|
OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=4983328
Cheney says what most of us already know, cutting the federal gas tax between memorial and labor day is pointless and does nothing but cut 10 billion in taxes. As was pointed out earlier, the average savings is 28 dollars for each american for 5 months. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Don't Taze Me, Bro! wrote:
> http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=4983328 > > Cheney says what most of us already know, cutting the federal gas tax > between memorial and labor day is pointless and does nothing but cut 10 > billion in taxes. > > As was pointed out earlier, the average savings is 28 dollars for each > american for 5 months. > > troll. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message news:WrKdneKLLY8r2djVnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t... > Don't Taze Me, Bro! wrote: >> http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=4983328 >> >> Cheney says what most of us already know, cutting the federal gas tax >> between memorial and labor day is pointless and does nothing but cut 10 >> billion in taxes. >> >> As was pointed out earlier, the average savings is 28 dollars for each >> american for 5 months. >> >> > > troll. For posting an OT? Geeze, everyone is a troll these days when they don't post something we like. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 17:40:50 GMT, "Don't Taze Me, Bro!"
<N00One187@NoWhere.Com> wrote: > >"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message >news:WrKdneKLLY8r2djVnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@speakeasy.n et... >> Don't Taze Me, Bro! wrote: >>> http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=4983328 >>> >>> Cheney says what most of us already know, cutting the federal gas tax >>> between memorial and labor day is pointless and does nothing but cut 10 >>> billion in taxes. >>> >>> As was pointed out earlier, the average savings is 28 dollars for each >>> american for 5 months. >>> >>> >> >> troll. > >For posting an OT? Geeze, everyone is a troll these days when they don't >post something we like. > The thing that I find amazing is that Cheney is apparently correct about something. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 06:18:46 -0700, jim beam
<spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote: >> Cheney says what most of us already know, cutting the federal gas tax >> between memorial and labor day is pointless and does nothing but cut 10 >> billion in taxes. >> >> As was pointed out earlier, the average savings is 28 dollars for each >> american for 5 months. >> >> > >troll. Cheney? Too tall to be a troll, except perhaps the large ones you find in the Hobbit. Perhaps more of a goblin, or maybe one of those oversize orcs. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
CHENEY SUCKS !!!!!!!!!
"still just me" <wheeledBobNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:4j4b44p78guigijao149md52oeoo3f0ndb@4ax.com... > On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 06:18:46 -0700, jim beam > <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote: > >>> Cheney says what most of us already know, cutting the federal gas tax >>> between memorial and labor day is pointless and does nothing but cut 10 >>> billion in taxes. >>> >>> As was pointed out earlier, the average savings is 28 dollars for each >>> american for 5 months. >>> >>> >> >>troll. > > Cheney? Too tall to be a troll, except perhaps the large ones you find > in the Hobbit. Perhaps more of a goblin, or maybe one of those > oversize orcs. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Cheny is a wad, but he is right. Increasing demand does not lower
the price. What we should do is raise the tax to cut wasteful consumption. Then offset the increase by giving a limited tax credit to family tax payers with under 100k net income (single filers 50k,) $0 credit for those over. That way we keep the tax of the backs of those that can least afford it and punish the Hummer drivers. This will spur growth of Hybrid and alternative fuels. You know damn well that if it hurts the rich that they will start doing something about it. Increase the tax monthly until they cry uncle. D. wrote: > CHENEY SUCKS !!!!!!!!! > > > "still just me" <wheeledBobNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:4j4b44p78guigijao149md52oeoo3f0ndb@4ax.com... >> On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 06:18:46 -0700, jim beam >> <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote: >> >>>> Cheney says what most of us already know, cutting the federal gas tax >>>> between memorial and labor day is pointless and does nothing but cut 10 >>>> billion in taxes. >>>> >>>> As was pointed out earlier, the average savings is 28 dollars for each >>>> american for 5 months. >>>> >>>> >>> troll. >> Cheney? Too tall to be a troll, except perhaps the large ones you find >> in the Hobbit. Perhaps more of a goblin, or maybe one of those >> oversize orcs. > > |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Just Me (remove <nospam> to reply) wrote:
> What we should do is raise the tax to cut wasteful consumption. Then > offset the increase by giving a limited tax credit to family tax payers > with under 100k net income (single filers 50k,) $0 credit for those > over. That way we keep the tax of the backs of those that can least > afford it and punish the Hummer drivers. This will spur growth of > Hybrid and alternative fuels. You know damn well that if it hurts the > rich that they will start doing something about it. Increase the tax > monthly until they cry uncle. You're forgetting/ignoring the serious overhead cost of employing people (within gubmint) to administer your system that does nothing but move money around. The amount of money that goes in to be re-distributed (for punishment and reward) will come out of the other end of the gubmint pipeline as a much smaller amount and will be a net loss to the economy. For the same reason, you can't hook a motor and a generator together, start them spinning, and feed the gerneator output to the input of the motor and expect them to keep spinning (much less create a net gain of power). Inefficiencies in the gubmint of administering such a program are probably worse than in my motor/generator analogy (for reference, see "perpetual motion"). Like most liberal schemes, there will be pretended "unintended consequences" and a net unavoidable loss to the economy and the quality of life. Liberalism always achieves the exact opposite of it's stated intent (better quality of life vs. degraded quality of life). Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
