New new election thread

[mountain bed]

Less oil consumption = less emissions = less global warming, is I think the point there.

 

A lot of right wingers moan about people taking personal responsibility rather than expecting the government to do things, so I think it's funny that when Obama asks people to take some responsibility by maintaining their cars, that's patronizing.

Exactly.

 

And although it misses the point entirely to compare this to Carter sitting around with a sweater on, if we had heeded his advice 30 years ago we would not be in the situation we're now in.

[bjorn_skurj]

Exactly.

 

And although it misses the point entirely to compare this to Carter sitting around with a sweater on, if we had heeded his advice 30 years ago we would not be in the situation we're now in.

Werd. I can repost the "malaise speech," if you like!

[bobbob1313]

Why are we talking about this when Obama is discussing a heightened tax on gas company's profits.

 

Windfall tax is what it's called, and it's a fucking terrible, backwards idea. Google has arguably the highest profit margin of any major company in the united states, but something tells me they won't be singled out for a windfall tax. Just gas companies. Where's the logic?

[ikol]

Now, putting doubts about whether or not global warming is a real phenomenon, is what the author says here false?

 

No, it's a pretty reasonable statement (though the usage of "best" requires a value judgment). I just don't see why taking those individual conservation measures (which the government does not control) precludes also allowing more oil to be drilled (which the government does control).

[caliber66]

No, it's a pretty reasonable statement (though the usage of "best" requires a value judgment). I just don't see why taking those individual conservation measures (which the government does not control) precludes also allowing more oil to be drilled (which the government does control).

Because there is no negative environmental impact to putting air in one's tires and there is to punching holes in the ocean floor and sucking out oil?

[Artifice]

Windfall tax is what it's called, and it's a fucking terrible, backwards idea. Google has arguably the highest profit margin of any major company in the united states, but something tells me they won't be singled out for a windfall tax. Just gas companies. Where's the logic?

 

Net margins for vertically integrated oligopoly controlled baseline resources for which this is no readily available substitute are almost 100% discretionary. Said simply, beyond the basic cost to produce (uninflated cost of goods sold), the company's spending/expensing is more of an issue of management preference rather than actual need. So the tried and true talking point comparing Exxon's net margin to other companies is irrelevant as it is apples to oranges.

 

What's more, these companies can selectively charge expenses to point of process divisions, thereby creating the sometimes fiction that "refining" is losing money, or "extraction" is making buckets of money. When you can squeeze the entire balloon, you can bend it into any shape you want.

 

That said, I do not favor a windfall profits tax, as I'm worried that the same oligopoly structure will just allow the cost to be passed on to consumers. I don't see how it won't happen without price controls, and I will not support price controls as I actually remember this crap in the 70s.

[Good Old Neon]

No, it's a pretty reasonable statement (though the usage of "best" requires a value judgment). I just don't see why taking those individual conservation measures (which the government does not control) precludes also allowing more oil to be drilled (which the government does control).

 

Perhaps because, aside from the substantial monetary and time and labor investment (all of which will do next to nothing to lower current gas prices. And even if it did, it might lull us into a false sense of security and complacency, forestalling our switch to much needed alternatives

[uncool2pillow]

there is no way we can drill ourselves out of the coming mess

(hops down from tall horse to take a pee)

I agree w/ that statement. And I'm a believer that consumption of oil plays a role in serious environmental damage. However, I do believe that drilling can help bridge the gap between our current energy needs and breakthroughs in alternative energy sources. Horizontal drilling techniques have made GETTING the oil less harmful.

 

I just realized the position I just took is pretty much the same as Paris Hilton's in her response to the McCain ad...

 

Shame on me.

[explodo]

I just realized the position I just took is pretty much the same as Paris Hilton's in her response to the McCain ad...

Her position is the only one that makes sense.

[EL the Famous]

Her position is the only one that makes sense.

 

doggy style?

[Guest Jules]

A lot of right wingers moan about people taking personal responsibility rather than expecting the government to do things, so I think it's funny that when Obama asks people to take some responsibility by maintaining their cars, that's patronizing.

It's patronizing because it implies we're not smart enough to figure this out on our own. Maybe I'm too sensitive. I have been told that many people are in fact that stupid and need to be told to do so. Well, then, ok.

