NYTimes , Today 4/30 Friedmans piece.

[newguy888]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/30/op...iedman.html?hp

Interesting read here. Clinton and McCain talking about the 18.4 cent gas tax repeal for the summer is just so stinkin ugly, do they really think Americans are that stupid?

Maybe.

The more I see Obama the more I may go that way.

[ERD50]

Thanks newguy - good article. While Obama is on the right side of the gas tax holiday, he is also for the 'windfall tax' on Big Oil, and that makes no sense.

Doesn't look like any of the three have the vision and/or guts to do what we need.


-ERD50

[Notmuchlonger]

Vote for the lesser of two weevils.

[chinaco]

Friedman is correct.

But our borrowing is to fund the $T Iraq war. So that we can pay exorbitant prices for the same oil that we are funding a military intervention to keep flowing.

That gas tax is a temporary ploy to help the economy... and a political move. You can bet that McCain and Clinton understand the debt implications.

The solar plant in Germany bothers me... they don't even have cheap labor. What's up with that?

[newguy888]

Originally Posted by chinaco

Friedman is correct.

But our borrowing is to fund the $T Iraq war. So that we can pay exorbitant prices for the same oil that we are funding a military intervention to keep flowing.

That gas tax is a temporary ploy to help the economy... and a political move. You can bet that McCain and Clinton understand the debt implications.

The solar plant in Germany bothers me... they don't even have cheap labor. What's up with that?

That solar plant, yep as I have said in other posts we build nothing here in the states. But then I am told I am wrong.

[Wags]

GREAT Article!

All this is a gimmick to get votes by Mr. McCain and Mrs. Clinton. Doing away with the federal gas tax during the summer months will do nothing to fix our nation's thirst for foreign oil and it sure will not help with creating a sound comprehensive national energy policy.

BAD IDEA.

NBC NEWS - Clinton-McCain gas tax holiday slammed

Economists say benefits will go to oil companies, not consumers.

Clinton-McCain gas tax holiday slammed - Oil & energy - MSNBC.com

GOD BLESS US ALL

[Independent]

I'm impressed that Obama, who is currently in trouble due to supposed "elitism", has the political courage to split with Clinton on this one.

Clinton and Obama both have an "energy policy" that Friedman should like. They want a cap-and-trade system for carbon credits which is essentially a tax on carbon based energy. Then they plan to use the tax revenue to support a whole range of selected programs. I'm sure they'll find money in there for Friedman's solar and wind credits.

OTOH, I'm not excited. If the gov't is going to push us to change our energy sources, they'd do better by being honest, calling a tax a "tax", and then rebating the money to us. The higher prices created by the tax will be enough incentive for private capital to find the most efficient alternatives. Who knows, we might discover that we choose primarily "using less" solar and wind are secondary.

[ERD50]

Originally Posted by Independent

I'm impressed that Obama, who is currently in trouble due to supposed "elitism", has the political courage to split with Clinton on this one.

It is interesting that the 'fiscal conservative' McCain is on the wrong side of this issue, and the 'most liberal' Obama is on the correct side.

What's a voter to do?

-ERD50

[youbet]

Originally Posted by Independent

I'm impressed that Obama, who is currently in trouble due to supposed "elitism", has the political courage to split with Clinton on this one.

Huh? Obama, with his elitist thinking, assumes everyone is a Phd teaching on campus. Who needs a break on the price of gas? Simply bicycle from your $1,000,000 home near campus to the classroom building, saving the world as you do so.........

Being elitist (more properly an "Ultralib Elitist") would cause him to split with Clinton on this one.

[Independent]

Originally Posted by youbet

Huh? Obama, with his elitist thinking, assumes everyone is a Phd teaching on campus. Who needs a break on the price of gas? Simply bicycle from your $1,000,000 home near campus to the classroom building, saving the world as you do so.........

Being elitist (more properly an "Ultralib Elitist") would cause him to split with Clinton on this one.

You seem confident that you know what Obama "assumes". I figure someone who has worked as a community organizer probably has met enough poor people to have an idea what 18.4 cents per gallon of gas means to them.