On 2008-06-04, Just Me (remove <nospam> to reply) <2000-nospam-cam@verizon.net> wrote:
> Cheny is a wad, but he is right. Increasing demand does not lower > the price. > > What we should do is raise the tax to cut wasteful consumption. Then > offset the increase by giving a limited tax credit to family tax payers > with under 100k net income (single filers 50k,) $0 credit for those > over. That way we keep the tax of the backs of those that can least > afford it and punish the Hummer drivers. This will spur growth of > Hybrid and alternative fuels. You know damn well that if it hurts the > rich that they will start doing something about it. Increase the tax > monthly until they cry uncle. The solution to any problem is NEVER more taxes. It is not the government's job to regulate the actions of the people. The solution is to let the price continue to be determined by supply and demand. If the price gets so high that people start actually curbing their use of fuel, the price will drop. It has probably already hit that point, and the price will likely settle around $3.75 per gallon for regular unleaded. The oil companies have no responsibility to the customer other than to provide the product at whatever price people are willing to pay for it. The price at which they are able to sell all the oil they want for the most amount of cash. This is good for the stockholders, and therefore exactly what the executives should do. -- Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733 joe at hits - buffalo dot com "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the time..." - Danny, American History X |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:43:46 -0500, Joe <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo.com>
wrote: >On 2008-06-04, Just Me (remove <nospam> to reply) <2000-nospam-cam@verizon.net> wrote: >> Cheny is a wad, but he is right. Increasing demand does not lower >> the price. >> >> What we should do is raise the tax to cut wasteful consumption. Then >> offset the increase by giving a limited tax credit to family tax payers >> with under 100k net income (single filers 50k,) $0 credit for those >> over. That way we keep the tax of the backs of those that can least >> afford it and punish the Hummer drivers. This will spur growth of >> Hybrid and alternative fuels. You know damn well that if it hurts the >> rich that they will start doing something about it. Increase the tax >> monthly until they cry uncle. > >The solution to any problem is NEVER more taxes. It is not the >government's job to regulate the actions of the people. > >The solution is to let the price continue to be determined by supply >and demand. If the price gets so high that people start actually >curbing their use of fuel, the price will drop. It has probably >already hit that point, and the price will likely settle around $3.75 >per gallon for regular unleaded. > One large factor in rising gas prices is the falling dollar. It's falling because we're spending a $trillion on a war to take over Iraq. And of course it's the government's job to regulate the actions of people. That's why we have a government. Otherwise we have a free for all. I don't mind tax and spend Democrats; that's the way government is supposed to operate. My problem is the borrow and spend Republicans. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
In message news:vclf44d99iqbindik9i3fanbclnblnlmmt@4ax.com, dgk
<dgk@somewhere.com> burned some brain cells writing: > And of course it's the government's job to regulate the actions of > people. That's why we have a government. Thomas Jefferson on Line One. And he's pissed. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
On 05 Jun 2008 12:28:59 GMT, Klark Kent <stewart@copeland.com`> wrote:
>> And of course it's the government's job to regulate the actions of >> people. That's why we have a government. > >Thomas Jefferson on Line One. And he's pissed. He's been pissed since Bush started ignoring his duty to protect the Constitution = and in fact, directly violating it - around 2001. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
On Jun 3, 1:40 pm, "Don't Taze Me, Bro!" <N00One...@NoWhere.Com>
wrote: > "jim beam" <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote in message > > news:WrKdneKLLY8r2djVnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t... > > > Don't Taze Me, Bro! wrote: > >>http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=4983328 > > >> Cheney says what most of us already know, cutting the federal gas tax > >> between memorial and labor day is pointless and does nothing but cut 10 > >> billion in taxes. > > >> As was pointed out earlier, the average savings is 28 dollars for each > >> american for 5 months. > > > troll. > > For posting an OT? Geeze, everyone is a troll these days when they don't > post something we like. No, you're a troll because you post crap and then never get back involved in the discussion. And also because you cross-post to a million different groups. Dan D '07 Ody EX Central NJ USA |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:43:46 -0500, Joe <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo.com>
