Democrats vote NO to lower gas prices

Originally posted by passenger

Ummm. Why should some Congressman be allowed to determine what kind of car I drive?If I want to buy a big car and pay some oil company to keep it running then that’s my choice as a free citizen. Why should some schmuck in Washington prevent them from drilling and thus artificially raise the prices sky-high so that I can no longer afford to drive the car of my choice?

You must not read The New York Times or watch "60 Minutes."

Congress will be allowed to determine the car you drive because your SUV, your thermostat set at 72 degrees, plus all the red meat you eat, are all contributing to the impending extinction of the polar bears, increased hurricane strength, and global famine.

reply to post by jamie83

So if it's not low supply what is it?

It's the appearance of low supply.

If it's not a partisan issue, what is it?

The game is fixed. You are watching a dog and pony show.

I still haven't heard an explanation that makes sense regarding why we shouldn't drill offshore.

Drill away!

reply to post by passenger

Alternative energy is like that. It probably will come around some day, but it doesn’t suffice now. It would be great if some genius invented a flux-capacitor tomorrow and we could all start running our cars on coffee grounds and banana peels - and someday it might happen

My friend, we can walk in space, land on a planet, we can explore the deepest parts of the ocean, but we can't figure out how to survive without oil. You can buy electric cars, the technology is here.

Two quick points...is it outlandish to think there might be environmental reasons to restrict drilling that close to shore?

Secondly, I have no problem with a fair gas tax imposed by the government because it represents an equitable user-pay manner of maintaining the transportation infrastructure.

I will confess, though, to being continually astounded at the partisan animosity in the States right now, and see it as a real cancer upon the national psyche.

Then again...if you're all fighting amongst yourselves, it does keep one distracted from the real evils, n'est-ce pas?

Originally posted by harvib
reply to post by jamie83

 

So if it's not low supply what is it?

It's the appearance of low supply.

I'm missing the distinction you're trying to make here. In economic terms, the supply is the quantity that's offered for sale everyday. The demand is the quantity the people want to purchase.

So it makes no sense to frame this in terms of the "appearance" of low supply. The supply is what it is -the amount of oil that's for sale on the market. How can the "real" supply be different that what "appears" to be the supply?

Originally posted by sos37


That's what I'm afraid of. As much as I love this country, I have to admit that I'm stunned by how many full-sized trucks and SUVs I still see on the roads nowadays with only single occupants and no business signs.

There are a few reasons why this is

1) The SUV's aren't worth CRAP anymore. I would say the vast majority are either severely upside down in them, or, don't want to basically give them away. How much gas can you buy for what you will lose? A 2007 Yukon XL Denali, or a 2007 top of the line Escalade, is worth about 21k now. They sold for +60k a year ago. How much gas will 40k buy you? Not worth losing that.

I have a 03 Yukon XL denali, that I bought at rough book(wholesale) a year ago. I am only about 5k upside down, but, 5k buys a lot of gas. Not to mention I still need a vehicle that will seat 7 people and carry two 36" dog crates plus large photography equipment and luggage. There are no signs on my vehicle and when I drive down the road, it will look like I am alone(tinted windows in the rear) even if I have kids and dogs with me.

2) small cars are expensive right now. Trading in that SUV isn't worth losing your butt and paying a premium. Again, how much gas can you buy with that loss?

3) People's needs for a vehicle aren't apparent on the outside. Assuming is never a good thing to do. You have no idea WHY someone is driving the vehicle they are. Would you trade in a car that you were going to lose 10's of thousands on? Or, have paid off free and clear and lose 10's of thousands on?

Many people are buying cheap run around cars for daily driving and keeping their large vehicles. Many dealers just *won't* trade for trucks/suv's now. Seriously. They will not take them in at all. They can't sell them, so, they don't want them

reply to post by llpoolej


Those are good points that make plenty of sense. So what your saying, assuming that gas prices are staying as high as they are, is what we are seeing is a transition period. We do know that sales of large trucks and SUVs are dropping off like crazy. As time goes on and the gas sucking trucks and SUVs that people already own become unreliable they won't replace them with the same unless they need them for logistical needs. Makes sense. We really won't see emissions reductions from higher fuel prices for another decade or so, depending on the reliability of the vehicles in question.

Every tax levied on any corporation will just get passed on to the American people. The Democrat power structure knows this but strangely their supporters don't.

The government profits tremendously from the high gas prices. They prevent oil companies from drilling which raises prices. They prevent additional refining which raises prices. Then they tax the profits. A huge chunk of that 4$ a gallon gas goes straight to the government. Its a big fat tax in disguise.

We are getting taxed every way to Friday and this is exactly what the Democrats want. They are socialists, they will use any clever scheme to extract money from the American people and high gas prices works perfectly.

Originally posted by passenger

Originally posted by sos37
My personal opinion is that Americans will continue to pay for gas, kicking and screaming all the way, up until it gets to about $7 a gallon before they scream "enough is enough!" and actually make changes to their driving habits and car choices on a large scale.

Ummm. Why should some Congressman be allowed to determine what kind of car I drive?If I want to buy a big car and pay some oil company to keep it running then that’s my choice as a free citizen. Why should some schmuck in Washington prevent them from drilling and thus artificially raise the prices sky-high so that I can no longer afford to drive the car of my choice?

I dont know why; I just know that if your gar guzzles gas, it will pollute the air more than necessary and the well-considered use of oil would be a better idea...much better even.
But I know that most americans I meet do not have any consideration for the quality of life and air.
Especially if it is not their own life or air.
It is a given fact that most americans use seven times the amount of resources that others use. It is just inconsiderate of them.
A people that is kept in the dark as to the effects of pollution will ofcourse be ignorant about applying sustainable energy. And ofcourse these people will grow idiotically obese, as is happening now.

Well what we need too do is Stop Paying for GAS, Riot or continue on being Punked by the Government. This Crap is getting ridiculous!!!! Them NUTS know us Americans are Struggling. So why do they keep on Upping Prices beyond belief and giving all these Bills the NAY and rejection?

but i guess this answers the many questions about this whole retarded situation!!!!

gatewaypundit.blogspot.com...

Originally posted by llpoolej


There are no signs on my vehicle and when I drive down the road, it will look like I am alone(tinted windows in the rear) even if I have kids and dogs with me.

Cracked me up, that one did!!
Nice reply.
Probably not ment to crack me up, but it did.
I like literal answers.

Oh and I do have the solution to the rising gasprizes thing.
here it comes...

Stop using fossil fuels.
Start using the easily available sources of energy that do not require processing and transport.
Start using the energy we are supposed to use.
Water, wind and sun.

They are abundantly available. In case you didnt know already.
The tech to use them has been around for a long time too.
What is so difficult in letting go of very polluting energy sources?
Is it the profits? Is it the control ? Is it stupidity?
I am inclined to believe that stupidity is the only reason why we are using crap that impairs our ability to have enough air. We need air for every process of living. Of thinking.
Greed and arrogance will be the death of us if we let it.

We can nag on about oil-prices, but we can also take the initiative by finding and using better energy BEFORE they (oil companies) can take us by the balls.

reply to post by dervishmadwhirler
I believe you just hit on the real conspiracy.

My use of a resource is not a sin or a crime. Your use of a resource is not a sin or a crime. The real problem is not people's use of resources, but the concept that people must be extremely careful to not overuse a resource.

We live on an awesome planet. We have resources in such abundance that it is unlikely we will ever run out of them. I have a garden that will provide me with food forever. I plant seeds, spend a little time and effort to make sure the weeds and grass don't overgrow them, and each tiny seed becomes days worth of food for my family. I save a few of the new seeds and plant them next year, and the cycle begins again.

I use lumber to build my house. That lumber comes from trees which grow naturally. Each tree drops seeds in abundance each year, each of which grows into a new tree if not trampled. There will never be a shortage of trees this way, as new ones grow to replace those which are used.

I burn gasoline in my pickup to get from place to place. that gasoline is never destroyed; it is converted into CO2 and H2O. The trees and garden use the CO2 and H2O to grow and give off O2 which I can then breathe. The plants die and return the carbon to the soil and geologic processes convert it into more oil which can be made into gasoline. A slow process, this, but we still have as much known oil as we have ever had. We just don't use it.

Pollution does not exist far from the cities. My water is clean and pure. I am surrounded by trees and grass and berries and fruits and vegetables. I have deer I can hunt for food, and any time of the day you can stand outside and hear a cow lowing or a chicken clucking. My water comes from a well which has never run dry and does not need clorine or flouride to make it 'safe'. No shortage of anything. Abundance of everything.

Pollution only exists when mankind bands together in cities so tightly as to make it impossible for nature to clean itself as fast as it is being soiled. It will catch up if we allow it, but we seem adamant about our need to have everything delivered to us in a truck and everything covered in rock (concrete). That's why I don't buy the stories about how we are destroying the planet. We're destroying small concentrated population centers only. And it is those in the population centers who are screaming the loudest about how everyone else has to do 'their part'.

I do my part. On my 90 acres, we allow a few deer to be taken each year, and those are eaten. I have a standing agreement with the taxidermists that should anyone be hunting for sport and not want the meat, I will take it and pay the fee. Just call me and tell me when it will be ready and how much money to bring. I leave my mountain alone, save for the occasional walks through it to sooth a savage spirit. That ability alone is priceless to me.

None of the things I do affects you in any way. If I eat more than is necessary to survive, what is it to you? I grew it, not you. If I drive a pickup truck, so I can buy material to build a house or a shed or a fence, what is it to you? I pay for the gas, you don't. If I smoke a cigarette, what is it to you? The lungs inhaling it are mine, not yours.

But instead we have bought into this concept of watching our neighbors, because they might do something that would affect us. We cower because someone driving a Hummer is using too much gasoline and should be driving a Prism. We become oppressed because someone is living in a house that is too large for them. We get angry because someone is eating too much food.

We want to control others. But we never will. We will eventually allow ourselves to be controlled by those who have force-fed us this socialized lifestyle. And what is really scary is that we will happily accept this control, because it means that those evil overusers will be punished. Well, at least until we become seen as the overusers. People tend to see things different when they become the target.

In the end, it will become one long struggle for freedom, marked with blood and death and terror. And someday, should the world last, we will achieve that freedom, although at a terrible cost. Then, slowly but surely, we will again be fed the lies and agendas that will send us happily back into slavery.

And in the meantime, we will continue to berate those who speak the truth, as morons, as uninformed, as unenlightened.

Feel free to call me a moron, uninformed, or unenlightened. I know you want to.

TheRedneck

Living Massachusetts, in the south shore actually not far from Cape Cod its interesting to consider what current energy costs are going to do for the industry of renewable energy. They are considering using Nantucket Sound to put up numerous windmills capable of making quite a bit of electricity. Now I'm not sure of the status of that project but I'm fairly certain that it won't put a dent in the bill I pay to keep the lights on. I don't know it just seems to be that if I owned a project like that and oil kept energy prices high, then the "green" energy companies would also be making money hand over fist. Just a thought anyway.

Here's something else to think about since it looks like the government is soaking up money from taxes on gas, what are they going to do late in 2009 and 2010 when the hybrid-electric vehicles are released? Not only is GM developing the Volt, but Toyota and Nissan are said to be developing similar vehicles as well. If the tech behind these cars is successful, it will make a huge dent in oil profits and usage in this country.

What do you want to bet the government will come up with some cracker-a$$ legislation to prevent production of these or put a huge tax on each unit sold, OR increase the tax on electricity?

reply to post by jamie83

I'm missing the distinction you're trying to make here. In economic terms, the supply is the quantity that's offered for sale everyday. The demand is the quantity the people want to purchase.

So it makes no sense to frame this in terms of the "appearance" of low supply. The supply is what it is -the amount of oil that's for sale on the market. How can the "real" supply be different that what "appears" to be the supply?

The distinction is that the actual supply may not matter. In other words if you want to inflate the price of something make it appear that there is a shortage. "Order now supplies won't last..."

I'm not necessarily against drilling but in my humble opinion it is not the solution. It is an another issue for us all to debate on and when prices continue to rise people will believe it's because the republicains conceded to the democrats or the enviromentalist, etc.... It's a diversion.

People need to stop being distracted by these nonsensical solutions and start thinking for themselves. We need to demand excellencefrom those that represent us, instead of excepting these half ass attempts at appeasing the masses while continuing to price gouge. Just because we are told something is a solution dosn't mean we have accept it as the only solution.

Nice post! Getting alot of responses! I wish I would have thought to post something like this.....wait....I DID! Maybe I put it in the wrong forum? Maybe the mods are slipping? Maybe it is a conspiracy?

www.abovetopsecret.com...'

The huge thing I want to add is Democrats won't let us drill 50 miles offshore of Florida, but it is perfectly OK for China to drill their. They have been doing it for 2 years.

reply to post by RRconservative

The huge thing I want to add is Democrats won't let us drill 50 miles offshore of Florida, but it is perfectly OK for China to drill their. They have been doing it for 2 years.

Why do you think that is?

reply to post by jamie83


Well one reason is that any oil drilled in Anwar, or the ocean will not be ready to use for at least 10 years. How will that drilling affect us now. The second is the massive damage drilling will do to the envoirnment. Third if we continue drilling we will only delay the use of alternative energy. Alternative energy will not only be cleaner but ultimately cheaper and will boost the American economy. I believe we are right on the cusp of energy revolution. Schwarzenneger is building solar panels in the calfornia desert. brazil makes gas from sugar. For 700 dollars you can run an old diesel on fast food grease. I think democrats are trying to use the price of oil to push new alternative energy technology

Originally posted by obamafan14
reply to post by jamie83

 

Well one reason is that any oil drilled in Anwar, or the ocean will not be ready to use for at least 10 years.

I am so glad you brought that up. Bill Clinton vetoed drilling in ANWAR 10 YEARS AGO! It would have been nice to have that million barrels a day instead of importing a million barrels a day from Saudi Arabia. I hope people don't use that same excuse in another 10 years.