Suppose candidate A proposed price caps on food. Candidate B opposes them. Would that mean B is an "elitist", because poor people buy food? Or would it mean that B understands that price caps do more harm than good?

[newguy888]

Originally Posted by Independent

You seem confident that you know what Obama "assumes". I figure someone who has worked as a community organizer probably has met enough poor people to have an idea what 18.4 cents per gallon of gas means to them.

Suppose candidate A proposed price caps on food. Candidate B opposes them. Would that mean B is an "elitist", because poor people buy food? Or would it mean that B understands that price caps do more harm than good?

18.4 cents a gallon at 3.63 a gallon as of todays average would bring down the cost of a gallon to 3.45 a gallon, the cost of a gallon 2 weeks ago. Sorry its pandering period, because both candidates have no idea what to do. If they had B@LLS they would tell Americans the real deal, that they need sell the SUV and get a fuel effecient vehicle. That gasoline will never be cheap again.

[Independent]

Originally Posted by newguy888

18.4 cents a gallon at 3.63 a gallon as of todays average would bring down the cost of a gallon to 3.45 a gallon, the cost of a gallon 2 weeks ago. Sorry its pandering period, because both candidates have no idea what to do. If they had B@LLS they would tell Americans the real deal, that they need sell the SUV and get a fuel effecient vehicle. That gasoline will never be cheap again.

I'd agree with almost all of this. I'd add that in addition to getting a smaller vehicle, people could:
live closer to work, shop closer to home, get a vehicle with a smaller engine, spend more to get better technology (turbo charging, lighter materials), carpool, telecommute, vacation closer to home, take public transportation.

And, if gas prices stay up, I'm pretty sure that Americans will use the mix of techniques work best for them, and they will end up using less gas.

[JB]

Originally Posted by newguy888

18.4 cents a gallon at 3.63 a gallon as of todays average would bring down the cost of a gallon to 3.45 a gallon, the cost of a gallon 2 weeks ago. Sorry its pandering period, because both candidates have no idea what to do. If they had B@LLS they would tell Americans the real deal, that they need sell the SUV and get a fuel effecient vehicle. That gasoline will never be cheap again.

It's even worse than that. The supply of refined gas is already fixed for the summer and can't be increased to meet the higher demand at a lower price. So the price will not change much, and the extra revenue will go straight to the oil companies.

[newguy888]

Originally Posted by JB

It's even worse than that. The supply of refined gas is already fixed for the summer and can't be increased to meet the higher demand at a lower price. So the price will not change much, and the extra revenue will go straight to the oil companies.

Shortages are the next big issue. Americans will keep sucking up the price increases with bit(ting etc, but when there are stinking gasoline lines then all bets are off.

remember the 70s??

Many were not even born then to know the real BS it was getting gas to go ANYPLACE!!

[Leonidas]

Originally Posted by newguy888

Shortages are the next big issue.

Maybe - Maybe not. But not anytime soon:

Inventories. OECD commercial inventories stood at 2.58 billion barrels at the end of 2007, 53 million barrels higher than reported in the last Outlook due to revised historic data. The improved stock situation mostly reflects lower-than-expected fourth quarter oil consumption in OECD Europe and Asia. In the first quarter of 2008, OECD commercial inventories are expected to decline only slightly, in contrast to an average 400,000 bbl/d draw over the past 5 years. Total U.S. inventories, which represent about 40 percent of total OECD stocks, rose by 1 million barrels during the first quarter, compared with an average decline of 26 million barrels over the same period during the previous 5 years. The normal seasonal decline in U.S. stocks was held in check by the weak U.S. gasoline market, with gasoline inventories increasing by 9 million barrels during the first quarter compared with the previous 5-year average decline of 6 million barrels. As a result, OECD commercial stocks could enter the summer almost 50 million barrels above the 5-year average. If expected oil production and consumption levels in the second half of 2008 materialize, total OECD commercial inventories should remain above the 5-year average for the rest of the year

Production. In 2007, domestic crude oil output averaged 5.1 million bbl/d, unchanged from 2006 (U.S. Crude Oil Production), and is projected to decline only slightly in 2008. In 2009, however, production is projected to grow by 3.9 percent, or about 200,000 bbl/d, mainly because of the start-up of the Thunder Horse and Tahiti platforms in the Gulf of Mexico.