wrote: >The oil companies have no responsibility to the customer other than to >provide the product at whatever price people are willing to pay for >it. The price at which they are able to sell all the oil they want >for the most amount of cash. This is good for the stockholders, and >therefore exactly what the executives should do. However, collusion for the purpose of monopoly is still illegal on the books of the US (although not enforced at all since January of 2000). Note the Enron case in CA and the current US investigation of such alleged actions. When "product at a price" moves into "manipulate the market" then there is an issue. Those same executives bear responsibility for that too. But, at the end of the day, some of us still believe in honesty, integrity, and doing the right thing for our customers our country, and our society - other (like you I have to guess) believe that greed is the guiding principle and model for our lives. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
In message news:c09g44dlgrj7jl5dvm3m99dhs34nd4sjrf@4ax.com, still just me
<wheeledBobNOSPAM@yahoo.com> burned some brain cells writing: > On 05 Jun 2008 12:28:59 GMT, Klark Kent <stewart@copeland.com`> wrote: > >>> And of course it's the government's job to regulate the actions of >>> people. That's why we have a government. >> >>Thomas Jefferson on Line One. And he's pissed. > > He's been pissed since Bush started ignoring his duty to protect the > Constitution = and in fact, directly violating it - around 2001. It started long before then. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
"dgk" <dgk@somewhere.com> wrote in message news:vclf44d99iqbindik9i3fanbclnblnlmmt@4ax.com... > >The solution is to let the price continue to be determined by supply > >and demand. If the price gets so high that people start actually > >curbing their use of fuel, the price will drop. It has probably > >already hit that point, and the price will likely settle around $3.75 > >per gallon for regular unleaded. > > > > One large factor in rising gas prices is the falling dollar. It's > falling because we're spending a $trillion on a war to take over Iraq. If that were true the great problem would have started a few years ago, and not right after the Dems won the congress in 2006, claiming of all things, to lower gas prices.... |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
"still just me" <wheeledBobNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:c09g44dlgrj7jl5dvm3m99dhs34nd4sjrf@4ax.com... > On 05 Jun 2008 12:28:59 GMT, Klark Kent <stewart@copeland.com`> wrote: > > >> And of course it's the government's job to regulate the actions of > >> people. That's why we have a government. > > > >Thomas Jefferson on Line One. And he's pissed. > > He's been pissed since Bush started ignoring his duty to protect the > Constitution = and in fact, directly violating it - around 2001. Cite? > |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
"still just me" <wheeledBobNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:c09g44dlgrj7jl5dvm3m99dhs34nd4sjrf@4ax.com... > On 05 Jun 2008 12:28:59 GMT, Klark Kent <stewart@copeland.com`> wrote: > >>> And of course it's the government's job to regulate the actions of >>> people. That's why we have a government. >> >>Thomas Jefferson on Line One. And he's pissed. > > He's been pissed since Bush started ignoring his duty to protect the > Constitution = and in fact, directly violating it - around 2001. > Nice German man describing Georgie's government: Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country. -Hermann Goering |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Just Me (remove <nospam> to reply) wrote:
> Cheny is a wad, but he is right. Increasing demand does not lower > the price. > > What we should do is raise the tax to cut wasteful consumption. Then > offset the increase by giving a limited tax credit to family tax payers > with under 100k net income (single filers 50k,) $0 credit for those > over. That way we keep the tax of the backs of those that can least > afford it and punish the Hummer drivers. This will spur growth of > Hybrid and alternative fuels. You know damn well that if it hurts the > rich that they will start doing something about it. Increase the tax > monthly until they cry uncle. Actually, we should raise the gas tax with an offsetting tax credit up to a certain limit. I would NOT limit the tax credit by income or filing status. You want to get buy-in from the general public, and encourage them to buy smaller vehicles, at least for commuting (keep the SUV or minivan for times when it's really appropriate). $50K is still pretty low income. Every licensed non-commercial driver with a vehicle registered in their name gets the credit for one vehicle. Maybe a $5/gallon tax, with a $5/gallon tax credit for 365 gallons a year, i.e. an $1825 tax credit. Use less than 365 gallons a year and you're ahead of the game. Use more, well it's up to you to commute solo in an SUV, or to drive the kids around in a minivan, or to live 50 miles from work. No tax credit for unlicensed drivers. No tax credit for those that don't file income taxes. Some sort of program for commercial vehicles to exempt them. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Bill Putney wrote:
> Just Me (remove <nospam> to reply) wrote: > >> What we should do is raise the tax to cut wasteful consumption. Then >> offset the increase by giving a limited tax credit to family tax >> payers with under 100k net income (single filers 50k,) $0 credit for >> those over. That way we keep the tax of the backs of those that can >> least afford it and punish the Hummer drivers. This will spur growth >> of Hybrid and alternative fuels. You know damn well that if it hurts >> the rich that they will start doing something about it. Increase the >> tax monthly until they cry uncle. > > You're forgetting/ignoring the serious overhead cost of employing people > (within gubmint) to administer your system that does nothing but move > money around. It'd be less than you think. Most of the infrastructure is already in place. The IRS already administers a variety of tax credits for various social policies, and the government already collects the federal gas tax. No new agencies are required. We're not talking about issuing ration books here. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
