|
|
Post by harpman1 on Jun 25, 2008 15:31:11 GMT -5
In thread after thread, left-wing members are asked the same basic questions re: oil usage, drilling, & alternative energy sources.
In each case, the questions are left unanswered or partisan rhetoric is used as a reply.
Is this a debate forum or just a place where folks yell really loud & then run away?
If the former, great.
If the latter, what's the point?
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Jun 25, 2008 17:37:37 GMT -5
I've already given you my answer harpman: The more money we put into alternative energy development, the faster we will see results. The Republican plan to give even more tax breaks to oil companies when they're already making record profits, and drill, drill, drill, doesn't have any sustainable solution for the future.
The Democrat's plan to tax oil company's windfall profits and put the money towards finding alternative solutions makes much more sense. We're PROGRESSING, or do you not like that word?
The truth is, we can live with $5/gallon gas while we focus on creating a more sustainable alternative. It is something that should have been started a long time ago but nobody wanted to be taxed to fund it. Now, we're so dependent on oil that our quality of life will suffer while we find a solution.
|
|
|
|
Post by harpman1 on Jun 25, 2008 17:53:49 GMT -5
So are you saying progressives & Obama will do nothing to lower gas or oil prices until sufficient years pass to bring alt. energies online?
If taxes increase on Big Oil, what will keep them from simply increasing prices to pay the taxes, as all businesses do & have always/will always do?
Is the suffering of millions OK with you as long as the greater good(as you see it) is served?
Will you feel just the same way if/when gas hits $10 or $15/gal?
How many years should we wait for the new energies before we drill for more oil? 10? 20?
Serious questions; they deserve serious non-partisan replies.
In other words, please look forward (or progressively) & not backwards at Pres. Bush; VP Cheney: etc. when replying.
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Jun 25, 2008 18:40:50 GMT -5
"So are you saying progressives & Obama will do nothing to lower gas or oil prices until sufficient years pass to bring alt. energies online?"
How many years until domestic drilling has any effect on gas prices? The most conservative estimates I've seen say at least 3 years.
"If taxes increase on Big Oil, what will keep them from simply increasing prices to pay the taxes, as all businesses do & have always/will always do?"
They didn't lower their prices when Bush cut their taxes, why should they increase prices if the original tax is reestablished?
"Is the suffering of millions OK with you as long as the greater good(as you see it) is served?"
Yes, if it prevents more severe suffering in the future.
"Will you feel just the same way if/when gas hits $10 or $15/gal?"
Probably not. If gas gets that expensive there will be a much greater sense of urgency to find an alternative. Let me ask you: How much will the proposed drilling contribute to lowering gas prices?
"How many years should we wait for the new energies before we drill for more oil? 10? 20?"
They are within our grasp, we just need to put money towards building the infrastructure to sustain it on a national level. It will be the saving grace for American car companies. They have had their asses handed to them by the Japanese for refusing to build fuel efficient cars and update their plants. It is a chance for them to refocus their energies, from building bloated, gas guzzling SUVs to building the cars of the future that run on alternative fuels.
|
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Jun 25, 2008 18:42:41 GMT -5
saunterelle, I had to exalt you for sticking to the party line. Even though you are wrong. We are dependent on energy. And what makes you think that alternative forms of energy will cause the price to drop? It won't, and that is the fault of those who excoriate the use of carbon based fuels.
Of course, if you do a bit of reading, you will find it is a policy of the left to increase the price of carbon based fuels. Not to encourage the use of alternative sources, because they don't exist yet, but to have control over us. Simple as that.
|
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Jun 25, 2008 18:51:50 GMT -5
" So are you saying progressives & Obama will do nothing to lower gas or oil prices until sufficient years pass to bring alt. energies online?" How many years until domestic drilling has any effect on gas prices? The most conservative estimates I've seen say at least 3 years. Maybe, but at least we are doing something to decrease our dependency on foreign oil, rather then waiting for new technology. That is our goal isn't it? Because it will be longer then three years before a viable alternative is found. Maybe more like 10 to 20 years. " If taxes increase on Big Oil, what will keep them from simply increasing prices to pay the taxes, as all businesses do & have always/will always do?" They didn't lower their prices when Bush cut their taxes, why should they increase prices if the original tax is reestablished? But, they sure will increase their prices if you increase their taxes. Economics 101. " Is the suffering of millions OK with you as long as the greater good(as you see it) is served?" Yes, if it prevents more severe suffering in the future. Well, you certainly are not a humanitarian. What kind of car do you drive? How do you heat your house? What type of stove do you cook on? Any answer you give makes you a elitist hypocrite, unless you do not own a car, heat your home or eat. " Will you feel just the same way if/when gas hits $10 or $15/gal?" Probably not. If gas gets that expensive there will be a much greater sense of urgency to find an alternative. Let me ask you: How much will the proposed drilling contribute to lowering gas prices? Urgency will not speed up the process of finding new forms of energy. Right now, it is necessary, and necessity is the mother of invention, not urgency. Drilling will not negate the necessity. Urgency creates panic and panic leads to violence. In other words, Mob Rule. " How many years should we wait for the new energies before we drill for more oil? 10? 20?" They are within our grasp, we just need to put money towards building the infrastructure to sustain it on a national level. It will be the saving grace for American car companies. They have had their asses handed to them by the Japanese for refusing to build fuel efficient cars and update their plants. It is a chance for them to refocus their energies, from building bloated, gas guzzling SUVs to building the cars of the future that run on alternative fuels. Really, what is within our grasp, exactly. Alternative fuels? Phhfft. They are only a stop gap, not an answer. Though I must say, I am interested in the Honda fuel cell vehicle. But, they will put into the atmosphere the biggest cause of global warming, water vapor. And, since you are on that band wagon, it can only be considered a non-solution by you. |
|
|
|
Post by harpman1 on Jun 25, 2008 19:14:58 GMT -5
If I have fields laying fallow & refuse to grow my own food, wouldn't it be logical for my neighbor, from whom I buy all my food, to charge me whatever he wants for this essential commodity?
