Price of Gas too high - What do you do?

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200512/NAT20051222a.html
from JoeUser Forums

That is an interesting question.  When the price of gas was too high, what did you do?

Many bitched and moaned and accused the greedy oil companies of price gouging.  Indeed, Congress wants (another) committee to look into it.  And some of the moaners were actually Republicans.  But alas, most were Green Friendly democrats.  So question number one is: Why?

When the price went through the ceiling, I cut back.  Many did, some could not.  But consumption did fall.  Which means that less bad gasses were getting into the atmosphere, and hence global warming was delayed by a day or two.  So what was the problem there?  For all the green friendly people, what is so bad about high energy prices?  Don't you even listen to your constituency?  Earth friendly, ELF, The Sierra Club, all want that, why don't you?  If you goal is to reduce the green house gasses, jack up the price!  Hell, those quick trips to the market will disappear as will many long vacation drives.

OK, so you are not a green.  But you are all for the poor and do not want them to suffer.  So prices have to stay low.  Now question number 2: How do you ensure low prices?

Answer: Increase supply!  The more available gas, then the producers cannot demand a price, they have to bid for your patronage!  And how do you increase the supply?  Drill for more!  So why are the liberals who pretend they want to help the poor, not for drilling in ANWR?  While that may not reduce the price of oil to 50 cents a gallon, it will do a couple of things.  First, it will moderate the price rise (that is called a cut in Washington-ease - just ask Gideon on his Food Stamp article).  Second, it will increase the supply, which will lead to actual reductions in price.  The poor will be helped!  A perfect solution to one of the poor's problems.  Actually many since oil is the basis for many of life's taken for granted pleasures!

So why are the "For the Poor" liberals not in favor of increasing the supply?

So here we have a nice little quiz.  I would love to hear how we can stop global warming, decrease the price of oil, help the poor, save the environment, and reduce our dependence on foreign oil so we don't have to have another war for oil.

But wait!  We have one more question.  OK, substitutes.  How many are for replacing oil as an energy source?  OK, how many have voted against new Nuclear power plants.  Since the first one built, only one has had a significant accident, and that was in the old USSR.  They are environmentally friendly, so there is no green house gasses.  But, there is that pesky spent uranium!  Yea, that is a mess, right?

OK, so their is solar power and wind power and water power!  But wait!  Strike water power.  That stops fish from fulfilling their manifest destiny.  So how about solar and Wind power? Oh, drat!  There are those ugly windmills and solar panels!  As we heard from  Bobby Jr, better to burn oil, than to despoil a view of a beach!  And those solar panels? Well, on a large scale they have not been commercially feasible yet.  But they are on an individual basis!

So the next question is - How many of the Greens now use solar or wind energy solely?  What? only a handful?  Why how could they be dangerous?  Is that not the be all and end all of their positions?  What?  They still burn fossil fuels? (a misnomer BTW).

OK, Final Question:  Who is bitching about no energy policy?  And how does their voting record stand with the above issues and questions?

And you still vote for them on this issue?

Sorry, one more question.  If you are a green, why are you not producing alternate sources of energy to oil?  Are you so lazy as to let someone else get rich off your ideas, and then blast them for getting rich because they are more ambitious than you?

politics
28,368 views 119 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
I wrote this out of frustration for the sheeple, not that any sheeple will actually respond.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Not an interesting question
Answer: Nothing.... Things such as this one can't be changed by me, so it doesn't get my energy, just my money.

Those that complain about paying the cost of gas are spoiled period. Travel outside the US and see what the rest of the worlds been paying for years.
Got to many questions... I am going to go drive my electric golf cart to the club and practice.
Elemental: Reforged
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
Dr Guy

Here is a comprehensive solution to the energy problem. It takes MORE then just increasing SUPPLY:

Restore the Café standards and make them apply to all cars, trucks and SUVs.

Establish new targets for increased miles per gallon for each type of vehicle over the next 10 years.