"Bill Putney" <bptn@kinez.net> wrote
> Like most liberal schemes, there will be pretended > "unintended consequences" and a net unavoidable loss to > the economy and the quality of life. Liberalism always > achieves the exact opposite of it's stated intent (better > quality of life vs. degraded quality of life). And you think this lunatic Bush has not degraded quality of life with the costs of this insane war and letting banks and Wall Street manipulate the mortgage and credit market so we are in a serious recession, with the little people getting thrown out of their homes and the big people seeing their assets in financial stocks plummet? You think it's good things were allowed to go hog wild? Maybe when the little people have lost enough jobs and are panicking to feed their kids, and so now they are tearing at the gates of your suburban community and happy to knife you as you walk down the street to support their families, you'll get it. A few liberal principles are precisely what ensures a healthy labor force to keep the economy thriving, and all of us, better off. I'd like every idiot who supported Bush to get kicked out of their house and go serve in Iraq for six months. This includes the non-voters who go around complaining but do not have the guts to admit putting Gore or Kerry in the White House would have been much safer. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
still just me wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:43:46 -0500, Joe <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo.com> > wrote: > >> The oil companies have no responsibility to the customer other than to >> provide the product at whatever price people are willing to pay for >> it. The price at which they are able to sell all the oil they want >> for the most amount of cash. This is good for the stockholders, and >> therefore exactly what the executives should do. > > However, collusion for the purpose of monopoly is still illegal on the > books of the US (although not enforced at all since January of 2000). > Note the Enron case in CA and the current US investigation of such > alleged actions. When "product at a price" moves into "manipulate the > market" then there is an issue. Those same executives bear > responsibility for that too. > > But, at the end of the day, some of us still believe in honesty, > integrity, and doing the right thing for our customers our country, > and our society - other (like you I have to guess) believe that greed > is the guiding principle and model for our lives. Umm - which previous administration was the same activity going on in? And which one put a stop to it and prosecuted it. You're blaming the Bush administration when that's the administration that blew the whistle on it. The previous administration did nothing. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
SMS wrote:
> Bill Putney wrote: >> Just Me (remove <nospam> to reply) wrote: >> >>> What we should do is raise the tax to cut wasteful consumption. Then >>> offset the increase by giving a limited tax credit to family tax >>> payers with under 100k net income (single filers 50k,) $0 credit for >>> those over. That way we keep the tax of the backs of those that can >>> least afford it and punish the Hummer drivers. This will spur growth >>> of Hybrid and alternative fuels. You know damn well that if it hurts >>> the rich that they will start doing something about it. Increase the >>> tax monthly until they cry uncle. >> >> You're forgetting/ignoring the serious overhead cost of employing >> people (within gubmint) to administer your system that does nothing >> but move money around. > > It'd be less than you think. Most of the infrastructure is already in > place. The IRS already administers a variety of tax credits for various > social policies, and the government already collects the federal gas > tax. No new agencies are required. We're not talking about issuing > ration books here. You kid yourself if you really believe that it would not take extra bodies in the gov't to administer it. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Elle wrote:
> "Bill Putney" <bptn@kinez.net> wrote >> Like most liberal schemes, there will be pretended >> "unintended consequences" and a net unavoidable loss to >> the economy and the quality of life. Liberalism always >> achieves the exact opposite of it's stated intent (better >> quality of life vs. degraded quality of life). > > And you think this lunatic Bush has not degraded quality of > life with the costs of this insane war and letting banks and > Wall Street manipulate the mortgage and credit market so we > are in a serious recession, We disagree on the war, and Congress created the mortgage crisis by incentivising (with both carrots and sticks) the lenders into lending huge sums of money in violation of every sound business practice of properly qualifying lenders. We're just seeing the chickens coming home to roost on that one (again - achieving the exact opposite of the stated intent). with the little people getting > thrown out of their homes and the big people seeing their > assets in financial stocks plummet? You think it's good > things were allowed to go hog wild? Congress put into action programs to cause exactly that to happen in violation of proven good business practices. > Maybe when the little people have lost enough jobs and are > panicking to feed their kids, and so now they are tearing at > the gates of your suburban community and happy to knife you > as you walk down the street to support their families, > you'll get it. > > A few liberal principles are precisely what ensures a > healthy labor force to keep the economy thriving, and all of > us What principles in particular would those be? > I'd like every idiot who supported Bush to get kicked out of > their house and go serve in Iraq for six months. OK. > This > includes the non-voters who go around complaining but do not > have the guts to admit putting Gore or Kerry in the White > House would have been much safer. That last part I definitely disagree with you on. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Bill Putney wrote:
> You kid yourself if you really believe that it would not take extra > bodies in the gov't to administer it. It would probably require adding some treasury department personnel to administer it, but it's not like creating a whole new government department. The infrastructure is all in place. The overhead would be minimal, just like it is when other tax incentives are added to the tax code, or when tax rates change. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Joe wrote:
> The solution is to let the price continue to be determined by supply > and demand. If the price gets so high that people start actually > curbing their use of fuel, the price will drop. It has probably > already hit that point, and the price will likely settle around $3.75 > per gallon for regular unleaded. This approach is extremely short-sighted. Oil is needed for products other than just than gasoline and diesel fuel. The supply and demand need to be managed carefully, as many countries already do. The actions of those not curbing their use of fuel, directly affect the rest of us. These people need to be penalized. > The oil companies have no responsibility to the customer other than to > provide the product at whatever price people are willing to pay for > it. That's right. It's the government that needs to help set the pricing at a level that is optimal for society as a whole. The price at which they are able to sell all the oil they want > for the most amount of cash. This is good for the stockholders, and > therefore exactly what the executives should do. The government is under no obligation to keep the taxes on fuel artificially low in order to help the oil companies make more money, nor are they required to institute policies that drive up the cost of oil. This is what has happened under Bush, and it was not unintentional. What the Obama administration should do: 1) Adjust the tax system on motor fuels to discourage consumption and reward conservation 2) Raise CAFE standards significantly 3) Encourage the development of plug-in hybrids 4) Encourage the expansion of nuclear power for generating electricity 5) Work on the creation of high speed rail, powered by electricity, powered by nuclear, to replace short hop air travel which is an inefficient use of fossil fuel. We just can't afford any more Republican presidents and their huge deficits, lack of foreign policy expertise, and their ties to big oil. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
SMS wrote:
> Joe wrote: > >> The solution is to let the price continue to be determined by supply >> and demand. If the price gets so high that people start actually >> curbing their use of fuel, the price will drop. It has probably >> already hit that point, and the price will likely settle around $3.75 >> per gallon for regular unleaded. > > This approach is extremely short-sighted. > > Oil is needed for products other than just than gasoline and diesel > fuel. The supply and demand need to be managed carefully, as many > countries already do. > > The actions of those not curbing their use of fuel, directly affect the > rest of us. These people need to be penalized. You mean like the people of the US, who use more fuel, per capita, than just about any other country? >> The oil companies have no responsibility to the customer other than to >> provide the product at whatever price people are willing to pay for >> it. > > That's right. It's the government that needs to help set the pricing at > a level that is optimal for society as a whole. > > The price at which they are able to sell all the oil they want >> for the most amount of cash. This is good for the stockholders, and >> therefore exactly what the executives should do. > > The government is under no obligation to keep the taxes on fuel > artificially low in order to help the oil companies make more money, nor > are they required to institute policies that drive up the cost of oil. > This is what has happened under Bush, and it was not unintentional. Not to mention under Clinton, the first Bush, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon .... > What the Obama administration should do: > > 1) Adjust the tax system on motor fuels to discourage consumption and > reward conservation > > 2) Raise CAFE standards significantly > > 3) Encourage the development of plug-in hybrids > > 4) Encourage the expansion of nuclear power for generating electricity > > 5) Work on the creation of high speed rail, powered by electricity, > powered by nuclear, to replace short hop air travel which is an > inefficient use of fossil fuel. > > > We just can't afford any more Republican presidents and their huge > deficits, lack of foreign policy expertise, and their ties to big oil. It's not just a problem with Republicans. It's a problem with Democrats. And, Americans, in general, who do not demand that their Presidents, Congress(wo)men and Senators are free from outside influences, like money from oil company executives and other conflicts of interest, as well. Over all, I agree with what you said about what the next President should do. I would also love to see a system where there is a general energy tax rebate and higher energy taxes. So, people can have a choice between saving money and energy or wasting both. Jeff |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Some nice touches that might work well.
