Obama proposes $1,000 emergency rebate checks

[ayzo]

LOL Washington just doesn't get it do they? This is worse than a gas tax cut and as effective as drilling offshore.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5isOFwdbq0tsqatW6vJpkDRTI1gMgD929M6A00


ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. (AP) — Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Friday pushed for a windfall profits tax to fund $1,000 emergency rebate checks for consumers besieged by high energy costs, a counter to Republican rival John McCain's call for more offshore drilling in coastal states like Florida.

The pitch for putting some of the economic burden of $4-a-gallon gasoline on the oil industry served a dual purpose for Obama: It allowed him to talk up an economic issue, seen by many as a strength for Democrats and a weakness for Republicans, and at the same time respond to criticism from McCain that Obama's opposition to offshore drilling leads to higher prices at the pump.

In linking McCain to the unpopular President Bush, Obama struck a theme from Ronald Reagan's successful 1980 campaign against President Jimmy Carter by asking a town-hall audience in St. Petersburg: "Do you think you are better off than you were four years ago or eight years ago? If you aren't better off, can you afford another four years?"

Obama primed the crowd by noting new government figures showing 51,000 jobs lost last month and citing 460,000 jobs lost over the last seven months. He tied other bad economic news from the Bush administration to McCain and offered his energy program as one route to relief.

"This rebate will be enough to offset the increased cost of gas for a working family over the next four months," Obama said during a two-day campaign swing in Florida. "It will be enough to cover the entire increase in your heating bills. Or you could use the rebate for any of your other bills, or even to pay down your own debt."

McCain was in Florida, too, speaking to the National Urban League's annual conference and criticizing Obama as not supportive of education initiatives that would help underprivileged students. Obama was scheduled to address the predominantly black group on Saturday.

The candidates entered Florida as a Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday showed the race there essentially tied, with Obama at 46 percent and McCain at 44 percent. The poll also showed that McCain had gained strength with independents over the last month, holding a 46-41 lead in July compared to a 47-37 Obama advantage in June.

Florida has been a heartbreaker for Democrats since they lost the state — and the presidency — to George W. Bush by 537 votes in the disputed 2000 election and by more than 380,000 votes in 2004. The state elected a Republican governor in 2006, a rare bright spot for the GOP that year.

Although Obama has opened seven offices in Florida, McCain has 35 there, illustrating the GOP's conviction that it cannot afford to lose Florida's 27 electoral votes in November.

McCain's campaign gained a head start over the Obama effort in the state thanks to its presidential primary early this year. The Arizona senator topped his GOP rivals — and effectively vanquished from the race former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani — with the help of Gov. Charlie Crist, now considered a possible running mate for McCain.

Obama and other Democrats refused to campaign for Florida's convention delegates when its primary moved ahead of other nominating contests on the calendar in violation of party rules. His main opponent, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, won only a hollow victory there because seating its delegation became embroiled in a dispute she later lost.

Energy issues could motivate Florida voters. The Quinnipiac poll showed six in 10 respondents backing Bush's call for more offshore drilling and wanting Congress to go along. At the same time, about a third of those polled favored Obama's energy policies over McCain's, with another third undecided between the two.

In St. Petersburg, Obama occasionally struggled to make his point before a boisterous crowd. Demonstrators in the audience demanded that he address minority issues, waving a banner saying "What about the black community, Obama." He countered that he pushed for a racial profiling law as a state legislator, then turned attention back to the economy with a focus on McCain.

[01WhiteCobra]

Great so take earned income from energy companies and divy it out to the masses. Nice.

Fuck working anymore. I'm going to elect Obama and I'll just sit on my ass all do. Fuck trying to get ahead.

[AL P]

Great so take earned income from energy companies and divy it out to the masses. Nice.

Fuck working anymore. I'm going to elect Obama and I'll just sit on my ass all do. Fuck trying to get ahead.

I'm glad you have finally seen the light.

[Somewhere in Time]

Obama is an self centered socialist. Anyone who can't see that is really just plain stupid.

[99MustangGT]

Ahhh will it ever end?!!!

[Vertnut]

Great so take earned income from energy companies and divy it out to the masses. Nice.

Fuck working anymore. I'm going to elect Obama and I'll just sit on my ass all do. Fuck trying to get ahead.
No, No! Keep working, man. There's a lot of sorry motherfuckers we need to feed! ;)

[silvercobra03]

I might not agree with him handing out 1,000 to everyone but I will not turn him down. :D

[Gripenfelter]

Great so take earned income from energy companies and divy it out to the masses. Nice.

Fuck working anymore. I'm going to elect Obama and I'll just sit on my ass all do. Fuck trying to get ahead.


Personally I see no difference in taking it from Oil companies or borrowing it from China. Just a band-aid.

[01WhiteCobra]

Personally I see no difference in taking it from Oil companies or borrowing it from China. Just a band-aid.

You don't see the difference between taking away legit profits from companies and your government borrowing from China?

[Vertnut]

You don't see the difference between taking away legit profits from companies and your government borrowing from China?
Holy shit...

[Gripenfelter]

You don't see the difference between taking away legit profits from companies and your government borrowing from China?


I don't, it still points to the fact that the US government is financially irresponsible.

Tax is tax....they take what they want. It don't matter if its you, me, or Exxon. The fact is I'd rather it come from US companies, than owe a communist country more money. Pick the lesser of two evils.

[01WhiteCobra]

I don't, it still points to the fact that the US government is financially irresponsible.

Tax is tax....they take what they want. It don't matter if its you, me, or Exxon. The fact is I'd rather it come from US companies, than owe a communist country more money. Pick the lesser of two evils.

So you think we won't borrow money from China and Japan because we have a windfall profit tax (one, that, btw, failed miserably back in the 80s)?

The big difference is, for example, Exxon is a highly efficient operations. In fact, even though their input costs have increase faster than their revenues, they have been able to finely tune their operation to continue running better profits (absolute and relative) quarter over quarter. What incentive does Exxon have to continue fine tuning their operations if they know the government will eat those extra efficiencies by way of additional tax no other business has to pay?

In fact, what you are doing is promoting communism by deciding a windfall profit tax is no different than borrowing from a communist nation.

[Dacotua]

Yeah right.

You tax oil companies more, they'll just raise their prices to cover the "New" Tax.

