil fuel a hundred years ago and they figured they would use it so they could justify charging more for it.
That's fair. I can agree with you on that. I'd rather have our government save their money and pay down the debt. And hopefully place a 100% tax on gasoline as well. If it's so cheap, we might as well tax it to pay off the debt. It's better than taxing income.
good luck getting the government to stop spending and pay down the debt.
Additionally, the fact that oil is supposedly a scarce commodity is a lie. The way they drive up prices is to shut down oil rigs. By the way, oil is not a fossil fuel. It is ABIOTIC and replenishes itself. The oil industry dreamed up that the public might buy the fact that oil was a fossil fuel a hundred years ago and they figured they would use it so they could justify charging more for it.
That's fair. I can agree with you on that. I'd rather have our government save their money and pay down the debt. And hopefully place a 100% tax on gasoline as well. If it's so cheap, we might as well tax it to pay off the debt. It's better than taxing income.
We've been talking about this for almost 40 years and nothing gets done. Google 'gerald ford 1975 "state of the union." ' He talks about all of this.
As long as energy companies can go to Washington with suitcases full of cash, nothing is going to get done.
I wasn't alive in 1975, so I'm not that well versed in super old policy.
I have mixed feelings about our ability to lobby. We all take advantage of it when we can but complain about it when someone else does.
I wasn't born in Roman times but I know who Julius Caesar was. If we think we only need to know what happened during our lives we'd be still living in caves.
That's why they invented recorded history and books. We now have the internet.
A) nuclear is a far more expensive alternative and requires that the government indemnify the utility because no insurance company will insure a nuclear plant. I don't know why one wouldn't like solar or wind. I've got photovoltaics on my roof that make 75% of my electricity.
B) As for refineries, when was the last time you passed a gas station and saw a "no gas today" sign? I didn't see one recently either. The fact is that the oil companies haven't built new refineries for good reason. They don't need more of them. Building new refineries are expensive and it doesn't make business sense to build a new one just for it to be used below capacity. It's much more sensible for oil refineries to be retrofitted to output more capacity -- and that's what they have done.
C) Alternative fuels are a good idea but efficiency is a much better alternative. The new Prius C, out in a few months, will get 60 mpg.
Google a comparison between the productivity of a nuclear power plant vs. a solar array. If individuals can purchase solar panels from U.S. firms and the U.S. gov't subsidizes that, I'm fine with that. The reality of the nation's needs and the amount of energy needed means nuclear power sources. You would need a solar array the size of a large state or two to do the job. Same thing with wind energy. These also have their own unique environmental impacts.
Greater oil production in the U.S. would translate into a need for more refineries, which haven't been built here in decades. Why are we subsidizing refineries in other nations? This is absurd.
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.