[Good Old Neon]

I agree w/ that statement. And I'm a believer that consumption of oil plays a role in serious environmental damage. However, I do believe that drilling can help bridge the gap between our current energy needs and breakthroughs in alternative energy sources. Horizontal drilling techniques have made GETTING the oil less harmful.

 

I just realized the position I just took is pretty much the same as Paris Hilton's in her response to the McCain ad...

 

Shame on me.

 

Assuming, of course,

[Moe_Syzlak]

Windfall tax is what it's called, and it's a fucking terrible, backwards idea. Google has arguably the highest profit margin of any major company in the united states, but something tells me they won't be singled out for a windfall tax. Just gas companies. Where's the logic?

I think windfall taxes are a terrible idea, but I would like to see a fair market value charged to companies that use public lands for their resources. This goes for oil & gas, mining, grazing, timber, etc... even ski areas.

[caliber66]

It's patronizing because it implies we're not smart enough to figure this out on our own. Maybe I'm too sensitive. I have been told that many people are in fact that stupid and need to be told to do so. Well, then, ok.

PEOPLE ARE NOT SMART ENOUGH TO FIGURE THIS OUT ON THEIR OWN. The articles posted earlier in this thread point out that millions of Americans drive around on underinflated tires. This is not conjecture. If you already drive around with properly inflated tires and a properly maintained car, then you are not the intended audience and thus there is no reason to feel talked down to.

[Good Old Neon]

It's patronizing because it implies we're not smart enough to figure this out on our own. Maybe I'm too sensitive. I have been told that many people are in fact that stupid and need to be told to do so. Well, then, ok.

 

I

[fatheadfred]

I think windfall taxes are a terrible idea, but I would like to see a fair market value charged to companies that use public lands for their resources. This goes for oil & gas, mining, grazing, timber, etc... even ski areas.

 

There can be exceptions though. Grazing and timber harvests can add value if done correctly. Emphasis on 'if done correctly'.

 

I can't think of what value mining, oil, or recreation add to public land.

[Guest Jules]

Point taken, people. I just thought the whole bit came across as kind of silly (sorry, I don't have a better word). We can move on now.

[JUDE]

PEOPLE ARE NOT SMART ENOUGH TO FIGURE THIS OUT ON THEIR OWN.

 

Unfortunately this is the problem with politics/government today, this assumption is the rule rather than the exception. Politicians in general seem to think that as a whole the citizenry must be told what to do across the board because we are all to stupid to figure out anything for ourselves.

 

You can go back to discussing the merits of properly inflated tires and doggy style now.

[caliber66]

Man, if collectively saving 2.8 million gallons of gas per year by spending 75 cents at the gas station air compressor is silly, producing 1.4 million gallons of gas per year by spending billions of dollars to pump and refine gas from beneath thousands of feet of ocean and rock must be like wearing plaid pants, a polka dotted shirt and a spinning bow tie.

 

(Sorry, Jules. I understand your point, and I'm done now. )

[Guest Jules]

spending 75 cents at the gas station air compressor is silly

Now, THAT is silly!

[caliber66]

Unfortunately this is the problem with politics/government today, this assumption is the rule rather than the exception. Politicians in general seem to think that as a whole the citizenry must be told what to do across the board because we are all to stupid to figure out anything for ourselves.

 

You can go back to discussing the merits of properly inflated tires and doggy style now.

Nobody told anyone what to do, and it's NOT AN ASSUMPTION. People don't inflate their tires properly, and doing something about it WILL save them gas, and therefore $$. It's a small part of the overall energy conversation that people have jumped on for some reason.

[Guest Jules]

Nobody told anyone what to do, and it's NOT AN ASSUMPTION. People don't inflate their tires properly, and doing something about it WILL save them gas, and therefore $$. It's a small part of the overall energy conversation that people have jumped on for some reason.

I thought you were done.

[caliber66]

I'm done with you, Mr. Goodwrench.

[Guest Jules]

I'm done with you, Mr. Goodwrench.

I actually don't know spit about cars. That was mostly bullshit. Not bad, huh?

[bjorn_skurj]

Nanny Nation