[Sean88gt]

I don't, it still points to the fact that the US government is financially irresponsible.

Tax is tax....they take what they want. It don't matter if its you, me, or Exxon. The fact is I'd rather it come from US companies, than owe a communist country more money. Pick the lesser of two evils.

You're an asshole.

What is my incentive to stay in business if the Feds are going to rape me? What determines excess profits?

I would LOVE to see the oil companies say "Fuck you, you try this and we shut down US operations today."

[Gripenfelter]

So you think we won't borrow money from China and Japan because we have a windfall profit tax (one, that, btw, failed miserably back in the 80s)?

The big difference is, for example, Exxon is a highly efficient operations. In fact, even though their input costs have increase faster than their revenues, they have been able to finely tune their operation to continue running better profits (absolute and relative) quarter over quarter. What incentive does Exxon have to continue fine tuning their operations if they know the government will eat those extra efficiencies by way of additional tax no other business has to pay?

In fact, what you are doing is promoting communism by deciding a windfall profit tax is no different than borrowing from a communist nation.

No, I never said I supported it. I just said to me there's no difference. It's either whore out our country, or rob from the rich and give to the poor.

Both are idiotic, each in their own way. Like I said, pick from the lesser of two evils.

[Gripenfelter]

You're an asshole.

What is my incentive to stay in business if the Feds are going to rape me? What determines excess profits?

I would LOVE to see the oil companies say "Fuck you, you try this and we shut down US operations today."

Let me ask you a question.

Which event would you rather see occur?

Keeping borrowing money from other countries. China, getting tired of the US and our junk debt, dump it all. Middle Eastern oil rich nations buying up or own majorities in every major US corporation and financial institution.

or

Raise taxes on US corporations and rid us of or pay down this national debt?

[Sean88gt]

Let me ask you a question.

Which event would you rather see occur?

China, getting tired of the US and our junk debt, dump it all. Middle Eastern oil rich nations buying up or own majorities in every major US corporation and financial institution.

or

Raise taxes on US corporations and rid of us or pay down this national debt?

Neither. We are standing over the hole, but we have ropes firmly wrapped around the throats, so if we go, they go.

Fucking over US corporations (I'm assuming you are an employee and don't realize how expensive it is to run a business) will ultimately fuck over US consumers. If oil companies are doing business for free, where is the incentive? They either ratchet the price up to cover the rape from the Feds or shut down.

China is reliant on us. If we (as a country and corporations) stopped buying anything from China, they would shrivel, which they need to do anyway.

There are always more scenarios then the Gloom or Doom that socialists liberals propose.

[Gripenfelter]

Neither. We are standing over the hole, but we have ropes firmly wrapped around the throats, so if we go, they go.

Fucking over US corporations (I'm assuming you are an employee and don't realize how expensive it is to run a business) will ultimately fuck over US consumers. If oil companies are doing business for free, where is the incentive? They either ratchet the price up to cover the rape from the Feds or shut down.

China is reliant on us. If we (as a country and corporations) stopped buying anything from China, they would shrivel, which they need to do anyway.

There are always more scenarios then the Gloom or Doom that socialists liberals propose.

You see though, the first event is happening.

I'm not advocating taxing anyone, I'm a firm believer in low taxes, but we have come to a breaking period in with the government, debt, and the economy.

So, please tell me how we get this economy going, pay down debt, without raising taxes, without borrowing money from other countries, and without having other countries becoming major shareholders in US institutions to prop us up?

[Sean88gt]

Lower taxes. Cut wasteful spending and entitlement programs, cap welfare.

Work on fair trade agreements. US goods receive tariffs in China, so hit them here.

In source jobs. The more economic damage we inflict upon them, the weaker they become.

Worst case scenario, nationalize everything from foreign countries and fuck em!:D

[mikeb]

So, please tell me how we get this economy going, pay down debt, without raising taxes, without borrowing money from other countries, and without having other countries becoming major shareholders in US institutions to prop us up?

Well, taking legitimate profits away from US corporations and redistributing it to the US population is surely not going to do anything to address the problems you described above (this goes for raising taxes too, another thing obama wants to do). It is socialism and punishment for doing well, pure and simple. And given today's global economy if the government starts to sieze profits or hike taxes to the moon then you'll see an exodus of US companies leaving for places like Dubai, and taking their jobs with them.

In fact, I'd say that those problems will likely never be solved until the US government fails in some way. It would take fiscal responsibility in Washington, and that ain't going to happen. Look at congress - they just voted to again raise the federal spending limit. What is the meaning of a limit if you can arbitrarily change it?

[Gripenfelter]

Lower taxes. Cut wasteful spending and entitlement programs, cap welfare.

Work on fair trade agreements. US goods receive tariffs in China, so hit them here.

In source jobs. The more economic damage we inflict upon them, the weaker they become.

Worst case scenario, nationalize everything from foreign countries and fuck em!:D

I like your way of thinking. I would add:

Promote a strong dollar. Stop sending billions in foreign aid. End the war in iraq (one way or another) so we can reinvest that money into the US.

As for calling me an asshole, I know it's not like this forum to actually have a two way conversation (half open minded) without insults, but I will forgive you after your last post. :D

[Sean88gt]

I assign 'asshole' like people used to in the oldern days.

See a kid misbehaving and they want to throw a disease on him instead of "Hey, that kid is acting like an asshole!"

The war needs to be run to a point they are sustainable. But quite simply, if the rest of the world (who asked) wants us out, then fuck em! We leave. Wall this country off, spend massive amounts on defense/offense, raise the price of food and other exports to the point that the rest of the world either shrivels or survives on their own.

And use protesting liberals as air deployed IED's;)

[silvercobra03]

The war needs to be run to a point they are sustainable. But quite simply, if the rest of the world (who asked) wants us out, then fuck em! We leave. Wall this country off, spend massive amounts on defense/offense, raise the price of food and other exports to the point that the rest of the world either shrivels or survives on their own.


AMEN brother preach on!!!

[Vertnut]

I assign 'asshole' like people used to in the oldern days.

See a kid misbehaving and they want to throw a disease on him instead of "Hey, that kid is acting like an asshole!"

The war needs to be run to a point they are sustainable. But quite simply, if the rest of the world (who asked) wants us out, then fuck em! We leave. Wall this country off, spend massive amounts on defense/offense, raise the price of food and other exports to the point that the rest of the world either shrivels or survives on their own.