[newguy888]

Originally Posted by Leonidas

Maybe - Maybe not. But not anytime soon:

Inventories. OECD commercial inventories stood at 2.58 billion barrels at the end of 2007, 53 million barrels higher than reported in the last Outlook due to revised historic data. The improved stock situation mostly reflects lower-than-expected fourth quarter oil consumption in OECD Europe and Asia. In the first quarter of 2008, OECD commercial inventories are expected to decline only slightly, in contrast to an average 400,000 bbl/d draw over the past 5 years. Total U.S. inventories, which represent about 40 percent of total OECD stocks, rose by 1 million barrels during the first quarter, compared with an average decline of 26 million barrels over the same period during the previous 5 years. The normal seasonal decline in U.S. stocks was held in check by the weak U.S. gasoline market, with gasoline inventories increasing by 9 million barrels during the first quarter compared with the previous 5-year average decline of 6 million barrels. As a result, OECD commercial stocks could enter the summer almost 50 million barrels above the 5-year average. If expected oil production and consumption levels in the second half of 2008 materialize, total OECD commercial inventories should remain above the 5-year average for the rest of the year

Production. In 2007, domestic crude oil output averaged 5.1 million bbl/d, unchanged from 2006 (U.S. Crude Oil Production), and is projected to decline only slightly in 2008. In 2009, however, production is projected to grow by 3.9 percent, or about 200,000 bbl/d, mainly because of the start-up of the Thunder Horse and Tahiti platforms in the Gulf of Mexico.

One big Hurricane in the gulf of Mexico and all bets would be off.

[Leonidas]

Originally Posted by newguy888

One big Hurricane in the gulf of Mexico and all bets would be off.

Price would go up but even Katrina and Rita didn't cause any shortages.

[Oldbabe]

Originally Posted by youbet

Huh? Obama, with his elitist thinking, assumes everyone is a Phd teaching on campus. Who needs a break on the price of gas? Simply bicycle from your $1,000,000 home near campus to the classroom building, saving the world as you do so.........

Being elitist (more properly an "Ultralib Elitist") would cause him to split with Clinton on this one.

This astounds me. The hype in every Presidential campaign always tries to stereotype the opposing candidate. To buy into it is entirely self-serving, of course. Although McCain is not my candidate I certainly respect him enough to ignore any attempts to paint him as a war monger or any other stereotype.

It's too bad that our politics in the US has to always focus on these trivialities. There are incredibly serious issues to discuss. Instead, we have this sort of name calling -- Obama is a "Ultralib Elitist -- as if the words meant anything substantial.

[youbet]

Originally Posted by Oldbabe

It's too bad that our politics in the US has to always focus on these trivialities. There are incredibly serious issues to discuss. Instead, we have this sort of name calling -- Obama is a "Ultralib Elitist -- as if the words meant anything substantial.

Being an Ultralib Elitist simply means Barrack is coming from a different part of the Dem party than Hillary. He's very liberal and he has shown a tad bit of elitist disdain for the "Joe Toolbox" guns and religion (as he puts it) folks that Hillary seems to be catering to and who seem to be supporting her. Therefore I'm not surprised Barrack would break with Hillary on the issue of temporarily suspending the fed gas tax.

My own opinion is that the Dems wrote off blue collar folks a while back and Hillary seized the opportunity to fill in the void.

(BTW, I think suspending the fed gas tax isn't a very good idea either.)

[Pete]

I love the high gas prices. I live in LA. The higher the prices go, the lighter the traffic gets. I don't wait in traffic, zoom home, and actually save time and money.

Friedman had a great idea of making gas 5 dollars a gallon. Anything between the actual cost of gas and 5 dollars would be tax, used to pay our debt and fund alternative energy.