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')