Establish tax credits for car manufacturers who achieve the established standards.

Establish tax surcharges to car manufacturers who fail to meet the new mileage standards.


Utilize the additional tax revenue from surcharges to help fund the tax credits to corporations who achieve the new Café standards.

Provide federal subsidies to more fully utilize available coal supplies to create the energy needed wherever possible. Subsidies should be used to help provide for clean air equipment and to research new methods of utilizing coal in a non polluting way. Tax credits should also be used to convert existing oil and gas fired generators to coal and with the cost of transporting coal from the source to the user.

Provide subsidies to help car manufacturers develop cars and trucks using alternate propulsion systems such as fuel cells and hybrid/electric vehicles.

Provide subsidies to develop long-term renewable energy supplies including geothermal, wind, direct solar conversion, cold fusion, fuel cells etc. The objective would be to reduce our dependence on foreign oil as well as provide for the sale of the new technology and equipment to other countries. This would have the obvious advantage of not only solving our energy problem but eliminating many of the political entanglements that our dependence on Middle East oil creates. In addition, a reduction in the purchase of foreign oil would help our balance of trade as would sell the new technology and equipment to other countries. Thus this strategy would be a win-win-win-win situation for our country by enhancing employment, corporate profits, reduce our trade deficit as well as simplifying some of our political entanglements.

Encourage the development of natural gas in areas controlled by the United States

Encourage the development of additional oil supplies that are under the control of the United States and do not endanger the environment.

Carefully evaluate any new or renewed agreements to provide United States produced energy to other nations. Our objective should be to first provide for energy independence before pledging our assets, especially oil and gas, to other countries.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top

Got to many questions... I am going to go drive my electric golf cart to the club and practice.

Well, I know I rambled. But so many questions!  You wonder how they can preach every side of the equation????

BTW: It takes more energy to recharge your cart than a gas one consumes.  But I dont think that will affect your next putt.

Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top

Here is a comprehensive solution to the energy problem. It takes MORE then just increasing SUPPLY:

So, why are you not doing a diddly dam on any of these?  And the CAFE standards are not only bogus, they are stupid!  You might as well, just tax gas out the ying yang. (and it is CAFE, not Café).

And the rest of your ideas can be summed up in one word: Government.  So point to any solution the government has ever come up with?  Let me give you a clue: nada.

Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
Encourage the development of additional oil supplies that are under the control of the United States and do not endanger the environment.


This will not hasppen due to the fact that any of our "large" deposits that are undevolped are in evironmentally protected areas. Anwar is one, gulf or ocean deposits are another.


Restore the Café standards and make them apply to all cars, trucks and SUVs.


This won't happen either. You can apply Cafe standards to cars and suv's but not a truck. You can only get so much power from a given amount of fuel. As you go past that you get a diminished return. You increase the mileage too far and you start to lose HP which is what does the work. You lose too much HP in a truck and it's no longer capable of performing its work.


Provide federal subsidies to more fully utilize available coal supplies to create the energy needed wherever possible. Subsidies should be used to help provide for clean air equipment and to research new methods of utilizing coal in a non polluting way. Tax credits should also be used to convert existing oil and gas fired generators to coal and with the cost of transporting coal from the source to the user.

Provide subsidies to help car manufacturers develop cars and trucks using alternate propulsion systems such as fuel cells and hybrid/electric vehicles.


Provide subsidies? Christ on a crutch man....weren't you the one "screaming" about the deficit? Where's the money supposed to come from. Sorry but this is one of those things you can't have both ways.

Establish tax credits for car manufacturers who achieve the established standards.


