Obama wants 'price signals'

page: 1
24
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 05:55 AM
link   
Price signals = punitive taxes and fees on goods and services.

He's going to raise the prices, taxes, and fees on anything he wants in order to change the behavior of Americans to fit what he thinks is right.

This is on EVERYONE - except the poor, he claims.

Interview of Obama on IPTV -




Edited immediately because the YouTube link thing isn't working.

[edit on 11/3/2008 by FlyersFan]

Mod edit: yvid tags

[edit on 11/3/2008 by Badge01]




posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 06:19 AM
link   
One of the reasons this guy scares the bejesus out of me. The idea that we should conserve energy (i.e. turn off our lights, more efficient vehicles, etc.) is great, and laudable. It's the way he wants to do it that's scary. Forcing us into it through government control of prices? If this is his preferred methodology for achieving his goals, then I shudder to think of what may be next.

The fact that he can say things such as this and still be popular says two things to me. It illustrates how poorly the American people are educated on this guys ideas. And also how the populace here is so disgusted with the current administration that any alternative is acceptable, no matter how questionable.

**Off topic** What the hell's with the Flyers this year


Peace



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
This is on EVERYONE - except the poor, he claims.


Interesting thing is..

Most of the things that are bad for people poor people do/use.

EXP: cigarettes, beer, and clunkers.

Tax the crap out of those and who are you really taxing?



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 06:35 AM
link   
I think it's a great idea to increase prices (in certain areas, like for the wealthy and wasteful) to force change!

There seems to be massive waste of energy from business across the world. If you were to walk through any of the business districts of the UK any night of the week, you'd see offices with all their lights on, office equipment running 24 hours, floodlights on needlessly.

Whenever I see an image of the NY skyline, there are buildings everywhere lit up like Christmas trees.
The only way to make them stop wasting so much is by penalizing those businesses financially. Nothing else seems to be working, and this seems like what Obama is proposing, not taxing and hiking prices for the average citizen.

Your statement of "everyone" is then changed to "except the poor", well, that's not everyone is it?
There seems to be a lot of misinformation going around, propaganda to feed the fear. I wish people would stop scare-mongering and allow people to vote and make their own decisions based on fact instead of trying to influence through spreading BS!

As a side-thought on the energy conservation thing...
One of the biggest ways we could save resources is by actually using the technology we have and allow people to work flexible hours from anywhere they wish. Most people commute every day and for what? To do in a brightly lit office what they could do from their own PC given the right technology (that these companies have to pay for anyway).
It would benefit the cities we all cram into every day, benefit the traffic system, save fuel, energy and time. It would save business money through not needing vast office space, and it would benefit society through allowing us to work socially rather than like caged animals.



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 06:37 AM
link   
As someone said in the youtube comments...
"Full of irrational and untrue fear mongering."
This video is almost as bad as all the stupid commercials on TV. No star, no flag. Sorry.


[edit on 3-11-2008 by GrayFox]



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 06:44 AM
link   
This has already been suggested and/or implemented across America. Cigarette taxes, junk food taxes, the Fair Tax proposal looks to do something similar on luxury items. Even regular groceries are taxed lower than other consumer goods.

If I were to go out of town to buy a car or furniture, I'm taxed based on my address, not my purchasing location. Why do they do it? To control purchasing behavior and generate more revenue.

It's been done for years.



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrayFox
"Full of irrational and untrue fear mongering."

Those are HIS WORDS. HE said them.
More illogic from Obama. More control over you from Obama.
More hits on the economy from Obama.


Originally posted by kosmicjack
It's been done for years.

And it's wrong. And he wants even more. Not 'just' sin taxes, but on everything that doesn't belong in his faux-hopeium filled world.

THIS is how government shapes your world and takes your freedom.

Not to mention the fact that this will screw up the economy even worse.

edtied to add -

Originally posted by Resinveins
What the hell's with the Flyers this year

Chaos. Pure Chaos!



[edit on 11/3/2008 by FlyersFan]



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 07:33 AM
link   
Good! Maybe people will stop being so wasteful, lower their carbon footprints and help us become more independent as regards our energy use.


If people want to drive their Hummers and waste our resources, then they should be allowed to. But they should pay more.

