This sure wont help OBAMA. Gas prices will be over 4.00 by spring

[WillowTree]

Gas Prices on the Rise, Expected to Top $4 Per Gallon This Spring

Obama sets gas prices?????????

Who Knew?????

Apparently President Bush did. The demoncraps hammered him for high gas prices. oh how quickly ye ferget.

 

[WillowTree]

are you so really uninformed that you think there are NO alternatives?

what are they? and how fast can you get them up and running? and what will the cost be? and who will pay for the poor people who cannot afford 40 thousand dollar automobiles? and what do you do with all the used up batteries?

 

[bripat9643]

The alternatives ARE out there and we, the United States, the supposed world leader, are not even taking baby steps towards them. Did you know there are entire towns (in other countries) being run entirely on wind and hydrogen? Have you heard about the battery swapping stations they are building in Israel and Australia?

Not even baby steps...

Everyone of these boondoggles I've ever heard about is losing money hand over fist. If they were economical, private corporations would be building them without government subsidies.

 

[skookerasbil]

Gas Prices on the Rise, Expected to Top $4 Per Gallon This Spring

Obama sets gas prices?????????

Who Knew?????

this is a POLITICS forum s0n..........and reality is 99% perception. And since the k00k lefties blamed Bush for high gas prices in 2008

 

[Full-Auto]

gas prices on the rise, expected to top $4 per gallon this spring

obama sets gas prices?????????

Who knew?????

this is a politics forum s0n..........and reality is 99% perception. And since the k00k lefties blamed bush for high gas prices in 2008

they deserve the payback and much much more.

 

[Seawytch]

The alternatives ARE out there and we, the United States, the supposed world leader, are not even taking baby steps towards them. Did you know there are entire towns (in other countries) being run entirely on wind and hydrogen? Have you heard about the battery swapping stations they are building in Israel and Australia?

Not even baby steps...

Everyone of these boondoggles I've ever heard about is losing money hand over fist. If they were economical, private corporations would be building them without government subsidies.

By all means, provide your source that says battery swapping stations and the wind/hydrogen towns are "losing money".

I'm fairly certain we would not have the oil or electric infrastructure we have now without government subsidies.

 

[Full-Auto]

The alternatives ARE out there and we, the United States, the supposed world leader, are not even taking baby steps towards them. Did you know there are entire towns (in other countries) being run entirely on wind and hydrogen? Have you heard about the battery swapping stations they are building in Israel and Australia?

Not even baby steps...

Everyone of these boondoggles I've ever heard about is losing money hand over fist. If they were economical, private corporations would be building them without government subsidies.

By all means, provide your source that says battery swapping stations and the wind/hydrogen towns are "losing money".

I'm fairly certain we would not have the oil or electric infrastructure we have now without government subsidies.

Why dont you show them making a profit.

Make sure you subtract out the free tax money.

 

[Seawytch]

Everyone of these boondoggles I've ever heard about is losing money hand over fist. If they were economical, private corporations would be building them without government subsidies.

By all means, provide your source that says battery swapping stations and the wind/hydrogen towns are "losing money".

I'm fairly certain we would not have the oil or electric infrastructure we have now without government subsidies.

Why dont you show them making a profit.

Make sure you subtract out the free tax money.

Can we do the same for oil and gas, take out all the "free' tax money I mean.

I'm of the opinion that we should not be making a profit off our source of energy. Ours should be an appliance based energy, not a resource based energy. People should be making their money off the machines that collect and store the energy, not off the source of the energy itself. I'd like to see nobody but gadget makers profiting off "energy".

And yes, the reason China is beating our fucking pants off, is because they are subsidized by their government. Same thing as Germany.

Where would our current infrastructure be without subsidies?

 

[Jarhead]

By all means, provide your source that says battery swapping stations and the wind/hydrogen towns are "losing money".

I'm fairly certain we would not have the oil or electric infrastructure we have now without government subsidies.

Why dont you show them making a profit.

Make sure you subtract out the free tax money.

Can we do the same for oil and gas, take out all the "free' tax money I mean.

I'm of the opinion that we should not be making a profit off our source of energy. Ours should be an appliance based energy, not a resource based energy. People should be making their money off the machines that collect and store the energy, not off the source of the energy itself. I'd like to see nobody but gadget makers profiting off "energy".

And yes, the reason China is beating our fucking pants off, is because they are subsidized by their government. Same thing as Germany.

Where would our current infrastructure be without subsidies?

you bring up an interesting point in regard to "non profit" energy suppliers...again, not those that distribute the actual energy...but those that furnish the energy distribution centers with the necessary natural resource.