If I started plowing & planting every acre I own, wouldn't that motivate my neighbor to lower his prices immediately in order to retain my business well into the future?
I submit it would. If all he had to sell me was a product that I would soon be providing for myself, he would notice that I was going to grow my own very soon. He would see the reduction in demand looming on the horizon & attempt to curry my favor with lower prices now. It is a market strategy that always works.
Why would it not work here?
I asked that you not lean on Bushitler/Cheneyburton in your response, & you failed to do that. I can only ask.
How would you stop Big Oil from passing the tax increases on?
What if they close up shop & go out of biz? Would you support Federal takeover of Big Oil ala Hugo Chavez?
If the future doesn't arrive on time, or the alt. energies reveal themselves to be as big a boondoggle as corn-based ethanol, will you support drilling then?
|
|
|
|
Post by iraqvet2003 on Jun 26, 2008 9:56:00 GMT -5
Why hasn't the extreme left recognized the dangerous elitism in their calls for alt. fuels?
If/when these alt fuel vehicles come out, what're all the "normal folk" going to do? Are they actually going to be able to run out and buy a new car? No. They'll still be driving their combustion engines. I know that I'll probably be driving my 2000 Ford Ranger till the wheels fall off.
It's time for the left to remember that not everyone likes giving up their hard-earned cash to publicly fund research in a product that will take some years to get off the ground (don't get me started on publicly funded research either).
In a time that our citizens need more buying power to survive, is it not unconscienable (sp?) to further decrease their buying power?
Now I'm ranting so excuse me, but one last point:
Everyone and their mother knows that oil is a finite resource, so anyone that thinks that the Transportation Industries aren't kicking their R&D into high gear for Alt. Fuels must be a moron. Does anyone honestly think these industries, knowing oil is finite, are ok with just folding up shop when oil runs out?
C'mon people! Step back, take a breath, and think this problem out. We are better than knee-jerk reactionaries.
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Jun 26, 2008 11:10:59 GMT -5
"It's time for the left to remember that not everyone likes giving up their hard-earned cash to publicly fund research in a product that will take some years to get off the ground (don't get me started on publicly funded research either). "
The research will not be publicly funded. It will come from a tax on oil companies' windfall profits. Windfall profits occur due to unforeseen circumstances in a product's market, such as unexpected demand or government regulation. Since the profits were unforeseen, taxing them should not hurt the company.
Of course the transition to new technology will take time and money, but it is necessary, and the sooner we can break our dependence on oil the better. The Republican plan chooses to postpone the problem rather than tackling it head on. Why? Because they are beholden to the oil industry.
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Jun 26, 2008 11:27:33 GMT -5
Lets see, we can't build nuke plants to produce electricity because the left is afraid of them.
We can't build dams to produce electricity because the left doesn't like them.
We can't build wind farms because the left doesn;t like that a few birds fly into the blades.
I;m sure that the left will find things to not like about solar farms (thousands of acres covered with panels is the first thing that comes to mind).
Once the full story is out on the hydrogen cars, the left won't like them because water vapor is a greenhouse gas.
"windfall profits tax" is just another way of saying 'price increase.' So again, the taxpayer is the one to foot the bill. And, I would be willing to bet that the amount of that tax would not pay for the research, so we would be paying twice for it (not to mention the amount the
burrocrats (sic) would skim off for themselves).
Yes, we do need to break the dependance on oil. Go back and actually READ what others have said, Saunterelle. So typical of the so-called progressives - if you are not in lock step with them, you must have sold your soul to (insert boogy man of the week). But, we can't just stop cold turkey and wait 10 or 20 years for the replacement. We need to phase it in.
The Dem. plan chooses to cause panic by running around like a bunch of chicken littles, and relying on pure emotionalism, throwing money at every plan that comes along, wasting time and resources, and getting nothing accomplished. Why? Because they are beholden to the one world govt. socialists.
|
|
|
|
Post by iraqvet2003 on Jun 26, 2008 12:03:40 GMT -5
Again, I must say that it only makes logical sense that these "evil" corporations are spending a lot of money in R&D, but go ahead and skip over that point.
Besides, it feels better to assuage your white guilt by throwing money at a problem doesn't it? When your kid acts up, do you just give him $20 bucks?
|
|
|
|
Post by jgaffney on Jun 26, 2008 15:06:25 GMT -5
SubdJoe sez...SubdJoe, it has already happened. SDG&E proposed building a solar farm in the desert east of San Diego. The environmentalists opposed it because the transmission lines would cross the Anza Borrego desert. So, just like the windmill farms in Nantucket Sound, alternative energy gets a lot of lip service from progressives. However, when it comes time to walk the walk, they are sadly missing in action.
|
|