Some people are environmentally conscious, and take great care to make their footprint as small as possible for the good of the country and the planet. For those who aren't willing to, let them pay for it. I'm paying voluntarily, but not everyone is willing to do that. So, since they can afford it and aren't concerned about the future they're leaving to their children, let them pay cash for it now. Maybe they'll start turning off some lights, trade in their Hummer for a RAV and recycle something now and then.

If it helps us get a little "greener" I'm all for it.



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 07:43 AM
link   
I Agree completely with what Obama is suggesting. People need to worry a little bit more about the future we're leaving for our future generations. What's wrong with conserving energy? Isn't that better on your pocket book?



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 07:50 AM
link   
Isn't that what states does already on some goods and services?

Sorry to bring this to you my friends.

But with the economical mess we are in no matter if is Obama or McCain we are due for the ride of our lives.

In order to fix the corporate ridden president legacy of bush and help the nation is actually with taxes increases, cut spending and yes the defense budget.

In 2009 our nation will no have enough money to pay for services.

Remember people that we are bailing out with tax payer the wealthy elite and the global banks.

So how come now I see so much outrage at what Obama may do?

We already have not problem bending over for what it has been done to us so far.


[edit on 3-11-2008 by marg6043]



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 07:53 AM
link   
Does anyone remember Clinton's Failed Luxury Tax of the early 90's? This "penalty tax" created a massive vacuum of spending and several industries suffered greatly because of it. People stopped buying boats (not just mega yachts), cars, private general aviation aircraft etc. Hard working craftsmen and craftswomen lost their jobs.

The failed tax was repealed after a year or two and people spent money again. Wow!!! Imagine that. Workers went back to work. What a concept.

Lets learn from the past. It all sounds like a ploy to destroy more industry and put more people on the Obama welfare rolls. It is all about govt. control.

If people really cared about the carbon footprint concept, then tax the snot out of gas and invest in viable alternatives such as high speed reliable train service in the major population centers. We are all suffering from 20/20 hindsight right now. Coulda Woulda Shoulda.



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
If people really cared about the carbon footprint concept, then tax the snot out of gas and invest in viable alternatives such as high speed reliable train service in the major population centers.


I'm all for viable alternatives to gasoline. And that would be OK, if wasteful people were the only ones who use gasoline, But everyone uses gasoline, And when someone is ALREADY doing their best to use as little fuel as possible and to be conscious about their energy practices, a higher tax on gas punishes them as well as the person who is wasting it like crazy.

As someone mentioned, "price signals" are already being used. In the case of cigarettes, Only smokers smoke. And if they want to continue, they're free to do so, and "taxing the snot out of" cigarettes works, because only smokers use them. But fuel, electricity and natural gas are different. Everyone uses them.

Make no mistake. I'm not talking about making it easier for "poor people". We can afford to live pretty good and "high on the hog", but when it comes to the environment, we don't. Because it's the right thing to do.

I believe some states already have price signals for electricity. A guy we know in California, who could afford to use a lot of electricity, found himself in a higher bracket and paying a lot for it. So he took that money of his and invested in solar to cut his electricity bill down to the next bracket. Now he's not paying so much, not using so much from the power company, AND he is using renewable resources.

Everybody's happy!


Edit: Hey, OMS, sounds like we know the same guy!


[edit on 3-11-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 08:18 AM
link   
I think it is a great idea. And it is already in place in places. For example, California has a graduated rate system for electric usage. Everybody gets the first X number of KwH at a base rate, then as usage goes up, so does the rate in graduated steps.

This encourages consumers to be mindful of their usage.

I used to work for a guy who spent several thousand dollars installing a solar array to feed into the grid so as to get him below the higher rate use levels. Good for him, as it saves him money over time, good for the community as it generated work for the solar equipment folks, good for the state as it lowers the load on the electric grid, and good for everybody due to that much less waste being pumped into the world from the generating plants.

This kind of plan, if implemented with care and consideration (which I am confident will be the case), can be of substantial long term benefit.

And if viewed as a 'tax', it is the best kind of tax... the kind each individual had complete control over how much of it they pay. To stay with the electricity example, if you don't want to pay the high rates, take the steps necessary to not. It's pretty simple.



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 08:47 AM
link   
Excellent points. I am all for renewable resources. Unfortunately, for the common folks converting over to these resources is extremely expensive in the start up phase. The savings only kicks in after several years or more depending on the cost of the products. Solar arrays, tankless hotwater heaters, front load washing machines and state of the art Energy Star products are great investments for those that can afford the initial cost.