Should there be profit made on a necessity?

That came up yesterday when NYCarbineer said he felt it wrong that someone makes a profit off of a failing company when they step in and try to tuirn it around.

So I started to think about it...

Doctors offer a service that is a necessity. Should they be non profit?
How about attorney's? They offer a service for people that are in dire need of legal help.
Accountants? They are a necessity.
Winter coat manufactuers? Retailers that distribute them?
Farmers? Grocers?
Universities?

Where do we draw the line? Who "ethically" has the right to generate a profit?

 

[Seawytch]

Why dont you show them making a profit.

Make sure you subtract out the free tax money.

Can we do the same for oil and gas, take out all the "free' tax money I mean.

I'm of the opinion that we should not be making a profit off our source of energy. Ours should be an appliance based energy, not a resource based energy. People should be making their money off the machines that collect and store the energy, not off the source of the energy itself. I'd like to see nobody but gadget makers profiting off "energy".

And yes, the reason China is beating our fucking pants off, is because they are subsidized by their government. Same thing as Germany.

Where would our current infrastructure be without subsidies?

you bring up an interesting point in regard to "non profit" energy suppliers...again, not those that distribute the actual energy...but those that furnish the energy distribution centers with the necessary natural resource.

Should there be profit made on a necessity?

That came up yesterday when NYCarbineer said he felt it wrong that someone makes a profit off of a failing company when they step in and try to tuirn it around.

So I started to think about it...

Doctors offer a service that is a necessity. Should they be non profit?
How about attorney's? They offer a service for people that are in dire need of legal help.
Accountants? They are a necessity.
Winter coat manufactuers? Retailers that distribute them?
Farmers? Grocers?
Universities?

Where do we draw the line? Who "ethically" has the right to generate a profit?

War? We all agree that nobody should be profiting from war right? Does that mean we don't pay our soldiers? No, it doesn't.

 

[editec]

This sure wont help OBAMA. Gas prices will be over 4.00 by spring

No, you are right, it won't help Obama.

More to the point it won't help the economy, either.

Not that I think there's jackshit that Obama (or for that matter any POTUS) can do anything about it.

 

[Jarhead]

Can we do the same for oil and gas, take out all the "free' tax money I mean.

I'm of the opinion that we should not be making a profit off our source of energy. Ours should be an appliance based energy, not a resource based energy. People should be making their money off the machines that collect and store the energy, not off the source of the energy itself. I'd like to see nobody but gadget makers profiting off "energy".

And yes, the reason China is beating our fucking pants off, is because they are subsidized by their government. Same thing as Germany.

Where would our current infrastructure be without subsidies?

you bring up an interesting point in regard to "non profit" energy suppliers...again, not those that distribute the actual energy...but those that furnish the energy distribution centers with the necessary natural resource.

Should there be profit made on a necessity?

That came up yesterday when NYCarbineer said he felt it wrong that someone makes a profit off of a failing company when they step in and try to tuirn it around.

So I started to think about it...

Doctors offer a service that is a necessity. Should they be non profit?
How about attorney's? They offer a service for people that are in dire need of legal help.
Accountants? They are a necessity.
Winter coat manufactuers? Retailers that distribute them?
Farmers? Grocers?
Universities?

Where do we draw the line? Who "ethically" has the right to generate a profit?

War? We all agree that nobody should be profiting from war right? Does that mean we don't pay our soldiers? No, it doesn't.

I agree...

But I am not sure what you are implying.....

Should doctors, lawyers, accountants, farmers, coat manufactureress, grocers, etc all be put on a set income like our military?

 

[Seawytch]

you bring up an interesting point in regard to "non profit" energy suppliers...again, not those that distribute the actual energy...but those that furnish the energy distribution centers with the necessary natural resource.

Should there be profit made on a necessity?

That came up yesterday when NYCarbineer said he felt it wrong that someone makes a profit off of a failing company when they step in and try to tuirn it around.

So I started to think about it...

Doctors offer a service that is a necessity. Should they be non profit?
How about attorney's? They offer a service for people that are in dire need of legal help.
Accountants? They are a necessity.
Winter coat manufactuers? Retailers that distribute them?
Farmers? Grocers?
Universities?

Where do we draw the line? Who "ethically" has the right to generate a profit?

War? We all agree that nobody should be profiting from war right? Does that mean we don't pay our soldiers? No, it doesn't.

I agree...

But I am not sure what you are implying.....