Were you not also the one yelling about tax breaks for the rich/corporate fat cats? Again you can't have it both ways.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
Dr Guy

YES this will require Government action. Look what allowing the oil companies to act freely has produced! Look what happens when Cheney gets his oil buddies to advise him on a solution. They just got $12 Billion more of a gift from Bush and the conservatives in Congress. We need a comprehensive policy to increase supply and conserve existing supplies by cutting demand. The SUV and the lack of MPG standards have done more to add to the problem then anything in the past 10 years. One more MPG saves MORE oil then from new drilling in Alaska!
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
when the gas prices sky-rocketed, my son and I started riding the local bus service, weather permitting we walked
too when we didn't need too much from the store.
It's fun to walk into town, about a mile away.

The bus company raised their fares from a dollar to a buck and a quarter for that mile ride, so walking
is good exercise.....
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
You wonder how they can preach every side of the equation????

They can't... choices have to be made and consequences result either way.

It takes more energy to recharge your cart than a gas one consumes


I will have to do some homework before responding to this comment. I have a convert box that allows me to plug my golf cart it into my 110 current in the garage. It has 7 batteries and I get either 3 rounds of golf or it's used to drive around our community for a week without a charge. In either case, it's 5hr charge is negligible on our Ebill verses filling up the PCar and wife's Jetta.

Here's a related side tidbit... NEV's are manufactured in such a manner their being rejected for double duty use on many pvt golf courses around the country.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
What did I do when gas prices went up? Well... mostly, I didn't go anywhere unless I really had to. In my area, there aren't any walkable stores, or parks, or anything, so driving was a must. I also allowed my gas to get dangerously low each time before I filled it up again.

Anyone know why prices are starting to go up again? They got down to 1.74 (cheapest) down here, and now they are back up to 1.89 (cheapest).
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top

Provide subsidies? Christ on a crutch man....weren't you the one "screaming" about the deficit? Where's the money supposed to come from. Sorry but this is one of those things you can't have both ways.

They scream both sides, I just forgot to mention that one.  But then, I did leave out the government as in reality, the only thing the government does is consume, not produce.

Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top

YES this will require Government action. Look what allowing the oil companies to act freely has produced!

yes, let us look!  200 years ago, we used whale oil and coal tar!  You want that?  Private Industry produced the oil industry, the government did not.  And so other than some blubber lovers, the whales are making a comeback!  And oil?  30 years ago we had a 20 year reserve.  Today it is 50, and no one is getting slaughtered over it!  get a grip you flaming liberal!  You cant see the stupidity for the idiocy in your arguements!

Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top

The bus company raised their fares from a dollar to a buck and a quarter for that mile ride, so walking
is good exercise.....

Exactly!  You conserved!  not because some Green said you should, but out of necessity.  As did we.  As did many others.  That is the key.  Yet when the circumstances are ripe to promote Kyoto and conservation, what do the clowns in congress do?  beat us over the head with what they want!

being a politician (of any stripe) is easy!  Dont think, just blast away!

Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top

Anyone know why prices are starting to go up again? They got down to 1.74 (cheapest) down here, and now they are back up to 1.89 (cheapest).

The cold weather, so demands for heating oil are again shorting the system.

Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top

In either case, it's 5hr charge is negligible on our Ebill verses filling up the PCar and wife's Jetta.

True, because most Electrical plants are not oil fired, but Nuclear of Coal fired.  But in the BTU conversion (if it is not Nuclear), it is much less efficient.  No one wants a coal fired golf cart, but electricty appears cheap and clean. Until one traces the source of that power.  At least with coal, while not green, we have a ton of it!  More than the rest of the world combined (I think).

Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
Ironically enough, many in the Sierra Club complained not because of the price being too high, mind you, but because the profits from the gas were going to the oil companies rather than a prohibitively high tax being imposed to fund groups like the Sierra Club. In other words, they weren't complaining that money was being made, they were complaining that THEY weren't making it!

As I pointed out before, though...most US oil companies are publicly traded, and most pay dividends. If libs feel like there's such a huge profit being made in the oil companies, you think they'd buy into them and put the resultant profits into their liberal causes.

That'd be the smart move, anyway. But I, at least, am not going to accuse many of the liberal leaders of being overly smart.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
I drove the car less often. I walked when ever I could. I was good excersize, I lost a few pounds so I an not that unhappy with the prices being so high.

Col Gene, I find it interesting that you being the one complaining about the defecit and how Bush keeps giving money to the Big Corps, like right here on this very article:

They just got $12 Billion more of a gift from Bush and the conservatives in Congress.


But you want to :

Establish tax credits for car manufacturers who achieve the established standards.


Make up your mind, as drmiller said you can't have it both ways.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
You also noted I would impose tax surcharges if they did not achieve the higher mileage requirements. I would also restore the tax rates to the pre 2001 rates on the wealthy to help pay for these tax credits to stimulate energy development.

The higher energy costs do not end at the gas pump. Wait until people begin receiving their home heating bills. Much of the added cost to drive our cars and heat our homes goes either to the FAT oil companies or to foreign countries for the oil. There is no completion in the oil business. They control the supply and how much of each product they refine and create the supply that helps them add to their profit. For any of you Bushies that do not believe it, look at the increases profit last quarter when they were charging $3.00 plus for a gallon of gasoline. They will be doing the very same thing this winter with natural gas and home heating oil. The $12 Billion in tax credits that the Bush energy Bill just gave the oil companies could have been used to help fund my energy proposals. Why did we give an industry that had record profits of $33 Billion in the last quarter another $12 Billion in tax cuts? Answer, they are part of the Bush Base! Screw the average person so the Bush supporters can get even more wealthy!
.
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
I'd like gas prices to reach about 5 bucks a gall, just to watch all those SUV fuckers that tailgate me everyday to work cry and sell their fucking gas-guzzlers!


no joke
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
Answer: Increase supply! The more available gas


Wait a sec, if you find that your household expenses are outweighing your income you start by cleaning house and seeing if there is anything you can cut out or cut down.
Then you see if you can find new sources of income.

Put this now in respect to the US and have we really tried to tighten our belts on oil as a country before we are looking for new sources of oil?
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top

You also noted I would impose tax surcharges if they did not achieve the higher mileage requirements. I would also restore the tax rates to the pre 2001 rates on the wealthy to help pay for these tax credits to stimulate energy development.

The higher energy costs do not end at the gas pump. Wait until people begin receiving their home heating bills. Much of the added cost to drive our cars and heat our homes goes either to the FAT oil companies or to foreign countries for the oil. There is no completion in the oil business. They control the supply and how much of each product they refine and create the supply that helps them add to their profit. For any of you Bushies that do not believe it, look at the increases profit last quarter when they were charging $3.00 plus for a gallon of gasoline. They will be doing the very same thing this winter with natural gas and home heating oil. The $12 Billion in tax credits that the Bush energy Bill just gave the oil companies could have been used to help fund my energy proposals. Why did we give an industry that had record profits of $33 Billion in the last quarter another $12 Billion in tax cuts? Answer, they are part of the Bush Base! Screw the average person so the Bush supporters can get even more wealthy!


I just love the way you avoid the statement. So I suppose that your tax surcharge will out weigh the tax "break" given? Don't think so. How long do you think it would take for the mfg's to come into line. Lets see now...tax break if I do, tax surcharge if I don't. Tough decision. I also note that you avoided EVERY other point I made. So then I guess everyone else is right! You ARE a one trick pony!
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top

Ironically enough, many in the Sierra Club complained not because of the price being too high, mind you, but because the profits from the gas were going to the oil companies rather than a prohibitively high tax being imposed to fund groups like the Sierra Club. In other words, they weren't complaining that money was being made, they were complaining that THEY weren't making it!

Dont you love the Hypocrisy!  I sure do!  I pay through the nose and then sit back and watch the complainers!

Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top

Make up your mind, as drmiller said you can't have it both ways.

Not hardly as long as the President is Bush!

Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply By: Gideon MacLeish
Posted: Tuesday, December 27, 2005
good catch, DJ!

He is getting very good!  I am going to have to read him more closely!