SMS wrote: > Just Me (remove <nospam> to reply) wrote: >> Cheny is a wad, but he is right. Increasing demand does not lower >> the price. >> >> What we should do is raise the tax to cut wasteful consumption. Then >> offset the increase by giving a limited tax credit to family tax >> payers with under 100k net income (single filers 50k,) $0 credit for >> those over. That way we keep the tax of the backs of those that can >> least afford it and punish the Hummer drivers. This will spur growth >> of Hybrid and alternative fuels. You know damn well that if it hurts >> the rich that they will start doing something about it. Increase the >> tax monthly until they cry uncle. > > Actually, we should raise the gas tax with an offsetting tax credit up > to a certain limit. > > I would NOT limit the tax credit by income or filing status. You want to > get buy-in from the general public, and encourage them to buy smaller > vehicles, at least for commuting (keep the SUV or minivan for times when > it's really appropriate). $50K is still pretty low income. > > Every licensed non-commercial driver with a vehicle registered in their > name gets the credit for one vehicle. Maybe a $5/gallon tax, with a > $5/gallon tax credit for 365 gallons a year, i.e. an $1825 tax credit. > Use less than 365 gallons a year and you're ahead of the game. Use more, > well it's up to you to commute solo in an SUV, or to drive the kids > around in a minivan, or to live 50 miles from work. > > No tax credit for unlicensed drivers. > No tax credit for those that don't file income taxes. > Some sort of program for commercial vehicles to exempt them. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
On 2008-06-05, dgk <dgk@somewhere.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:43:46 -0500, Joe <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo.com> > wrote: > >>On 2008-06-04, Just Me (remove <nospam> to reply) <2000-nospam-cam@verizon.net> wrote: >>> Cheny is a wad, but he is right. Increasing demand does not lower >>> the price. >>> >>> What we should do is raise the tax to cut wasteful consumption. Then >>> offset the increase by giving a limited tax credit to family tax payers >>> with under 100k net income (single filers 50k,) $0 credit for those >>> over. That way we keep the tax of the backs of those that can least >>> afford it and punish the Hummer drivers. This will spur growth of >>> Hybrid and alternative fuels. You know damn well that if it hurts the >>> rich that they will start doing something about it. Increase the tax >>> monthly until they cry uncle. >> >>The solution to any problem is NEVER more taxes. It is not the >>government's job to regulate the actions of the people. >> >>The solution is to let the price continue to be determined by supply >>and demand. If the price gets so high that people start actually >>curbing their use of fuel, the price will drop. It has probably >>already hit that point, and the price will likely settle around $3.75 >>per gallon for regular unleaded. >> > > One large factor in rising gas prices is the falling dollar. It's > falling because we're spending a $trillion on a war to take over Iraq. That has nothing to do with the value of the dollar. Go back to school and get a lesson on economics. The largest pressure on the value of the dollar is the plummeting interest rate, resulting in the flooding of the economy with new currency, which reduces the value of the currency. Spending money on the industrial complex has never been a burden to any economy, and has been used repeatedly in the past to dig out of recession. > > And of course it's the government's job to regulate the actions of > people. That's why we have a government. Otherwise we have a free for > all. No, it is the job of the government to preserve the freedom and liberty of the people. The government is not your daddy, it is your employee. I don't need a big brother. I need someone to do the things that I cannot do on my own. Maintain the roads, protect the borders, and preserve the freedom of myself and my fellow american. > > I don't mind tax and spend Democrats; that's the way government is > supposed to operate. My problem is the borrow and spend Republicans. If you think that's how government is supposed to operate, you belong in a pen, just bahhhing along and eating your feed. You do not belong in anything that was once called a great nation. You are an abomination. You ARE the problem. -- Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733 joe at hits - buffalo dot com "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the time..." - Danny, American History X |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
["Followup-To:" header set to alt.autos.honda.]
On 2008-06-05, still just me <wheeledBobNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote: > On 05 Jun 2008 12:28:59 GMT, Klark Kent <stewart@copeland.com`> wrote: > >>> And of course it's the government's job to regulate the actions of >>> people. That's why we have a government. >> >>Thomas Jefferson on Line One. And he's pissed. > > He's been pissed since Bush started ignoring his duty to protect the > Constitution = and in fact, directly violating it - around 2001. > Bush isn't the first, or the worst, to wipe his ass with the Constitution. The first BIG foray into ignoring it was probably FDR, though it was done incrementally even before him... Now they all consider the Constitution to be no more than a challenge... -- Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733 joe at hits - buffalo dot com "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the time..." - Danny, American History X |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
On 2008-06-05, Topp@Work <topprolmc@comcast.net> wrote:
> > "dgk" <dgk@somewhere.com> wrote in message > news:vclf44d99iqbindik9i3fanbclnblnlmmt@4ax.com... > >> >The solution is to let the price continue to be determined by supply >> >and demand. If the price gets so high that people start actually >> >curbing their use of fuel, the price will drop. It has probably >> >already hit that point, and the price will likely settle around $3.75 >> >per gallon for regular unleaded. >> > >> >> One large factor in rising gas prices is the falling dollar. It's >> falling because we're spending a $trillion on a war to take over Iraq. > > If that were true the great problem would have started a few years ago, and > not right after > the Dems won the congress in 2006, claiming of all things, to lower gas > prices.... > > To be fair, one of Bush's big campaign promises in 2000 was to lower gas prices. He hasn't been very successful. -- Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733 joe at hits - buffalo dot com "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the time..." - Danny, American History X |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