Should doctors, lawyers, accountants, farmers, coat manufactureress, grocers, etc all be put on a set income like our military?

Like our policemen or firemen?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The alternatives ARE out there and we, the United States, the supposed world leader, are not even taking baby steps towards them. Did you know there are entire towns (in other countries) being run entirely on wind and hydrogen? Have you heard about the battery swapping stations they are building in Israel and Australia?

Not even baby steps...

Everyone of these boondoggles I've ever heard about is losing money hand over fist. If they were economical, private corporations would be building them without government subsidies.

No links, huh?

 

[JakeStarkey]

War? We all agree that nobody should be profiting from war right? Does that mean we don't pay our soldiers? No, it doesn't.

I agree...

But I am not sure what you are implying.....

Should doctors, lawyers, accountants, farmers, coat manufactureress, grocers, etc all be put on a set income like our military?

Like our policemen or firemen?

Like our president, governors, and legislators.

 

[Jarhead]

War? We all agree that nobody should be profiting from war right? Does that mean we don't pay our soldiers? No, it doesn't.

I agree...

But I am not sure what you are implying.....

Should doctors, lawyers, accountants, farmers, coat manufactureress, grocers, etc all be put on a set income like our military?

Like our policemen or firemen?

you are not answering me.

Are you implying that anyone who caters to the needs (not wants) of the people should be on a set salary?

 

[Seawytch]

I agree...

But I am not sure what you are implying.....

Should doctors, lawyers, accountants, farmers, coat manufactureress, grocers, etc all be put on a set income like our military?

Like our policemen or firemen?

you are not answering me.

Are you implying that anyone who caters to the needs (not wants) of the people should be on a set salary?

They aren't is the point. There is plenty of profit to be made in non profit enterprises. Health care and energy are two things that shouldn't be "for profit".

 

[Jarhead]

Like our policemen or firemen?

you are not answering me.

Are you implying that anyone who caters to the needs (not wants) of the people should be on a set salary?

They aren't is the point. There is plenty of profit to be made in non profit enterprises. Health care and energy are two things that shouldn't be "for profit".

what about landlords of apartment buildings? Housing is a necessity.
And farmers?
Layers?

I guess what I am asking is what is your ideology. Do you feel all "necessities" should not be profit generating?

How do you define a necessity? What good is energy if you dont have a hroof over your head? What good is healthcare if you dont have clothes to keep you from dying of hypotherrmia?

 

[Big Fitz]

"Will and determination" doesn't pay for anything.
Here's the issue. The federal government cannot raise enough tax revenue to pay for these grandiose projects. The private sector sees little chance of return on investment.
These things MUST BE PAID FOR. As long as it is money that it takes to get these thngs done, it is what it is.

They can afford it by stopping waste on government health care. Take that money and instead of playing games with 'unique services' which medicine isn't, and start doing something productive with it that will advance this nation like infrastructure building, repair and expansion. We need to increase our energy production nationwide by 250% if we are to make it through this century as a leader. that's a lot of jobs to create. Our transportation infrastructure needs updating. Our information infrastructure needs completing.

That's how we can afford it.

But then again, this money should not be spent by the feddies (save for highways and railroads since that is in their constitutional power) and turn it over to the states to improve themselves.

Be careful...Government pays for nothing. Besides, there is no expertise in government capable of this. It would have to be contracted out to the private sector. These companies are going to look at the balance sheet. If there is no potential return on investment, two things are going to happen. One is the companies will demand a subsidy or guarantee on their investment. In which case the taxpayers will get stuck with the bill. And forget the medical care thing. That's not going anywhere because it is an entitlement. And any rational person knows the government can and will not ever end an entitlement.
The second alternative is private firms will decline to participate.

Unfortunately you're probably right. I was just giving a rational idea. We have a group of politicians who cannot see past the special interests of entitlement junkies because the entire nation has their hand out DEMANDING with their vote, some payola.

 

[Big Fitz]

Bull and shit. You cannot logistically convert this nation over to an alternative energy source in 1 year, let alone realize any damn savings. This is particularly obvious when you realize that NONE of the alternatives equal the efficiency and energy density of oil, particularly gasoline.

Gas and other traditional fuels are still too cheap to force us into alternative markets, particularly with the amount of infrastructure in place

Just the way the Saudis want it to be...

"We don't want the West to go and find alternatives, because, clearly, the higher the price of oil goes, the more they have incentives to go and find alternatives,"~ Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal​

Was he one of the guys that Bush was swapping spit with?

If W swapped spit, Obama's cleaning his colon with his tongue.