And use protesting liberals as air deployed IED's;)
I've always been a proponent of "Isolationalism", though it would be tough with the ways of the world now.

[Sean88gt]

I've always been a proponent of "Isolationalism", though it would be tough with the ways of the world now.

I'm ok with a global economy, but when we are the wallet and are under-appreciated I say fuck them.

They should bow to us and kiss our ass. Which is why I say cut them off and see how it is without us.

[01WhiteCobra]

Raise taxes on US corporations and rid us of or pay down this national debt?

You forgot shrink government and live within our means.

You continue to advocate a socialistic program (windfall profit tax) to fix a capitalistic system. Blending the two is what got us in the mess we are in now. Continue to expand socialistic programs will only hamper and already broken down system of government and economy.

[gt350mustang]

Yeah right.

You tax oil companies more, they'll just raise their prices to cover the "New" Tax.
x2000

[01WhiteCobra]

Yeah right.

You tax oil companies more, they'll just raise their prices to cover the "New" Tax.

If it is like the windfall profit tax of the 80s it was more of an excise tax and not a marginal tax.

The WPT of the 80s took the difference between the market price of oil and a statutory base price which was adjusted for inflation and state tax.

Doesn't really help them to raise the price unless they want to give it to the government. The profits for the company wouldn't change although the government coffers would get larger.

[Denny]

The ONLY thing that will save our economy (if it's still salvagable) is to hold the consumer 100% responsible for his own spending. Let the people sink or swim. Don't punish the companies who make money, just to prolong the inevitable.

[gpamp]

Obama is an self centered socialist. Anyone who can't see that is really just plain stupid.
Because he wants to hand out $1000?

Didn't Bush do that, like... twice?

George W. Bush is TWICE the self centered socialist Obama is. Anyone who can't see that is really just plain stupid.

[Vertnut]

Because he wants to hand out $1000?

Didn't Bush do that, like... twice?
He gave tax-payers their own money. Giving folks a companies profits is just a bit socialistic...don't you think? :cool:

[Tx Redneck]

End the war in iraq (one way or another) so we can reinvest that money into the US.

You want to help w/ the budget deficit? Listen to http://www.4shared.com/file/57485938/6aa5ab04/COD.html <----(edited down http://www.4shared.com/file/57486119/33320746/cost_of_divorce.htmlfull program[/URL] .
Sourced from http://faithandfamily.com/radio/program/current-issues-20080430 and the published study:http://americanvalues.org/html/coff_mediaadvisory.htm.

[Somewhere in Time]

He gave tax-payers their own money. Giving folks a companies profits is just a bit socialistic...don't you think? :cool:

Took the words right out of my mouth. There is a huge difference between the two. Obama has no right to tax oil companies legit profits. I assure you, if this does happen, we will all end up paying for it in a big way.

[sc281_99-0135]

their knee jerk reaction to our knee jerk reaction of idiocy and capping profit and capitalism as a whole would be to give us the finger and leave to a country where they can actually build a fucking refinery. :rolleyes:


they would love to be able to build a more efficient and safer refinery without the damn tree huggers getting all pissy, at least in these countries theyd still be allowed to beat the huggers asses like their parents should have done when they were little. :D

[TexasDevilDog]

Obama's populism policy will work as well help as it has in Venezuela and Zimbabwe.

[Vertnut]

Obama's populism policy will work as well help as it has in Venezuela and Zimbabwe.
Stop making sense, dammit! Obama's new energy policy is to "air up our tires" for better fuel economy!

[Sean88gt]

Stop making sense, dammit! Obama's new energy policy is to "air up our tires" for better fuel economy!

I'm going to run e/t streets at 10psi just to counteract his plan!

[slow99]

Wow, another thread that has managed to blow my mind.

[black01gt]

I might not agree with him handing out 1,000 to everyone but I will not turn him down. :D
Well alright. All we got from that cheapskate Bush was this lousy $600. This mothafuckin grill cost me twice dat. Obama my main man.... :D

[black01gt]

they would love to be able to build a more efficient and safer refinery without the damn tree huggers getting all pissy, :D
Gotta call bullshit. What treehugger gives a shit about more refining capacity in Bakersfield, Beaumont, Big Springs, etc.? What treehugger has the clout to stand up to The Oil Prez? "They would love to better accomodate the American public and bring the cost of their product down..." :D Hardly.

[cannonball996]

sooner or later we are going to have to pay down our debt, and thats going to be done with higher taxes, there is no other way. this will cause the value of the dollar to start to go up again, and give americans more purchasing power after the tax

[Vertnut]

sooner or later we are going to have to pay down our debt, and thats going to be done with higher taxes, there is no other way. this will cause the value of the dollar to start to go up again, and give americans more purchasing power after the tax
There's the primary difference between you and I. Higher taxes will just lead to...higher taxes. There's no end to it. We need to cut back on our government waste/spending to really fix the issue. Line-item veto's wouldn't hurt...

[01WhiteCobra]

sooner or later we are going to have to pay down our debt, and thats going to be done with higher taxes, there is no other way. this will cause the value of the dollar to start to go up again, and give americans more purchasing power after the tax

Cut the size of government, keep taxes the same.

Done deal.

It is absurd to think that giving the government more money will lead to reduced debt. It will be used to expand the government because everyone has their own little special interest to deal with.

The value of the US dollar will go up when the feds realize that just because they have a printing press doesn't mean it has to print money in ever rising frequency.

[Denny]

Cut the size of government, keep taxes the same.

Done deal.

It is absurd to think that giving the government more money will lead to reduced debt. It will be used to expand the government because everyone has their own little special interest to deal with.

The value of the US dollar will go up when the feds realize that just because they have a printing press doesn't mean it has to print money in ever rising frequency.
Right. When we started printing "In God We Trust" on our money, the dollar was doomed.

[The Punisher]

There's the primary difference between you and I. Higher taxes will just lead to...higher taxes. There's no end to it. We need to cut back on our government waste/spending to really fix the issue. Line-item veto's wouldn't hurt...
Yup!
high taxes = the government misusing more of our money and the rich hiding more of their money. Lower taxes promote the economy, rich will invest more, people are able to spend more. We just need washington to be fiscally responsible! Lets not punish the people since washington is acting like a 16 year old with a credit card with no limit.