On 2008-06-05, still just me <wheeledBobNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:43:46 -0500, Joe <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo.com> > wrote: > >>The oil companies have no responsibility to the customer other than to >>provide the product at whatever price people are willing to pay for >>it. The price at which they are able to sell all the oil they want >>for the most amount of cash. This is good for the stockholders, and >>therefore exactly what the executives should do. > > However, collusion for the purpose of monopoly is still illegal on the > books of the US (although not enforced at all since January of 2000). > Note the Enron case in CA and the current US investigation of such > alleged actions. When "product at a price" moves into "manipulate the > market" then there is an issue. Those same executives bear > responsibility for that too. What collusion? The oil companies make a small percentage of the price of gas. Pennies on the dollar. That hasn't changed. They still make the same percentage. The price increase isn't their fault. It has gone up because of several factors, but none of them were oil company greed. > > But, at the end of the day, some of us still believe in honesty, > integrity, and doing the right thing for our customers our country, > and our society - other (like you I have to guess) believe that greed > is the guiding principle and model for our lives. > > You do the right thing for your customers because they pay you for it. You don't do it for free, or you cease to have a company, and therefore cease to have customers. -- Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733 joe at hits - buffalo dot com "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the time..." - Danny, American History X |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Bill Putney wrote: > Just Me (remove <nospam> to reply) wrote: > > > What we should do is raise the tax to cut wasteful consumption. Then > > offset the increase by giving a limited tax credit to family tax payers > > with under 100k net income (single filers 50k,) $0 credit for those > > over. That way we keep the tax of the backs of those that can least > > afford it and punish the Hummer drivers. This will spur growth of > > Hybrid and alternative fuels. You know damn well that if it hurts the > > rich that they will start doing something about it. Increase the tax > > monthly until they cry uncle. > > You're forgetting/ignoring the serious overhead cost of employing people > (within gubmint) to administer your system that does nothing but move > money around. What is the cost? Most people who complain about the inefficiency of government can't seem to cite the dollar amounts with any authority. In this case, collecting the tax wouldn't cost any more because the mechanism is already in place, and the feds already send out income tax refund checks anyway, so what's the extra cost of including a gas tax credit, other than the likelihood that more refund checks will be mailed out (or electronic transfers made) than usual? While you're trying to prove how inefficient government is, show me where private health insurance is cheaper than Medicare. Betcha can't do that, either. ;) > Like most liberal schemes, there will be pretended "unintended > consequences" and a net unavoidable loss to the economy and the quality > of life. Liberalism always achieves the exact opposite of it's stated > intent (better quality of life vs. degraded quality of life). Unlike conservatism, real or merely self-identified, which has never resulted in any negative consequences, whether in peace or in war. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Joe wrote: > The solution to any problem is NEVER more taxes. Prove it. Tell me why Mexico, where government spending is only about 10% of GDP, compared to roughly 30-35% in the US, is doing relatively much worse. Even Forbes magazine, which hardly sympathizes with socialism, ran an article saying that economic output was maximized when government spending was around 20-24% of GDP. > It is not the government's job to regulate the actions of the people. So there should be no government police force, no government courts, no government jails, and only you and private parties you hire, befriend, etc., should protect your rights? > The solution is to let the price continue to be determined by supply > and demand. If the price gets so high that people start actually > curbing their use of fuel, the price will drop. It has probably > already hit that point, and the price will likely settle around $3.75 > per gallon for regular unleaded. The big problem with your argument is that the oil industry isn't totally free market but gets great subsidies, such as very cheap drilling rights on public land and having the US military invade oil producing countries. > The oil companies have no responsibility to the customer other than to > provide the product at whatever price people are willing to pay for it. And no responsibility to avoid polluting the environment, right? |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Klark Kent wrote: > In message news:vclf44d99iqbindik9i3fanbclnblnlmmt@4ax.com, dgk > <dgk@somewhere.com> burned some brain cells writing: > > > And of course it's the government's job to regulate the actions of > > people. That's why we have a government. > > Thomas Jefferson on Line One. And he's pissed. Because he hurt his hand while enthusiastically beating one of his slaves and now can't write his speech about personal liberty. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Joe wrote: > ["Followup-To:" header set to alt.autos.honda.] > On 2008-06-05, still just me <wheeledBobNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On 05 Jun 2008 12:28:59 GMT, Klark Kent <stewart@copeland.com`> wrote: > > > >>> And of course it's the government's job to regulate the actions of > >>> people. That's why we have a government. > >> > >>Thomas Jefferson on Line One. And he's pissed. > > > > He's been pissed since Bush started ignoring his duty to protect the > > Constitution = and in fact, directly violating it - around 2001. > > Bush isn't the first, or the worst, to wipe his ass with the > Constitution. The first BIG foray into ignoring it was probably FDR, > though it was done incrementally even before him... You're forgetting the Federalists' Sedition Acts. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Elle wrote:
> "Bill Putney" <bptn@kinez.net> wrote >> Like most liberal schemes, there will be pretended >> "unintended consequences" and a net unavoidable loss to >> the economy and the quality of life. Liberalism always >> achieves the exact opposite of it's stated intent (better >> quality of life vs. degraded quality of life). > > And you think this lunatic Bush has not degraded quality of > life with the costs of this insane war and letting banks and > Wall Street manipulate the mortgage and credit market so we > are in a serious recession, with the little people getting > thrown out of their homes and the big people seeing their > assets in financial stocks plummet? You think it's good > things were allowed to go hog wild? Presumably the corollary to his statement is that schemes hatched by non-liberals only have intended consequences, i.e. the consequences of Bush-Cheney policies were all intended. Interesting hypothesis ... |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Joe wrote:
> On 2008-06-04, Just Me (remove <nospam> to reply) <2000-nospam-cam@verizon.net> wrote: >> Cheny is a wad, but he is right. Increasing demand does not lower >> the price. >> >> What we should do is raise the tax to cut wasteful consumption. Then >> offset the increase by giving a limited tax credit to family tax payers >> with under 100k net income (single filers 50k,) $0 credit for those >> over. That way we keep the tax of the backs of those that can least >> afford it and punish the Hummer drivers. This will spur growth of >> Hybrid and alternative fuels. You know damn well that if it hurts the >> rich that they will start doing something about it. Increase the tax >> monthly until they cry uncle. > > The solution to any problem is NEVER more taxes. A simple rule for simple-minded people. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
SMS wrote: > Just Me (remove <nospam> to reply) wrote: > > What we should do is raise the tax to cut wasteful consumption. Then > > offset the increase by giving a limited tax credit to family tax payers > > with under 100k net income (single filers 50k,) $0 credit for those > > over. That way we keep the tax of the backs of those that can least > > afford it and punish the Hummer drivers. This will spur growth of > > Hybrid and alternative fuels. You know damn well that if it hurts the > > rich that they will start doing something about it. Increase the tax > > monthly until they cry uncle. > > Actually, we should raise the gas tax with an offsetting tax credit up > to a certain limit. > > I would NOT limit the tax credit by income or filing status. You want to > get buy-in from the general public, and encourage them to buy smaller > vehicles, at least for commuting (keep the SUV or minivan for times when > it's really appropriate). $50K is still pretty low income. > > Every licensed non-commercial driver with a vehicle registered in their > name gets the credit for one vehicle. Maybe a $5/gallon tax, with a > $5/gallon tax credit for 365 gallons a year, i.e. an $1825 tax credit. > Use less than 365 gallons a year and you're ahead of the game. Use more, > well it's up to you to commute solo in an SUV, or to drive the kids > around in a minivan, or to live 50 miles from work. > > No tax credit for unlicensed drivers. > No tax credit for those that don't file income taxes. > Some sort of program for commercial vehicles to exempt them. I'd give the credit quarterly to every working adult under a certain income level, the same dollar amount to each person, no matter how much or little hydrocarbon fuel they consumed or even if they didn't drive at all. That method would have the lowest bureaucratic overhead, be the least prone to fraud, and offer the greatest incentive to not waste energy. Government credits don't work well when they're complex. |
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Jeff wrote:
> SMS wrote: >> Joe wrote: >> >>> The solution is to let the price continue to be determined by supply >>> and demand. If the price gets so high that people start actually >>> curbing their use of fuel, the price will drop. It has probably >>> already hit that point, and the price will likely settle around $3.75 >>> per gallon for regular unleaded. >> >> This approach is extremely short-sighted. >> >> Oil is needed for products other than just than gasoline and diesel >> fuel. The supply and demand need to be managed carefully, as many >> countries already do. >> >> The actions of those not curbing their use of fuel, directly affect >> the rest of us. These people need to be penalized. > > You mean like the people of the US, who use more fuel, per capita, than > just about any other country?... Well the liberals talk out of both sides of their mouth on this. For example, regarding the fact that Al Gore's house uses over 18 times the energy that the average U.S. house uses - hold on a minute - I need to wrap my head in duct tape so it doesn't explode while explaining the liberal "logic" - so Al Gore's house uses over 18 times the amount of energy that the average U.S. house does - but he pays fees into the utility for that usage that go into producing carbonless energy sources like windmills based on the "excess" amount of energy he uses. Becuase he is using so much energy and is therefore funding better sources of energy, not only is he not a hypocrite, but he's actually a hero for using more than his fair share of energy so that he's funding so-called "green" sources. (removing duct tape) So my question is: Which is correct: To *punish* (like liberals want to do) people who use more than their fair share, or to *praise* and make excuses for (like liberals do) those who, like Gore, use more than their fair share. Or is the answer dependent on who the user is, i.e., is he/she part of the liberal elite? Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:45 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands