Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 23:48:32 -0500, Joe <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo.com>
wrote:

>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.


Too much blather, but if you want the government to build roads, then
it needs to tax. What I don't want my government doing is lying about
the need to go to war, which is what the republicans did.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

"Joe" <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo.com> wrote in message
news:slrng4hhon.hq4.joe@barada.griffincs.local...
> 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.

They did go down until 9/11...

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:ee_1k.3763$N87.596@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com...
> 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.

You are a moron if you think this is how the world works and that the
"state" is a nanny.....
>
> The actions of those not curbing their use of fuel, directly affect the
> rest of us. These people need to be penalized.

Penalized? Screw you you gestapo commie


> > 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.

That is Communism, not capitalism.

>
> 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

So Government control....

>
> 2) Raise CAFE standards significantly

And put millions out of work the next day......


> 3) Encourage the development of plug-in hybrids

And burn more coal than oil and pollute the environment more than with
gas....

>
> 4) Encourage the expansion of nuclear power for generating electricity

You "greenies" are the ones that have prevented that for 30 years in the
USA.

>
> 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.

Are you gonna buy the land to lay the tracks????

>
>
> We just can't afford any more Republican presidents and their huge
> deficits, lack of foreign policy expertise, and their ties to big oil.

BWAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAA

FDR (DEMO-CRAT) got us in WWII....We didn't pay that debt off until 1978....

GO LEARN BEFORE YOU SPEAK

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:qfX1k.3635$ZE5.2357@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...

> 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.

I use 365 gallons a month, just for work and groceries...

You are a friggin Communist Tyrant

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

larry moe 'n curly wrote:

> 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.

It's too complex to do what you propose, and too revenue negative. How
are you going to account for the different cost of living in different
areas of the country?

The federal gasoline tax and the tax credits are already in place. Just
increase the gasoline tax, and then give the money back to those that
are not wasteful, so it's no net loss to them. You don't need any big
bureaucracy to manage it.

You have to be careful when you change tax policy to avoid unintended
consequences.

Ross Perot was a nut case, but the one thing he proposed that made sense
was the increased gasoline tax.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

Gib Bogle wrote:
> 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.

In fact, tax policy is widely used to shape social policy.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

SMS wrote:

> larry moe 'n curly wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> It's too complex to do what you propose, and too revenue negative.

What I propose is even more simpler than what you propose, and how can
it be revenue-negative when it won't refund more than it takes in?

> How are you going to account for the different cost of living in different
> areas of the country?

I'm not, and why should I? After all, do the personal deduction on
income tax and the earned income credit vary according to local costs
of living?
>
> The federal gasoline tax and the tax credits are already in place. Just
> increase the gasoline tax, and then give the money back to those that
> are not wasteful, so it's no net loss to them. You don't need any big
> bureaucracy to manage it.
>
> You have to be careful when you change tax policy to avoid unintended
> consequences.

That's why I don't want the tax to be too high and result in too much
of a switch to undesirable alternatives, like alcohol, diesel, or
electricity, the last two being bad mostly because a quick switchover
could put them in short supply..

How does your gas tax/income tax refund plan avoid unintended
consequences?

> Ross Perot was a nut case, but the one thing he proposed that made sense
> was the increased gasoline tax.

That's true, and car makers have long preferred that over higher fuel
economy standards, but the country has been pathologically against all
taxes since the 1980s, even when lower taxes result in higher costs
(deficits, bad roads causing car damage and travel delays). Even
conservative George Will said the US was undertaxed.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

"Gib Bogle" <bogle@ihug.too.much.spam.co.nz> wrote
> 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 ...

Indeed. Too many parrot the cliché-du-decade instead of
looking deeper into what is necessary so we all do not live
like savages, waiting always for the next murderous tribal
raid. Republicans and Democrats have, liberals and cons,
have far less that divides them than they have in common.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

> > We just can't afford any more Republican presidents and their huge
> > deficits, lack of foreign policy expertise, and their ties to big oil.
>
> BWAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAA
>
> FDR (DEMO-CRAT) got us in WWII....We didn't pay that debt off until 1978....
>
> GO LEARN BEFORE YOU SPEAK

IIRC WW2 went from Sept 1, 1939 to Sept 2, 1945... at least for the
rest of the world. In the US it started on Dec 7, 1941 when the Japs
bomber Pearl Harbor. (How much did that cost?)

If the US had entered the war before that, the Japs wouldn't have been
able to bomb Pearl. Also don't forget the countless billions in aid
the US sent to Europe for rebuilding... if the US had entered the war
with the rest of the world, that may have been reduced as well.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

Before one decides to let the government do MORE to save us from ourselves
one should consider the answers to several questions regarding what the
government has already done?

What was the price of a gallon of gas before the Clean Air act?

What was the price of a gallon of gas before the CAFE?

What was the amount of the FEDERAL & STATE fuel taxes before CAFE?

Why are federal and state roads and bridges deteriorating?

How many refineries were built since the Clean Air act?

How many refineries have been shut down since the Clean Air act?

Why has the cost of diesel fuel gone up $1.60 more than the increase in the
price of gasoline?

What was the average BTU content of a gallon of gas before enthanol was
mandated?

What has happened to the cost of corn, wheat, oats and soy beans since
ethanol was mandated?

Why not require a CAFE of 100 MPG?

What will happen to the cost of everything we buy it the Congress enacts a
carbon tax

Why does one think the government can do anything to help the average
working man in regard to fuel costs?

Why do we keep electing the same nuts?



"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hY_1k.3658$hH.1627@trndny07...
> 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.
>>
> Jeff

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

Mike hunt wrote:
> Before one decides to let the government do MORE to save us from ourselves
> one should consider the answers to several questions regarding what the
> government has already done?
>
> What was the price of a gallon of gas before the Clean Air act?

You can see the gasoline price history, in today's dollars, at
"http://zfacts.com/p/35.html". The Clean Air Act took effect in 1990.

There was no effect on gasoline prices due to the Clean Air Act. The
price came down steadily until W was elected president.

There was no effect on gasoline prices due to the CAFE standard.
> What was the price of a gallon of gas before the CAFE?

You can see the gasoline price history, in today's dollars, at
"http://zfacts.com/p/35.html". The CAFE standard started in 1975.

There was no effect on gasoline prices due to the CAFE standard. The
price came down steadily until W was elected president.

> What was the amount of the FEDERAL & STATE fuel taxes before CAFE?

The federal tax rate was 4 cents a gallon both before and after CAFE.
Under Reagan, it went up to 9 cents a gallon, eight years after CAFE was
instituted. There are 50 states, so you can go check those.

> Why are federal and state roads and bridges deteriorating?

Spending money in Iraq rather than on our own infrastructure.

> How many refineries were built since the Clean Air act?

Zero, but it had nothing to do with the Clean Air Act. It was an effort
on the part of the oil companies to run fewer refineries at higher
capacity, and to reduce refining capacity in order to drive up prices.

> How many refineries have been shut down since the Clean Air act?

A lot, but it had nothing to do with the Clean Air Act. It was an effort
on the part of the oil companies to run fewer refineries at higher
capacity, and to reduce refining capacity in order to drive up prices.

> Why has the cost of diesel fuel gone up $1.60 more than the increase in the
> price of gasoline?

Because people will pay $1.60 more for diesel so the oil companies can
charge $1.60 more. Diesel costs less to refine than gasoline, even with
the requirement for low sulfur diesel.

> What was the average BTU content of a gallon of gas before enthanol was
> mandated?

124,000.

A gallon of Ethanol has 77,000 BTU, so a 10% Ethanol mixture would have
119,300 BTU.

It uses far more BTU to make Ethanol than you get back from burning it.
Only with government subsidies to artificially lower the price is
Ethanol viable. Thank your friend's at Archers Daniel Midland, and their
Republican pals in Congress for this boondoggle.

> What has happened to the cost of corn, wheat, oats and soy beans since
> ethanol was mandated?

Went up. Thank your friend's at Archers Daniel Midland, and their
Republican pals in Congress for this boondoggle.

> Why not require a CAFE of 100 MPG?

100 MPG is impractical with current technology.

> What will happen to the cost of everything we buy it the Congress enacts a
> carbon tax

Unknown. Increased costs cannot always be passed along to the consumer,
because the consumer can switch to other products, or in some case to no
product at all.

> Why does one think the government can do anything to help the average
> working man in regard to fuel costs?

Because some governments understand the law of supply and demand, and
enact policies to drive down demand, which in turns lowers prices.

> Why do we keep electing the same nuts?

We don't. W was elected only once. In 2000 Gore was elected, Bush was
selected.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

Now that you have listed your answers, do a search for the correct answers
and get back to us LOL

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:cMf2k.3398$uE5.1937@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com...
> Mike hunt wrote:
>> Before one decides to let the government do MORE to save us from
>> ourselves one should consider the answers to several questions regarding
>> what the government has already done?
>>
>> What was the price of a gallon of gas before the Clean Air act?
>
> You can see the gasoline price history, in today's dollars, at
> "http://zfacts.com/p/35.html". The Clean Air Act took effect in 1990.
>
> There was no effect on gasoline prices due to the Clean Air Act. The price
> came down steadily until W was elected president.
>
> There was no effect on gasoline prices due to the CAFE standard.
>> What was the price of a gallon of gas before the CAFE?
>
> You can see the gasoline price history, in today's dollars, at
> "http://zfacts.com/p/35.html". The CAFE standard started in 1975.
>
> There was no effect on gasoline prices due to the CAFE standard. The price
> came down steadily until W was elected president.
>
>> What was the amount of the FEDERAL & STATE fuel taxes before CAFE?
>
> The federal tax rate was 4 cents a gallon both before and after CAFE.
> Under Reagan, it went up to 9 cents a gallon, eight years after CAFE was
> instituted. There are 50 states, so you can go check those.
>
>> Why are federal and state roads and bridges deteriorating?
>
> Spending money in Iraq rather than on our own infrastructure.
>
>> How many refineries were built since the Clean Air act?
>
> Zero, but it had nothing to do with the Clean Air Act. It was an effort on
> the part of the oil companies to run fewer refineries at higher capacity,
> and to reduce refining capacity in order to drive up prices.
>
>> How many refineries have been shut down since the Clean Air act?
>
> A lot, but it had nothing to do with the Clean Air Act. It was an effort
> on the part of the oil companies to run fewer refineries at higher
> capacity, and to reduce refining capacity in order to drive up prices.
>
>> Why has the cost of diesel fuel gone up $1.60 more than the increase in
>> the price of gasoline?
>
> Because people will pay $1.60 more for diesel so the oil companies can
> charge $1.60 more. Diesel costs less to refine than gasoline, even with
> the requirement for low sulfur diesel.
>
>> What was the average BTU content of a gallon of gas before enthanol was
>> mandated?
>
> 124,000.
>
> A gallon of Ethanol has 77,000 BTU, so a 10% Ethanol mixture would have
> 119,300 BTU.
>
> It uses far more BTU to make Ethanol than you get back from burning it.
> Only with government subsidies to artificially lower the price is Ethanol
> viable. Thank your friend's at Archers Daniel Midland, and their
> Republican pals in Congress for this boondoggle.
>
>> What has happened to the cost of corn, wheat, oats and soy beans since
>> ethanol was mandated?
>
> Went up. Thank your friend's at Archers Daniel Midland, and their
> Republican pals in Congress for this boondoggle.
>
>> Why not require a CAFE of 100 MPG?
>
> 100 MPG is impractical with current technology.
>
>> What will happen to the cost of everything we buy it the Congress enacts
>> a carbon tax
>
> Unknown. Increased costs cannot always be passed along to the consumer,
> because the consumer can switch to other products, or in some case to no
> product at all.
>
>> Why does one think the government can do anything to help the average
>> working man in regard to fuel costs?
>
> Because some governments understand the law of supply and demand, and
> enact policies to drive down demand, which in turns lowers prices.
>
>> Why do we keep electing the same nuts?
>
> We don't. W was elected only once. In 2000 Gore was elected, Bush was
> selected.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

Mike hunt wrote:
> Now that you have listed your answers, do a search for the correct answers
> and get back to us LOL

You don't like the correct answers because they conflict with your
political beliefs, beliefs that are not based on any reality.

You asked a bunch of loaded questions, unaware of the actual answers,
trying to make a political statement that supported your neo-con
political philosophy, which apparently you gleaned from right wing radio
talk show hosts like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh. You should be aware
that these guys are entertainers. They say what they say not because
they actually believe any of it, but because it brings in advertising
dollars to their syndicated shows.

When your ignorance was demonstrated for all to see, the only comeback
you could come up with was a "LOL." Very weak. No wonder or country is
in such dire straits. The educational system has produced a generation
of people like you that have no understanding of economics, foreign
policy, or energy, but that just want to blame everything on someone else.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

As with your answers to the questions you are 180 degrees of out line in you
assment of me LOL

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:n_g2k.73$cW3.38@nlpi064.nbdc.sbc.com...
> Mike hunt wrote:
>> Now that you have listed your answers, do a search for the correct
>> answers and get back to us LOL
>
> You don't like the correct answers because they conflict with your
> political beliefs, beliefs that are not based on any reality.
>
> You asked a bunch of loaded questions, unaware of the actual answers,
> trying to make a political statement that supported your neo-con political
> philosophy, which apparently you gleaned from right wing radio talk show
> hosts like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh. You should be aware that these
> guys are entertainers. They say what they say not because they actually
> believe any of it, but because it brings in advertising dollars to their
> syndicated shows.
>
> When your ignorance was demonstrated for all to see, the only comeback you
> could come up with was a "LOL." Very weak. No wonder or country is in such
> dire straits. The educational system has produced a generation of people
> like you that have no understanding of economics, foreign policy, or
> energy, but that just want to blame everything on someone else.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

Waiving the right to remain silent, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> said:

> You can see the gasoline price history, in today's dollars, at
> "http://zfacts.com/p/35.html". The CAFE standard started in 1975.
>
> There was no effect on gasoline prices due to the CAFE standard. The
> price came down steadily until W was elected president.

Horseshit. Look at the chart again. Bush wasn't President in 1999.

--
Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail

"A lack of common sense is now considered a disability,
with all the privileges that this entails."

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

Waiving the right to remain silent, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> said:

> Mike hunt wrote:

>> Why are federal and state roads and bridges deteriorating?
>
> Spending money in Iraq rather than on our own infrastructure.

What did Clinton spend on infrastructure..? Surely, that huge "budget
surplus" was spent on the betterment of American society..?

Clue: Life didn't begin with Bush's first term.

You're welcome...

--
Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail

"A lack of common sense is now considered a disability,
with all the privileges that this entails."

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

Waiving the right to remain silent, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> said:

> Mike hunt wrote:
>> Now that you have listed your answers, do a search for the correct
>> answers and get back to us LOL
>
> You don't like the correct answers because they conflict with your
> political beliefs, beliefs that are not based on any reality.
>
> You asked a bunch of loaded questions,

And you povided a bunch of loaded answers...

--
Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail

"A lack of common sense is now considered a disability,
with all the privileges that this entails."

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

dgk wrote:

> ...What I don't want my government doing is lying about
> the need to go to war, which is what the republicans did.

Yes - we are all very familiar with revisionist history.

You might find this video of none other than Al Gore citing actual
acts committed by Saddam, his documented use of WMD's,
including pursuit of nukes, and berating Bush 1 for doing nothing about it:
http://scripturn.com/video_9JE48XHKG64.html

Here's another: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0h6gehCPvpk

That's just *one* guy. We don't need to cite all the statements ever
made by all the other hypocritical Democrats, including Clinton, do we?

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
 

Mike hunt wrote:

> ...What was the average BTU content of a gallon of gas before enthanol was
> mandated?

Last week, my family took a vacation to New England from Virginia.
Drove a total of 2100 miles. Every time we transitioned from areas
without gasohol to ones with gasohol, you could watch the mileage
computer average drop steadily with each fillup. It crept up slowly
(due to the high number of miles in the calculated average) after
returning to non-gasohol areas.

> ...What will happen to the cost of everything we buy it the Congress enacts a
> carbon tax...

Many of our jobs will go to third world countries who won't have the
ball and chain carbon tax to deal with and they will pollute worse than
we ever did, so the environment will be harmed more, and everyone will
suffer way more than if the government had not acted so stupidly. The
exact opposite from what is dishonestly claimed to be the intention will
have been achieved.

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:
> Mike hunt wrote:

>> Why are federal and state roads and bridges deteriorating?
>
> Spending money in Iraq rather than on our own infrastructure.

Umm - no. Local and state governments routinely take federal money
specifically provided for maintenance and upgrades of critical
infrastructure and divert them to touchy-feely projects (New Orleans
levies are a *perfect* example of that).


>> Why do we keep electing the same nuts?
>
> We don't. W was elected only once. In 2000 Gore was elected, Bush was
> selected.

Your credibility just flew out the window with that comment.

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 2008-06-06, dgk <dgk@somewhere.com> wrote:

>
> Too much blather, but if you want the government to build roads, then
> it needs to tax. What I don't want my government doing is lying about
> the need to go to war, which is what the republicans did.

Where did you see anyone say that there should be NO taxes? I sure
didn't say it. Some level of taxation is necessary to perform those
minimal services as the federal government is intended to do, such as
national defense, etc...

The Republicans didn't lie to take us to war. You could argue that
Bush lied, but he is not "The Republicans" any more than KKK Grand
Master Robert Byrd is "The Democrats".


--
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 2008-06-06, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> Gib Bogle wrote:
>> 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.
>
> In fact, tax policy is widely used to shape social policy.

Absolutely, it is. And that is just plain wrong, and possibly
unconstitutional. Taxes are a requirement to keep the government
running. But the Federal Government, as defined in the Constitution,
is not there to be our nanny.

--
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
 

Joe wrote:
> On 2008-06-06, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>> Gib Bogle wrote:
>>> 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.
>> In fact, tax policy is widely used to shape social policy.
>
> Absolutely, it is. And that is just plain wrong, and possibly
> unconstitutional. Taxes are a requirement to keep the government
> running. But the Federal Government, as defined in the Constitution,
> is not there to be our nanny.
>

You should try living in a country where people pay little or no taxes.
You might be surprised, even educated.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

On 2008-06-07, Gib Bogle <bogle@ihug.too.much.spam.co.nz> wrote:
> Joe wrote:
>> On 2008-06-06, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>>> Gib Bogle wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>> In fact, tax policy is widely used to shape social policy.
>>
>> Absolutely, it is. And that is just plain wrong, and possibly
>> unconstitutional. Taxes are a requirement to keep the government
>> running. But the Federal Government, as defined in the Constitution,
>> is not there to be our nanny.
>>
>
> You should try living in a country where people pay little or no taxes.
> You might be surprised, even educated.

You might try not obsfuscating the issue. I have never advocated for
a society without taxes. I advocate a society that matches the intent
of the founders of this country. An extremely limited federal
government, and more powerful state and local governments. While, in
my world, federal taxes would be lower, local and state taxes would
likely be a bit higher than they are now, though they would be voted
on by lawmakers that are much more answerable to the voters...

Instead of trying to decide who I am, perhaps you could address the
actual issues we are discussing. I'd hate to think that they are all
over your head, and your just trying to appear to be a part of this
conversation that you don't really grasp...


--
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
 

SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in
news:cMf2k.3398$uE5.1937@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com:

> Mike hunt wrote:
>> Before one decides to let the government do MORE to save us from
>> ourselves one should consider the answers to several questions
>> regarding what the government has already done?
>>
>> What was the price of a gallon of gas before the Clean Air act?
>
> You can see the gasoline price history, in today's dollars, at
> "http://zfacts.com/p/35.html". The Clean Air Act took effect in 1990.
>
> There was no effect on gasoline prices due to the Clean Air Act. The
> price came down steadily until W was elected president.
>
> There was no effect on gasoline prices due to the CAFE standard.
>> What was the price of a gallon of gas before the CAFE?
>
> You can see the gasoline price history, in today's dollars, at
> "http://zfacts.com/p/35.html". The CAFE standard started in 1975.
>
> There was no effect on gasoline prices due to the CAFE standard. The
> price came down steadily until W was elected president.
>
>> What was the amount of the FEDERAL & STATE fuel taxes before CAFE?
>
> The federal tax rate was 4 cents a gallon both before and after CAFE.
> Under Reagan, it went up to 9 cents a gallon, eight years after CAFE
> was instituted. There are 50 states, so you can go check those.
>
>> Why are federal and state roads and bridges deteriorating?
>
> Spending money in Iraq rather than on our own infrastructure.
>
>> How many refineries were built since the Clean Air act?
>
> Zero, but it had nothing to do with the Clean Air Act. It was an
> effort on the part of the oil companies to run fewer refineries at
> higher capacity, and to reduce refining capacity in order to drive up
> prices.
>
>> How many refineries have been shut down since the Clean Air act?
>
> A lot, but it had nothing to do with the Clean Air Act. It was an
> effort on the part of the oil companies to run fewer refineries at
> higher capacity, and to reduce refining capacity in order to drive up
> prices.

you are only half right. the greenies are stiffling any attempt to put
up any new plants, as no one wants one in THERE back yard.


>
>> Why has the cost of diesel fuel gone up $1.60 more than the increase
>> in the price of gasoline?
>
> Because people will pay $1.60 more for diesel so the oil companies can
> charge $1.60 more. Diesel costs less to refine than gasoline, even
> with the requirement for low sulfur diesel.
>
>> What was the average BTU content of a gallon of gas before enthanol
>> was mandated?
>
> 124,000.
>
> A gallon of Ethanol has 77,000 BTU, so a 10% Ethanol mixture would
> have 119,300 BTU.
>
> It uses far more BTU to make Ethanol than you get back from burning
> it. Only with government subsidies to artificially lower the price is
> Ethanol viable. Thank your friend's at Archers Daniel Midland, and
> their Republican pals in Congress for this boondoggle.

here you are conpletly full of it. It has been higher than one to one
fo a very long time. many independent sourses agreea on that. also it is
increasing in efficiency all the time. also most ethanol plants are
majority owned by farmer investors not Archer. also a tax reduction is
NOT a subisidy. allowing one to keep there own money is not a subusidy.
Oil on the other hand is massively subusized.

>
>> What has happened to the cost of corn, wheat, oats and soy beans
>> since ethanol was mandated?
>
> Went up. Thank your friend's at Archers Daniel Midland, and their
> Republican pals in Congress for this boondoggle.

once again you got it wrong!!! the price of crops has gone up because of
the price of fuel and increase in world demand for food, and mostly
because of the huge drop in the dollars value because the government is
pumping massive amounts of paper into the system to try to pay off its
depts with inflated cheeper money. Both branches are guilty of this
because no one will cut spending. actuall spending has not been cut in
probably 50 years or more.


>
>> Why not require a CAFE of 100 MPG?
>
> 100 MPG is impractical with current technology.
>
>> What will happen to the cost of everything we buy it the Congress
>> enacts a carbon tax
>
> Unknown. Increased costs cannot always be passed along to the
> consumer, because the consumer can switch to other products, or in
> some case to no product at all.

the reality is most goods will skyrocket in price as almost everything
uses oil in some form. it will likely destroy what is left of our
abality to compete in the world as no one else will be affected, because
no one else is dumb enough to do it. they won`t cripple there economies
this way.



>
>> Why does one think the government can do anything to help the average
>> working man in regard to fuel costs?
>
> Because some governments understand the law of supply and demand, and
> enact policies to drive down demand, which in turns lowers prices.

communist countries do that. excuse me socialist countries.
>
>> Why do we keep electing the same nuts?

because most people are stupid enough to vote for the one that says
they will do the most for them insead of what is the best for the
country.
>
> We don't. W was elected only once. In 2000 Gore was elected, Bush was
> selected.

again your full of crap but in this case it doesn`t mater. neither would
have been any better. neither party has a nickles worth of difference
between them and they are both so far to the left you can`t even see to
the right. also both are ignoring the constitution so much we might as
well not have one.
A true constitutionl government would have 90% of the congress and
judges impeached and may shot for anti constituional behaveure.
KB



--
THUNDERSNAKE #9

Protect your rights or "Lose" them
The 2nd Admendment guarantees the others

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

Joe wrote:
> On 2008-06-07, Gib Bogle <bogle@ihug.too.much.spam.co.nz> wrote:
>> Joe wrote:
>>> On 2008-06-06, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>>>> Gib Bogle wrote:
>>>>> 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.
>>>> In fact, tax policy is widely used to shape social policy.
>>> Absolutely, it is. And that is just plain wrong, and possibly
>>> unconstitutional. Taxes are a requirement to keep the government
>>> running. But the Federal Government, as defined in the Constitution,
>>> is not there to be our nanny.
>>>
>> You should try living in a country where people pay little or no taxes.
>> You might be surprised, even educated.
>
> You might try not obsfuscating the issue. I have never advocated for
> a society without taxes. I advocate a society that matches the intent
> of the founders of this country. An extremely limited federal
> government, and more powerful state and local governments. While, in
> my world, federal taxes would be lower, local and state taxes would
> likely be a bit higher than they are now, though they would be voted
> on by lawmakers that are much more answerable to the voters...
>
> Instead of trying to decide who I am, perhaps you could address the
> actual issues we are discussing. I'd hate to think that they are all
> over your head, and your just trying to appear to be a part of this
> conversation that you don't really grasp...

"The solution to any problem is NEVER more taxes."

This is the silly statement to which I responded. It isn't over my head.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

On 2008-06-07, Gib Bogle <bogle@ihug.too.much.spam.co.nz> wrote:

> "The solution to any problem is NEVER more taxes."
>
> This is the silly statement to which I responded. It isn't over my head.

Clearly, it is...


--
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
 

I suppose we could continue to let the market fix the problem. Sure worked
well over the last 30 years...... lol

Republicans claim that government doesn't work. When they win office they
prove it.

What kills me is the assumption that the market and private industry is so
efficient. Explain Enron to me please.....



"Bill Putney" <bptn@kinez.net> wrote in message
news:6ar88tF388ffaU3@mid.individual.net...
> 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
 

Art wrote:
> I suppose we could continue to let the market fix the problem. Sure worked
> well over the last 30 years...... lol
>
> Republicans claim that government doesn't work. When they win office they
> prove it.
>
> What kills me is the assumption that the market and private industry is so
> efficient. Explain Enron to me please.....

It's real simple - it was an extremely unethical company. One out of
how many?

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 Sat, 07 Jun 2008 00:14:08 -0500, Joe <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo.com>
wrote:

>> "The solution to any problem is NEVER more taxes."
>>
>> This is the silly statement to which I responded. It isn't over my head.
>
>Clearly, it is...

Someone call George Bush I and let him know about this ('cause he's
the one that recognized that Reagan's excesses could only be paid down
with new taxes...)

Notice that Bush II decided to follow Reagan's path of record setting
deficits - thereby insuring that his successor will have to do what
his Dad did to pay down more record deficits.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

Art wrote:
> I suppose we could continue to let the market fix the problem. Sure worked
> well over the last 30 years...... lol
>
> Republicans claim that government doesn't work. When they win office they
> prove it.
>
> What kills me is the assumption that the market and private industry is so
> efficient. Explain Enron to me please.....
>
>
>
> "Bill Putney" <bptn@kinez.net> wrote in message
> news:6ar88tF388ffaU3@mid.individual.net...
>> 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')
>
>
The oil problem started in 1999 when Phil Gramm added a bill to an
appropriations bill at the last minute which deregulated the commodity
markets. This part of the bill had been proposed separately three times
, but failed. The part added to the appropriations bill was written by
Wendy Gramm, Phil's wife who was a lobbyist for Enron at the time.

This was after Enron had already manipulated the electric market in
California. Everyone except the Congress new this was a mistake, but
passed it anyway. This is why we now have such price spikes in the oil
and commodity markets. It is not from normal supply and demand, it is
from perceived supply and demand issues.

Thank you Phil Gramm and the Republican Party.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

Waiving the right to remain silent, Carroll Boardway <mcboard@sbcglobal.net>
said:

> The oil problem started in 1999 when Phil Gramm added a bill to an
> appropriations bill at the last minute which deregulated the commodity
> markets. This part of the bill had been proposed separately three times
> , but failed. The part added to the appropriations bill was written by
> Wendy Gramm, Phil's wife who was a lobbyist for Enron at the time.
>
> This was after Enron had already manipulated the electric market in
> California. Everyone except the Congress new this was a mistake, but
> passed it anyway. This is why we now have such price spikes in the oil
> and commodity markets. It is not from normal supply and demand, it is
> from perceived supply and demand issues.
>
> Thank you Phil Gramm and the Republican Party.

So Gramm's bill raised GLOBAL oil prices and demand to current levels..?

Are you really this naive..?

--
Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail

"A lack of common sense is now considered a disability,
with all the privileges that this entails."

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

Larry in AZ wrote:
> Waiving the right to remain silent, Carroll Boardway <mcboard@sbcglobal.net>
> said:
>
>> The oil problem started in 1999 when Phil Gramm added a bill to an
>> appropriations bill at the last minute which deregulated the commodity
>> markets. This part of the bill had been proposed separately three times
>> , but failed. The part added to the appropriations bill was written by
>> Wendy Gramm, Phil's wife who was a lobbyist for Enron at the time.
>>
>> This was after Enron had already manipulated the electric market in
>> California. Everyone except the Congress new this was a mistake, but
>> passed it anyway. This is why we now have such price spikes in the oil
>> and commodity markets. It is not from normal supply and demand, it is
>> from perceived supply and demand issues.
>>
>> Thank you Phil Gramm and the Republican Party.
>
> So Gramm's bill raised GLOBAL oil prices and demand to current levels..?
>
> Are you really this naive..?
>
He was the start of it all.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

Waiving the right to remain silent, Carroll Boardway
<mcboard@sbcglobal.net> said:

> Larry in AZ wrote:
>> Waiving the right to remain silent, Carroll Boardway
>> <mcboard@sbcglobal.net> said:
>>
>>> The oil problem started in 1999 when Phil Gramm added a bill to an
>>> appropriations bill at the last minute which deregulated the commodity
>>> markets. This part of the bill had been proposed separately three
>>> times , but failed. The part added to the appropriations bill was
>>> written by Wendy Gramm, Phil's wife who was a lobbyist for Enron at
>>> the time.
>>>
>>> This was after Enron had already manipulated the electric market in
>>> California. Everyone except the Congress new this was a mistake, but
>>> passed it anyway. This is why we now have such price spikes in the
>>> oil and commodity markets. It is not from normal supply and demand,
>>> it is from perceived supply and demand issues.
>>>
>>> Thank you Phil Gramm and the Republican Party.
>>
>> So Gramm's bill raised GLOBAL oil prices and demand to current
>> levels..?
>>
>> Are you really this naive..?
>>
> He was the start of it all.

I suppose he's also responsible for the extraordinary demands for oil by
the Chinese and Indians..?

--
Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail

"A lack of common sense is now considered a disability,
with all the privileges that this entails."

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

Larry in AZ wrote:
> Waiving the right to remain silent, Carroll Boardway
> <mcboard@sbcglobal.net> said:
>
>> Larry in AZ wrote:
>>> Waiving the right to remain silent, Carroll Boardway
>>> <mcboard@sbcglobal.net> said:

>>>> The oil problem started in 1999 when Phil Gramm added a bill to an
>>>> appropriations bill at the last minute which deregulated the commodity
>>>> markets. This part of the bill had been proposed separately three
>>>> times , but failed. The part added to the appropriations bill was
>>>> written by Wendy Gramm, Phil's wife who was a lobbyist for Enron at
>>>> the time.
>>>>
>>>> This was after Enron had already manipulated the electric market in
>>>> California. Everyone except the Congress new this was a mistake, but
>>>> passed it anyway. This is why we now have such price spikes in the
>>>> oil and commodity markets. It is not from normal supply and demand,
>>>> it is from perceived supply and demand issues.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you Phil Gramm and the Republican Party.
>>> So Gramm's bill raised GLOBAL oil prices and demand to current
>>> levels..?

>>> Are you really this naive..?

>> He was the start of it all.

> I suppose he's also responsible for the extraordinary demands for oil by
> the Chinese and Indians..?

Oh - you're no fun!! LOL!

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
 

still just me wrote:
>
> He's been pissed since Bush started ignoring his duty to protect the
> Constitution = and in fact, directly violating it - around 2001.
>
Bush looks like a Constitutional Scholar when you compare him to a
Democrat or liberal. These groups believe the Constitution meaning can
be changed when they can't push their bills into law. Just get judges
in there that will liberally interpret the laws the way they want it.
No need for Constitutional amendments -- it is a "living" document.

It is "The Constitution of the Day".

Ask all the unborn children who have been murdered -- more than the
entire population of Canada.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

In message news:QLWdnXDaNoEuBNHVnZ2dnUVZ_sninZ2d@comcast.com, Jim
<no_one@invaiddomain.com> burned some brain cells writing:

> Bush looks like a Constitutional Scholar when you compare him to a
> Democrat or liberal. These groups believe the Constitution meaning can
> be changed when they can't push their bills into law.

What Article and Section contains the phrase "Unitary President"?

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

In message news:QLWdnXDaNoEuBNHVnZ2dnUVZ_sninZ2d@comcast.com, Jim
<no_one@invaiddomain.com> burned some brain cells writing:

> Ask all the unborn children who have been murdered -- more than the
> entire population of Canada.

But sadly, not Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Wolfie, Condi, Ledeen, Franklin, Feith,
etc.

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 20:47:19 -0600, Jim <no_one@invaiddomain.com>
wrote:

>> He's been pissed since Bush started ignoring his duty to protect the
>> Constitution = and in fact, directly violating it - around 2001.
>>
>Bush looks like a Constitutional Scholar when you compare him to a
>Democrat or liberal. These groups believe the Constitution meaning can
>be changed when they can't push their bills into law. Just get judges
>in there that will liberally interpret the laws the way they want it.
>No need for Constitutional amendments -- it is a "living" document.
>It is "The Constitution of the Day".

I can see that you are one of those who immediately assumes that
anyone who dislikes Bush and opposes what he's done from a
Constitutional viewpoint must be a Democrat and described by the
scandalous "L" word. You're wrong. I'm way more constitutionality
conservative than you. I believe in a very strong and strict
Constitution - Bush and friends believe in whatever furthers their
personal agenda.

I pray that future presidents can restore the integrity of the
Constitution but I fear some of the damage is irreversible.

As for the "living" document - A document written in the late 1700's
is going to require some interpretation hundreds of years later. You
can't avoid that. You can still do it strictly. As for "making up the
law on the fly" - look into signing statements and get back to me.

>Ask all the unborn children who have been murdered -- more than the
>entire population of Canada.

The RNC and their management core (the neo-cons) don't give two bits
about your abortion issue. They use it to gather your votes and those
of other in order to elect themselves in office so they can work
towards their real objective: fattening their wallets through
government expenditures and laws that benefit them personally. (Look
into the dictionary definition of fascism when you get a chance).

Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
 

On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 20:47:19 -0600, Jim <no_one@invaiddomain.com>
wrote:

>
>It is "The Constitution of the Day".
>
>Ask all the unborn children who have been murdered -- more than the
>entire population of Canada.

First, your figures are suspect. Current estimates are that 1 million
abortions performed per year. If your simply taking the number of
abortions performed *today* and multiplying it time the years since
Rowe v. Wade, there's a problem: the number of abortions performed in
1973 was not anywhere near the same level.

Second, there's a balance between the rights of the individual and the
rights of the "unborn" as you choose to call it. People have rights to
control their own bodies (there's that constitutional conservatism
again). When does a fertilized egg become a "life"? The courts seems
to say that it's when the life becomes independently sustainable. I
don't know about that, but I'm pretty sure it isn't the say after an
egg is fertilized either. FYI - This comes from the Bible: Leviticus
17:11 says, "For the life of a creature is in the blood." That would
move your definition of life beginning at conception out a ways.

Third , some religions claim that it's against the Bible to use drugs
or surgery. Should they be allowed to apply that belief to their
children? Or should a court be able to step in and order medical care
for the benefit of the child to protect the child's right to life? I'd
be interested in your view.

Fourth, are you one of those hypocritical anti-abortion, pro death
penalty folks? Those folks seem to be OK with an obvious taking of
human life as long as the timing works out. Seem most anti-aortionists
are, aside from the clergy. Let me know.

Get back to me on these issues, I'm interested in your views.