[cannonball996]

I would love a smaller government, and cut the budget, but you would never get everyone to agree on it. what are we going to cut down on? military spending, social security, home land security. where are you going to be able to pull 8 trillion dollars from?

[Denny]

I would love a smaller government, and cut the budget, but you would never get everyone to agree on it. what are we going to cut down on? military spending, social security, home land security. where are you going to be able to pull 8 trillion dollars from?
Special interests, foriegn aid, CONGRESSIONAL VACATIONS.

[cannonball996]

Special interests, foriegn aid, CONGRESSIONAL VACATIONS.
that would not even come close to paying off the debt

[Denny]

that would not even come close to paying off the debt
Over time, it will. Not only will we NOT be paying for all that, but the money we would be using will go toward the debts. Think about it.

[slow06]

Since there are some smart people in here, what do you think of the Fair Tax? How would that help our current economic situation?

It seems to me it would help everyone, and here's how:
Lower Income: get to keep more of their money which they desperately need, and are only taxed when they CHOOSE to spend money on taxable items.
Highest Income: get to invest more money (That is assuming they got where they are by having a little financial wisdom. Because they tend to spend more than the lower income classes, they will in turned be taxed more. Still their CHOICE.
Middle Income: A little of both.

[Denny]

Since there are some smart people in here, what do you think of the Fair Tax? How would that help our current economic situation?

It seems to me it would help everyone, and here's how:
Lower Income: get to keep more of their money which they desperately need, and are only taxed when they CHOOSE to spend money on taxable items.
Highest Income: get to invest more money (That is assuming they got where they are by having a little financial wisdom. Because they tend to spend more than the lower income classes, they will in turned be taxed more. Still their CHOICE.
Middle Income: A little of both.
I was about to respond, but then I noticed it wasn't addressed to me. :o

[gip99drop]

I'll take a grand, maybe I can start working on my Coupe. lol

[slow06]

I was about to respond, but then I noticed it wasn't addressed to me. :o

Oh come on...give it a shot.

An even more important question:What can we do about it?

There is no doubt in my mind that a combination of the ideas mentioned in this thread has the potential to turn our country around. Now what are we going to do about it. How do we get some wise, common sense people in office? How do we keep this government in check? (It has been running wild for too long)

[Vertnut]

Oh come on...give it a shot.

An even more important question:What can we do about it?

There is no doubt in my mind that a combination of the ideas mentioned in this thread has the potential to turn our country around. Now what are we going to do about it. How do we get some wise, common sense people in office? How do we keep this government in check? (It has been running wild for too long)
Vote the bums out...all of them.

[MadMax404m]

Gotta call bullshit. What treehugger gives a shit about more refining capacity in Bakersfield, Beaumont, Big Springs, etc.? What treehugger has the clout to stand up to The Oil Prez? "They would love to better accomodate the American public and bring the cost of their product down..." :D Hardly.

The problem with that logic is, they might bring the oil down 1/3 the price, but get 2x the profits, not all things logical are done in a "I want it now" sense. Treehuggers care about refining in those places because the more they complain, the more money they get from the govt and the "special intrest" nut-lovers. Tree-hugging is a buisness when people realize the "special intrest" groups make more money the more they complain and whine the more the american people will steer away from them.

[Vertnut]

These "tree-huggers" you speak of, are the very reason that Pelosi and Barry don't want to drill. Some of their biggest contributors from the far left, are tree-huggers, and they can't afford to let us drill.

[black01gt]

These "tree-huggers" you speak of, are the very reason that Pelosi and Barry don't want to drill. Some of their biggest contributors from the far left, are tree-huggers, and they can't afford to let us drill.
CAMPAIGN. Nothing matters but THE CAMPAIGN. :eek:

[Gripenfelter]

Since there are some smart people in here, what do you think of the Fair Tax? How would that help our current economic situation?

It seems to me it would help everyone, and here's how:
Lower Income: get to keep more of their money which they desperately need, and are only taxed when they CHOOSE to spend money on taxable items.
Highest Income: get to invest more money (That is assuming they got where they are by having a little financial wisdom. Because they tend to spend more than the lower income classes, they will in turned be taxed more. Still their CHOICE.
Middle Income: A little of both.

I'm all for a fair tax.

[mustangguy289]

I am so ready for Novemeber.. let the assinations begin.

[cannonball996]

its not the tree huggers that the democrats are fighting for, the democrats said they would agree to the drilling if the republicans would agree to the limitations on speculations.

[slow06]

its not the tree huggers that the democrats are fighting for, the democrats said they would agree to the drilling if the republicans would agree to the limitations on speculations.

Well lets do it then! Stop the Partisan bitching and get it going!

Politicians and their complaining. Every last one of them is full of crap, I swear.

[Vertnut]

its not the tree huggers that the democrats are fighting for, the democrats said they would agree to the drilling if the republicans would agree to the limitations on speculations.
I've got some news for you...if we're drilling like we should be, there would be little or no attraction for speculation. The reason speculation on oil works, is because of the limitations we have put on ourselves.

[MadMax404m]

its not the tree huggers that the democrats are fighting for, the democrats said they would agree to the drilling if the republicans would agree to the limitations on speculations.

The "All of the Above" bill that is being haulted by the dems(because they dont want to drill, yet they want alternative energy and this gives that but it still says to drill)would be a cause and effect solution for speculation. The dems just dont want to drill, hell the reason pelosi is haulting all of this is because there are 20-30% of dems who now want to drill and she would lose, and god forbid she lose anything.

Pelosi is fighting for no one but the exteme left(which includes special intrest groups BTW). Why in the hell do you think she shut down congress while 70% of them said no, why did she turn off the cameras while still in session? She wont accept ANY bill that has to do with an energy policy to go to the floor or even be discussed, especially when the american public is watching.

[AL P]

I would love a smaller government, and cut the budget, but you would never get everyone to agree on it. what are we going to cut down on? military spending, social security, home land security. where are you going to be able to pull 8 trillion dollars from?

You don't need everyone to agree on it. You reduce everything by a certain percent. Let's say you reduce government spending by 1% a year for 10 years.

Of course there will be people who have a problem with this and think their pet issue should be exempt but fuck them. Everyone takes a haircut, it's only fair.

Instead of that you will see nonsense like this windfall profit tax.

I'm just amazed at the stupid idiots who think it is a big idea. Gpamp, are you a god damned moron?

[gpamp]

Drilling won't solve anything.

It just won't. I don't care what kind of false logic has been spewed by the Right, it will NOT help our energy crisis or bring down the cost of gas.

IMO, I think the speculators are being paid off by the oil & gas companies, to push the price of their product up so high, that we're BEGGING for drilling in Alaska, because for some reason (hmmm... I wonder...) we are lead to believe that's the answer.

The oil companies have been wanting to tap into Alaska & more off shore drilling for a long time. If they get their way, all that'll happen is that they'll have more of their high-priced product to sell.

For the life of me, I can't see what the Right gains in this scenario. Other than all of the Right Wing that's spewing misinformation about how much oil is down there, and how safe it is to the environment (false), are the ones who are benefitting from the oil & gas companies personally, and politically.

It's a ploy, people. The gas companies are using us as leverage to drill where they're not supposed to.

[sc281_99-0135]

its not the tree huggers that the democrats are fighting for, the democrats said they would agree to the drilling if the republicans would agree to the limitations on speculations.



this has gotta be the stupidest idea of themall.

speculation is betting on whether something will go one way or another.

THE BASIS FOR OUR WHOLE FUCKING ECONOMY!!!

yea lets stop speculation so we can keep people from losing money. its the economy stupid.

if youre gonna do this ya might as well nationalize the oil industries because the corporate entities will leave the US

thatll solve all your liberal problems....i mean social security is just peachy


how bout you give the speculators a reason to speculate down , instead of whining and complaining like fucking babies

[Vertnut]

Drilling won't solve anything.

It just won't. I don't care what kind of false logic has been spewed by the Right, it will NOT help our energy crisis or bring down the cost of gas.

IMO, I think the speculators are being paid off by the oil & gas companies, to push the price of their product up so high, that we're BEGGING for drilling in Alaska, because for some reason (hmmm... I wonder...) we are lead to believe that's the answer.

The oil companies have been wanting to tap into Alaska & more off shore drilling for a long time. If they get their way, all that'll happen is that they'll have more of their high-priced product to sell.

For the life of me, I can't see what the Right gains in this scenario. Other than all of the Right Wing that's spewing misinformation about how much oil is down there, and how safe it is to the environment (false), are the ones who are benefitting from the oil & gas companies personally, and politically.

It's a ploy, people. The gas companies are using us as leverage to drill where they're not supposed to.
So you do not believe in "supply and demand"? The very basic fabric of economics? Please explain why it won't work.

[mustangguy289]

Drilling won't solve anything.

It just won't. I don't care what kind of false logic has been spewed by the Right, it will NOT help our energy crisis or bring down the cost of gas.

IMO, I think the speculators are being paid off by the oil & gas companies, to push the price of their product up so high, that we're BEGGING for drilling in Alaska, because for some reason (hmmm... I wonder...) we are lead to believe that's the answer.

The oil companies have been wanting to tap into Alaska & more off shore drilling for a long time. If they get their way, all that'll happen is that they'll have more of their high-priced product to sell.

For the life of me, I can't see what the Right gains in this scenario. Other than all of the Right Wing that's spewing misinformation about how much oil is down there, and how safe it is to the environment (false), are the ones who are benefitting from the oil & gas companies personally, and politically.

It's a ploy, people. The gas companies are using us as leverage to drill where they're not supposed to.


I hope they get you when they get Obama.

[slow99]

So you do not believe in "supply and demand"? The very basic fabric of economics?

Well, this is dfwstangs...

[AL P]

Drilling won't solve anything.

It just won't. I don't care what kind of false logic has been spewed by the Right, it will NOT help our energy crisis or bring down the cost of gas.

IMO, I think the speculators are being paid off by the oil & gas companies, to push the price of their product up so high, that we're BEGGING for drilling in Alaska, because for some reason (hmmm... I wonder...) we are lead to believe that's the answer.

The oil companies have been wanting to tap into Alaska & more off shore drilling for a long time. If they get their way, all that'll happen is that they'll have more of their high-priced product to sell.

For the life of me, I can't see what the Right gains in this scenario. Other than all of the Right Wing that's spewing misinformation about how much oil is down there, and how safe it is to the environment (false), are the ones who are benefitting from the oil & gas companies personally, and politically.

It's a ploy, people. The gas companies are using us as leverage to drill where they're not supposed to.

Let me guess, economics was not your favorite subject?

[Vertnut]

Well, this is dfwstangs...
No shit. UFO's? Yep! Ghosts'? Yep! Supply and demand? Nope! He can't be that stupid. There's no way...

[AL P]

Well, this is dfwstangs...

Are you really suprised at all?

[MadMax404m]

Drilling won't solve anything.

It just won't. I don't care what kind of false logic has been spewed by the Right, it will NOT help our energy crisis or bring down the cost of gas.

IMO, I think the speculators are being paid off by the oil & gas companies, to push the price of their product up so high, that we're BEGGING for drilling in Alaska, because for some reason (hmmm... I wonder...) we are lead to believe that's the answer.

The oil companies have been wanting to tap into Alaska & more off shore drilling for a long time. If they get their way, all that'll happen is that they'll have more of their high-priced product to sell.

For the life of me, I can't see what the Right gains in this scenario. Other than all of the Right Wing that's spewing misinformation about how much oil is down there, and how safe it is to the environment (false), are the ones who are benefitting from the oil & gas companies personally, and politically.

It's a ploy, people. The gas companies are using us as leverage to drill where they're not supposed to.

LMMFAO

Yet your "dems" want to pull oil out the NPR? Its still supply and demand either way you look at it only drilling gets you more for a longer period of time. Really? Are you and the rest of your dems that blindsided that either way its boosting supply to accomodate for demand?

[AL P]

LMMFAO

Yet your "dems" want to pull oil out the NPR? Its still supply and demand either way you look at it only drilling gets you more for a longer period of time. Really? Are you and the rest of your dems that blindsided that either way its boosting supply to accomodate for demand?

Supply and Demand don't exist in the liberal idiot world, it's all puppy dog kisses, candy cane light poles and chocolate covered mailboxes.

I almost want Obama to win so some of these fucking morons can get an education after the economy slides off of a fucking cliff into an abyss. It would be amusing to watch some of these idiots starve.

[slow06]

Drilling won't solve anything.

It just won't. I don't care what kind of false logic has been spewed by the Right, it will NOT help our energy crisis or bring down the cost of gas.

IMO, I think the speculators are being paid off by the oil & gas companies, to push the price of their product up so high, that we're BEGGING for drilling in Alaska, because for some reason (hmmm... I wonder...) we are lead to believe that's the answer.

The oil companies have been wanting to tap into Alaska & more off shore drilling for a long time. If they get their way, all that'll happen is that they'll have more of their high-priced product to sell.

For the life of me, I can't see what the Right gains in this scenario. Other than all of the Right Wing that's spewing misinformation about how much oil is down there, and how safe it is to the environment (false), are the ones who are benefitting from the oil & gas companies personally, and politically.

It's a ploy, people. The gas companies are using us as leverage to drill where they're not supposed to.

Why the hell should they not tap into the Alaskan Oil? It isn't doing anyone any good underground, is it?

You can't see what the Right gains?? Maybe because it isn't about gaining anything for a political party, it is about helping our economy overall. Why does it have to only help the Right? Do you really think Democrats are gaining nothing from high oil prices? Do you think republicans are the only ones making money from Big Oil? HA!

[Vertnut]

LMMFAO

Yet your "dems" want to pull oil out the NPR? Its still supply and demand either way you look at it only drilling gets you more for a longer period of time. Really? Are you and the rest of your dems that blindsided that either way its boosting supply to accomodate for demand?
He is "fighting the good fight", like Pelosi! "I'm trying to save the world!" Let's save our asses first, then worry about the world.

[MadMax404m]

Supply and Demand don't exist in the liberal idiot world, it's all puppy dog kisses, candy cane light poles and chocolate covered mailboxes.

I almost want Obama to win so some of these fucking morons can get an education after the economy slides off of a fucking cliff into an abyss. It would be amusing to watch some of these idiots starve.

My problem with obama getting in(even though like you, I to would love to see the morons fall off the cliff) is if he does enough damage what do we do then? Could we recover? Only took hitler a couple years to do it and luck what happened to them :D :p

When you really look at it, obama is one scary MFer and if obama is president, and if he picks a VP that is ANYTHING like gore, with pelosi and reid in congress they can really screw things up pretty damn bad in a very short amount of time

BTW we bought Alaska for one reason and one reason only in 1949, and that was for oil, why not use what we bought?

[gpamp]

The economy can't be tweaked by people in high places? You guys must be high, if you think that's true.

Why NOT take oil off the market? Ok, maybe not off the market completely, but a little regulation could go a really long way. Is water a communist resource just because it's handled by municipalities?

[Denny]

The economy can't be tweaked by people in high places? You guys must be high, if you think that's true.

Why NOT take oil off the market? Ok, maybe not off the market completely, but a little regulation could go a really long way. Is water a communist resource just because it's handled by municipalities?
Are you comparing water to oil?!?! Jeez, dude.

Look, oil itself isn't the problem. It's the great demand for it while we have a dominant, close to monopolizing source, calling the shots. If we up our own production, then it takes care of the IMMEDIATE problem. We'll still have time to come up with alternative sources of power while we use OUR oil.

[gpamp]

Are you comparing water to oil?!?! Jeez, dude.

Look, oil itself isn't the problem. It's the great demand for it while we have a dominant, close to monopolizing source, calling the shots. If we up our own production, then it takes care of the IMMEDIATE problem. We'll still have time to come up with alternative sources of power while we use OUR oil.
Yeah, I'm comparing water to oil. No, dude. I'm comparing the systems in which both are distributed as resources.

Do you actually think that if we started drilling in Alaska, that it'll be our own little oil factory? That we'll have "The Precious" and no one else can touch it? No. It'll go into the market, for everyone to fight for (might as well just hand it to China), and the price MIGHT drop a bit. We might see $3.65 gas instead of $3.70. And while you might say "a five cent drop helps", it doesn't help enough to justify drilling, imo.

[The Punisher]

Yeah, I'm comparing water to oil. No, dude. I'm comparing the systems in which both are distributed as resources.

Do you actually think that if we started drilling in Alaska, that it'll be our own little oil factory? That we'll have "The Precious" and no one else can touch it? No. It'll go into the market, for everyone to fight for (might as well just hand it to China), and the price MIGHT drop a bit. We might see $3.65 gas instead of $3.70. And while you might say "a five cent drop helps", it doesn't help enough to justify drilling, imo.
Did you get your figures from the Dalia Bama? I didn't know he and you were able to predict what would happen if we start drilling.... :rolleyes:

[slow06]

Yeah, I'm comparing water to oil. No, dude. I'm comparing the systems in which both are distributed as resources.

Do you actually think that if we started drilling in Alaska, that it'll be our own little oil factory? That we'll have "The Precious" and no one else can touch it? No. It'll go into the market, for everyone to fight for (might as well just hand it to China), and the price MIGHT drop a bit. We might see $3.65 gas instead of $3.70. And while you might say "a five cent drop helps", it doesn't help enough to justify drilling, imo.

Why are you so opposed to drilling?

Why don't we drill, to effect supply and speculation, AND look for alternative sources of energy for the future? We need to attack this problem an every front we can, and not wait around for someone to develop a better battery or cheaper solar panels.

Every little thing we can do to become more efficent with the oil we have, bring us away from dependence on OPEC, and find alternative renewable energy is a step in the right direction. Just doing any 1 or to of these things is not enough, we need to do them all, and we need to do them NOW.

Drilling alone is not a perfect solution, but it can be a big part of a long-term plan.

[gpamp]

Did you get your figures from the Dalia Bama? I didn't know he and you were able to predict what would happen if we start drilling.... :rolleyes:
Haha, just because you needed a reason to throw out "Dali(no 'a') Bama" doesn't make your point invalidating of mine.

It's the world economy. You're saying that if we allow a company that sells its product all around the World, to start drilling in our country, that they'll make sure the oil they produce stays in said country? No way. They're going to sell it to the highest bidder. Supply & demand are out the window now that the oil & gas companies see that we're willing to pay $4 a gallon. Why get $80 a barrel, when you can get $120?

It's not that I'm against drilling. I just don't think it's going to do any good, at all. It won't offset anything. It probably won't sustain anything. Keep in mind that the science community is split down the middle with just how much oil is under Alaska.

I'd like to know why everyone's so against alternative fuel types?

[Nate]

Haha, just because you needed a reason to throw out "Dali(no 'a') Bama" doesn't make your point invalidating of mine.

It's the world economy. You're saying that if we allow a company that sells its product all around the World, to start drilling in our country, that they'll make sure the oil they produce stays in said country? No way. They're going to sell it to the highest bidder. Supply & demand are out the window now that the oil & gas companies see that we're willing to pay $4 a gallon. Why get $80 a barrel, when you can get $120?

It's not that I'm against drilling. I just don't think it's going to do any good, at all. It won't offset anything. It probably won't sustain anything. Keep in mind that the science community is split down the middle with just how much oil is under Alaska.

I'd like to know why everyone's so against alternative fuel types?
More supply moves the equilibrium price down to a lower level. Economics 101. You do not throw supply and demand out the window, you increase supply with the same demand prices go down.

Yes it will be sold to highest bidder at the time but increasing supply will do what I mentioned above.

Who said anything about being against alt fuel types? I'm all for it but while it is being developed we can drill and do other things to bring down oil now as we explore the alternate fuel types.

The scientific community does agree that oil is under Alaska though, how much we'll see when we start drilling.

If you care to respond with economic reasons of why and prove to me your basis for this then I will respond back to you like an adult. If you throw out petty insults etc I will place you back on ignore.

[Denny]

Yeah, I'm comparing water to oil. No, dude. I'm comparing the systems in which both are distributed as resources.

Do you actually think that if we started drilling in Alaska, that it'll be our own little oil factory? That we'll have "The Precious" and no one else can touch it? No. It'll go into the market, for everyone to fight for (might as well just hand it to China), and the price MIGHT drop a bit. We might see $3.65 gas instead of $3.70. And while you might say "a five cent drop helps", it doesn't help enough to justify drilling, imo.
Shit... I want that crystal ball of yours. Five cents is a pretty exact number, huh? You don't think it would start a price war between us and the rest of the suppliers? I still see that you didn't respond to the comment about if you know how supply and demand work.

[The Punisher]

Haha, just because you needed a reason to throw out "Dali(no 'a') Bama" doesn't make your point invalidating of mine.

It's the world economy. You're saying that if we allow a company that sells its product all around the World, to start drilling in our country, that they'll make sure the oil they produce stays in said country? No way. They're going to sell it to the highest bidder. Supply & demand are out the window now that the oil & gas companies see that we're willing to pay $4 a gallon. Why get $80 a barrel, when you can get $120?

It's not that I'm against drilling. I just don't think it's going to do any good, at all. It won't offset anything. It probably won't sustain anything. Keep in mind that the science community is split down the middle with just how much oil is under Alaska.

I'd like to know why everyone's so against alternative fuel types?
You just said the answer.. Supply and demand... more supply, less demand.. Hence why we should drill now! There isn't a shortage on old, but speculation of a shortage of oil. Why wait till its too late? Oh wait.... Dali Bama wants us to just suck it up and air up our tires and give us a $1000 rebate check instead of addressing the real problem. Typical liberal... Your political association makes you against off shore drilling. Because the people you support oppose it. :rolleyes:

[The Punisher]

Shit... I want that crystal ball of yours. Five cents is a pretty exact number, huh? You don't think it would start a price war between us and the rest of the suppliers? I still see that you didn't respond to the comment about if you know how supply and demand work.
Do not forget, he consults the Dali Bama... The Dali Bama is all knowing.... :p

[slow06]

I'd like to know why everyone's so against alternative fuel types?

I don't think anyone in this discussion is really against alternative fuel, it is just the idea that we would wait around while things are being invented/improved is asinine. Let's do what we can now, and when battery/hydrogen/solar power becomes more feasible we can move in that direction.

Think about this: One of reason alternative fuels will help in the long run is because it will reduce demand for oil. By supporting alternative fuels I assume you know this is one of their benefits, correct? I also assume that you know that by decreasing demand this would, in turn, cause prices to slowly drop.

That is Supply and Demand! Alternative fuels will attack the demand side, which you hopefully agree would drop prices. Wouldn't attacking the Supply side do the same?

Wouldn't a combination of both be the best approach?

[gpamp]

More supply moves the equilibrium price down to a lower level. Economics 101. You do not throw supply and demand out the window, you increase supply with the same demand prices go down.

Yes it will be sold to highest bidder at the time but increasing supply will do what I mentioned above.

Who said anything about being against alt fuel types? I'm all for it but while it is being developed we can drill and do other things to bring down oil now as we explore the alternate fuel types.

The scientific community does agree that oil is under Alaska though, how much we'll see when we start drilling.

If you care to respond with economic reasons of why and prove to me your basis for this then I will respond back to you like an adult. If you throw out petty insults etc I will place you back on ignore.
You'll notice, I never insult someone who hasn't insulted me first. I just assume that's the only thing they can hear when they do that, so I respond in their language.

I didn't say you, in particular were against alternative fuel types. Although, "I'm all for it but while it is being developed we can drill and do other things to bring down oil now as we explore the alternate fuel types." has been a major talking point amongst the right wing, and in my opinion, its losing its substance, because, again, I don't believe it'll bring down the price of oil all that much. I mean, you said yourself "The scientific community does agree that oil is under Alaska though, how much we'll see when we start drilling." What if a company spends billions of dollars to drill in Alaska, and finds 2,000 barrels-worth? That won't help the cost of oil or fuel at all. It could, in fact, cause it to go up to offset cost to get in there. It's an uneccessary gamle, IMO.

And Denny, I know you're smart enough to realize that when I say "five cents", I'm using that as an example, not an exact number. And you really think price wars will bring down the cost of oil? With oil in the world market, it's more like an auction. And we're bidding against a country that knows we don't really have the cash... otherwise, we wouldn't owe them trillions of dollars.

[Nate]

You'll notice, I never insult someone who hasn't insulted me first. I just assume that's the only thing they can hear when they do that, so I respond in their language.

I didn't say you, in particular were against alternative fuel types. Although, "I'm all for it but while it is being developed we can drill and do other things to bring down oil now as we explore the alternate fuel types." has been a major talking point amongst the right wing, and in my opinion, its losing its substance, because, again, I don't believe it'll bring down the price of oil all that much. I mean, you said yourself "The scientific community does agree that oil is under Alaska though, how much we'll see when we start drilling." What if a company spends billions of dollars to drill in Alaska, and finds 2,000 barrels-worth? That won't help the cost of oil or fuel at all. It could, in fact, cause it to go up to offset cost to get in there. It's an uneccessary gamle, IMO.

And Denny, I know you're smart enough to realize that when I say "five cents", I'm using that as an example, not an exact number. And you really think price wars will bring down the cost of oil? With oil in the world market, it's more like an auction. And we're bidding against a country that knows we don't really have the cash... otherwise, we wouldn't owe them trillions of dollars.You never said anything about supply and demand. And the scientific community is not debating between 2000 barrels and 2 billion barrels. There is a significant amount of oil under Alaska that is worth exploring from a purely economic viewpoint.

Please tell me how supply going up will not force downward pressure while demand is still decreasing in America?

[Vertnut]

You'll notice, I never insult someone who hasn't insulted me first. I just assume that's the only thing they can hear when they do that, so I respond in their language.

I didn't say you, in particular were against alternative fuel types. Although, "I'm all for it but while it is being developed we can drill and do other things to bring down oil now as we explore the alternate fuel types." has been a major talking point amongst the right wing, and in my opinion, its losing its substance, because, again, I don't believe it'll bring down the price of oil all that much. I mean, you said yourself "The scientific community does agree that oil is under Alaska though, how much we'll see when we start drilling." What if a company spends billions of dollars to drill in Alaska, and finds 2,000 barrels-worth? That won't help the cost of oil or fuel at all. It could, in fact, cause it to go up to offset cost to get in there. It's an uneccessary gamle, IMO.

And Denny, I know you're smart enough to realize that when I say "five cents", I'm using that as an example, not an exact number. And you really think price wars will bring down the cost of oil? With oil in the world market, it's more like an auction. And we're bidding against a country that knows we don't really have the cash... otherwise, we wouldn't owe them trillions of dollars.
Tests' from 1954, show closer to 100 billion barrels in ANWR. That's probably pretty conservative, considering the testing procedures they used then and the technology differences over the last 50 years.

[gpamp]

You never said anything about supply and demand. And the scientific community is not debating between 2000 barrels and 2 billion barrels. There is a significant amount of oil under Alaska that is worth exploring from a purely economic viewpoint.

Please tell me how supply going up will not force downward pressure while demand is still decreasing in America?
Because America isn't the only place that uses oil. China's demand has gone through the roof. Maybe if there were just as many oil companies drilling as there were convenient stores, THEN we'd have options, and supply & demand would work like it's supposed to. Oil is much closer to a monopoly.

[Vertnut]

Because America isn't the only place that uses oil. China's demand has gone through the roof. Maybe if there were just as many oil companies drilling as there were convenient stores, THEN we'd have options, and supply & demand would work like it's supposed to. Oil is much closer to a monopoly.
China's demand is nowhere near where folks thought it was going to be, and after the Olympics, it could drop considerably. You really have nothing to base your argument on. It's simple economics. Even your man Obama is wanting to drill offshore now. :cool:

[Nate]

Because America isn't the only place that uses oil. China's demand has gone through the roof. Maybe if there were just as many oil companies drilling as there were convenient stores, THEN we'd have options, and supply & demand would work like it's supposed to. Oil is much closer to a monopoly.
Has their through the roof production in recent overcome our slowing down of use?

ANY more supply will affect prices regardless if more oil is used, so by your logic...

Other people are using it so lets let demand get higher and keep supply the same. By this it pushes equilibrium higher (economics 101 concepts right here) which price rises...so instead of offsetting increasing demand with increasing supply to keep equilibrium the same, fuck it we'll just wait until another source is ready?

If you do not grasp these concepts I will gladly pay for you to take Micro and Macro economics at the local CC along with a logic course that is taught by a professor I know at my local CC.

[Vertnut]

Has their through the roof production in recent overcome our slowing down of use?

ANY more supply will affect prices regardless if more oil is used, so by your logic...

Other people are using it so lets let demand get higher and keep supply the same. By this it pushes equilibrium higher (economics 101 concepts right here) which price rises...so instead of offsetting increasing demand with increasing supply to keep equilibrium the same, fuck it we'll just wait until another source is ready?

If you do not grasp these concepts I will gladly pay for you to take Micro and Macro economics at the local CC along with a logic course that is taught by a professor I know at my local CC.
Test days were the only times I'd show up for ECO201, and I still passed the course, and I'm a dumb-shit... :cool:

[67camino]

Because America isn't the only place that uses oil. China's demand has gone through the roof. Maybe if there were just as many oil companies drilling as there were convenient stores, THEN we'd have options, and supply & demand would work like it's supposed to. Oil is much closer to a monopoly.
Don't you think that since it would be American oil then it would help prop up the dollar which inturn would lower the price of oil after all oil is traded in US $$$, also more of the money would be going back into the US economy(because its our oil not some towel heads)and thats always a good thing. You really dont understand economics do you?

[Vertnut]

Don't you think that since it would be American oil then it would help prop up the dollar which inturn would lower the price of oil after all oil is traded in US $$$, also more of the money would be going back into the US economy(because its our oil not some towel heads)and thats always a good thing. You really dont understand economics do you?
He doesn't want to. "Obama-nomics" makes more sense to him, I guess. :rolleyes:

[Nate]

Test days were the only times I'd show up for ECO201, and I still passed the course, and I'm a dumb-shit... :cool:
I took micro in Highschool and Macro in college, got A's in both being there about 2/3's of the time...it's all about shifting right/left up and down.

Wish I would have finished my minor in Econ though... :o Was just an extra 2 classes. :(

[MadMax404m]

Don't you think that since it would be American oil then it would help prop up the dollar which inturn would lower the price of oil after all oil is traded in US $$$, also more of the money would be going back into the US economy(because its our oil not some towel heads)and thats always a good thing. You really dont understand economics do you?

That is the simple logic, I mean look at Iraqs revenue when they rebuilt the oil rigs there? Then again, to the liberals we have to get RID of all things oil, and to the extreme left, we all should live like cavemen with no power.