How do we keep the costs affordable? Right now, it just seems like "going green" is simply trendy. Its the Hollywood thing to do. There is even a new cable channel dedicated to the concept. Unfortunately, thse shows "advertise" high end products and homeowners with virtually unlimited budgets. The average homeowner is just paying the bills. Ride a train, take the bus, walk, carpool, ride a bike, insulate your home etc. These are the simple things that we all can do right now.


+1 more 
posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

If people want to drive their Hummers and waste our resources, then they should be allowed to. But they should pay more.


They do pay more. They may pay the same as everyone else on a per gallon, per kilowatt hour, per btu scale... but they pay they pay more by using more.

I'll tell ya what, let's try this one on for size as it's a perfectly legitimate comparison. People with the most health problems should pay more everytime they see a doctor since they monopolize more time & more health insurance/medicaid/medicare. They are using more than their fair share and should have to pay more until they can learn how to better manage that resource.

Obviously a ridiculous statement... but nomoreso ridiculous than suggesting those who use more gas or electricity should be forced to pay a higher rate. What socialistic nonsense!



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 10:22 AM
link   
What does this have to do with Why McCains Policies are good?


More FUD...


I just don't get why people rally around fears as opposed to hopes.


I never hear anyone say that McCain is bringing hope with his policies, only McCain Supporters fearing what Obama might bring.

It's as if McCain is only running as the anti-obama, not as a pro anything.



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
Unfortunately, for the common folks converting over to these resources is extremely expensive in the start up phase.


Yes, it is. But there's no real reason that it should be that expensive. We only pay that much because not many people are doing it. The more it's encouraged and the more people do it, the less expensive it will be.


Ride a train, take the bus, walk, carpool, ride a bike, insulate your home etc. These are the simple things that we all can do right now.


Exactly right! AND inflate your tires!



Originally posted by burdman30ott6
They do pay more. They may pay the same as everyone else on a per gallon, per kilowatt hour, per btu scale... but they pay they pay more by using more.


Right. But paying more doesn't solve the problem of depleted energy resources. This is one problem that throwing money at it doesn't help at all. It just depletes the resource sooner. The idea is to make them pay more (per gallon or btu) so they feel it in the pocketbook and do something about being more conservative with non-renewable resources or else start using renewable ones.

HunkaHunka - I NEVER hear why I should vote for McCain! Only why I should be scared crapless of Obama. And after the fear-mongering of the last 8 years and learning that this country was being DRIVEN by fear, driven right out of our rights, I resist it! I refuse to be afraid! I refuse to be driven to make a move exclusively out of fear. I am hopeful! For the first time in a long time, I have hope!


Ah... Me luvs the hopeium! LD



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Resinveins
 


They all scare the bejesus out of me. Whether we vote or not one or the other is going to win.

It doesn't matter who we get - McCain will keep us at war, start a new one with "bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran" and he will be used as a puppet to continue failed foreign Bush policy. If McCain dies in office, then the "know nothing" Sarah Palin takes over, and that to me is the scariest scenario.

Obama will tax this and tax that. If you thought we saw a lot of carbon monitoring now, just wait until he takes over. With him in there, there is no doubt we will head into socialism quietly and will not even realize it until it is too late.

I am still writing in Ron Paul, but for America it doesn't really matter.

We are doomed

[edit on 3-11-2008 by arizonascott]



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 10:45 AM
link   
Punitive taxes and fees to CHANGE YOUR BEHAVIOR to that which the POTUS wants ...

... and so many can't see the slippery slope that puts us on .. the power that gives the govenment to make you change your buying habits and behaviors to fit THEIR idea of what is moral and what isn't. To make you change your buying habits and behaviors to fit THEIR agendas.

People here are envisioning rainbows and unicorns dancing overtop, with a bright sunny sky. Hello? Remember, these are POLITICIANS we are dealing with. If ya'll think this is going to start and stop with someones' 'carbon footprint' ...


This is a slippery slippery slope.



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Flyers no every body see rainbows in the sky with a new political clown in the white house.

Our Nation is in deep BS and none of the two candidates for president can do a darn thing about it unless they put their live at risk and clean the capital nation of the corrupted dirt that is plaguing the halls of Congress.





new topics

top topics



 
24
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join