Obama has a Fix for oil prices

[Bones]

Ok, no discussion of it.  I understand. 

Socialist,..hehe,..funny guy.

Do not worry, I slow, but I am getting there are things that cannot be discussed on this board without people having some type of defensive seizure.  It is that way with any board.  You just have to find the things that can be talked about.

I do not have a lot of time to spend on it, so I try to get my discussions in when I can.  Never had the intention of pissing off people.  Just a lack of understanding of the demographic here.  Pardon my ignorance.

[Toad]

People aren't having seizures at all.

People are holding up your idea to the light and showing you that it refracts differently from different viewpoints.

You continually tell us you want people to drive "responsibly" which is to say you want them to drive the way YOU think is best.

What others are telling you is that it is:

1. None of your business if some kid wants to waste gas by jackrabbitting between stop lights. It's HIS money, not yours.

2. None of your business if some guy chooses to drive a 12 mpg Hummer because he likes it and can afford it. It's HIS money, not yours.

3. The current system of people in those two examples paying more than some "responsible" driver in a Civic is working EXACTLY as the system you propose. They do already pay more; it's their call, not yours.

4. The system is in fact working "well enough". The recent jump in gas prices to the $4 level has changed the minds of many of the nation's drivers. Consumption has dropped ~3% during the oil run up. In barrels of oil, that's a huge amount. Trucks and SUV's have essentially stopped selling.

Let the market work. We don't need another nanny.

[Bones]

I wil say this and then stop.

So, when someone acts irresponsibly, which causes a negative impact on another person it is ok.

Since when did privileges at the expense of others become appropriate?  I missed that memo.

[Elfie]

So, when someone acts irresponsibly, which causes a negative impact on another person it is ok.

How does someone else's bad driving habits impact you in a negative way?

[Bones]

How does someone else's bad driving habits impact you in a negative way?

Really?

Let's just drop it.  There is no point in trying to talk about it.  I apologize for even trying to post here.  Let it go.  It's done.  You are all right.  I am all wrong.  Just move on.

[Toad]

There's no more "negative impact" to you from some SUV driver "overeating" at the gas pump than there is from some fattie overeating at the Country Buffet.

There is no shortage of oil or food. Have you had to wait in line at the gas pumps? Was it rationed? Could you only fill up on an odd/even license plate schedule?

Have you been to KFC and been told there's no chicken? McDonald's run out of hamburgers yet? The grocery store out of cheese?


Here's the crux: You view some "high school kid who is driving a monster 4x4 with a 454 engine in it who grannies along at 10 MPH getting" .5 miles to the gallon as "irresponsible".

That is your opinion. You are entitled to that opinion. You have every right to own a Honda Civic. Where you go horribly, horribly wrong is when you decide that kid should be punished with higher taxes. That is nanny state taken to the extreme.

You already have what you want. Upthread you said "if you provide a monetary incentive to do what you can to get better fuel mileage, I think it would work."

I think gas at $4/gallon provided a huge monetary incentive to make people attempt to get better mileage and cut out what they now feel are unnecessary trips.

You have what you want already BUT it doesn't involve any government coercion at all. How can you not be pleased.

Just a lack of understanding of the demographic here.  Pardon my ignorance.

This is the same talk-down BS that we get from the Obamessiah. Your ideas were read, evaluated and drew responses. Because we don't agree with you we apparently belong to some unspecified "demographic" to which you feel morally or intellectually superior.

Well, bud...here's the demographic we belong to: we're in the group that favors individual liberty.

[lasersailor184]

I wil say this and then stop.

So, when someone acts irresponsibly, which causes a negative impact on another person it is ok.

Since when did privileges at the expense of others become appropriate?  I missed that memo.

Perhaps I'm in the middle of having a stroke, but this post came up for me originally as done by Skuzzy.  It seemed so odd and out of place that I didn't respond.


Now it's showing that Bones did it.  Perhaps I crossed the edge of sanity back on 401 and 202...

[Maverick]

How does someone else's bad driving habits impact you in a negative way?

Ever been in a collision not of your own fault? I know you are thinking of something else entirely but the question you posted is less than stellar in explaining what you meant to convey.

[dkff49]

No that I side with him, but I think what Bones is trying to say is that when someone uses excessive amounts of gas it does put some additional cost onto those that try not to use as much just more in an indirect way.

The process of supply and demand causes this to happen (with a free-market it is extremely tough to regulate this). Those that chose to drive the .5 mpg vehicles and preform the jackrabbit starts help to increase demand. That demand increase helps to cause a decrease in supply which requires the oil companies to take additional actions to increase output to replenish those supplies. These additional steps cause an increase in price.

Unfortunately the only way out of this is to move closer to a socialist type setup. I wish there was a magic lamp that could be rubbed to make this simple but ages old problem go away, but that isnot going to happen.

I tried to keep it as simple as possible but I think that both sides have some of it right. I think Bones is right it sucks that those use more can afford it but do indirectly increase the price for thse of us who can not afford it as easily. However I also think the others are also right in that the only way to regulate that further is to tell everybody that you now have to purchase only what we tell you and you have to drive in a way that is conservative,making a little more socialist.

Just my take guys no insult or argument intended.

[Elfie]

Ever been in a collision not of your own fault? I know you are thinking of something else entirely but the question you posted is less than stellar in explaining what you meant to convey.

In the context of the thread, I didn't think I needed to explain it further. You obviously got what I meant from the start. 

[Maverick]

If ya don't communicate clearly ya ain't comunicatin! Ya R just spreading letters thru the internet!

 

[Elfie]

If ya don't communicate clearly ya ain't comunicatin! Ya R just spreading letters thru the internet!

 

 

[bj229r]

Sen. Obama said this: "There are things that you can do individually though to save energy. Making sure your tires are properly inflated, simple thing, but we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could actually save just as much."
--------------------------------

Off-shore drilling in the lower 48 states will yield approximately 200,000 barrels of oil per day... 20 years from now.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/ongr.html

27% of American cars would improve mileage by 3% by properly inflating tires, reducing oil consumption approximately 800,000 barrels per day immediately. That doesn't include the 4% improvement from tune ups.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/maintain.shtml

There's never an Einstein around when you need one to do the math. Maybe Paris Hilton will be along to explain it. 

Ive posted this before, but it continually gets ignored

Last December, at the behest (and expense) of the American Petroleum Institute and Shell oil, I flew down to the Gulf Coast to visit an offshore oil platform. They helicoptered me 165 miles out into the gulf and I stepped onto Brutus, a tension-linked platform anchored to the seafloor 3,000 feet below. It would be an understatement to say I was in awe. Until you’re actually standing on one you can’t begin to appreciate the sheer size and complexity of such a thing.

The platform is the size of a few football fields jammed together, and the top of the derrick was easily a few hundred feet off the water. Dozens of people lived on board, and everything — from the computer systems to the actual drilling rig — was state of the art. Brutus produced over 100,000 barrels of oil a day — down from over 300,000 at its peak capacity.

That sounds impressive. But here’s what truly floored me: Shell decided Brutus’s location in the gulf would be profitable for drilling in April 1999. The company then built the massive oil platform, transported it to the right location in the gulf, anchored the floating leviathan onto the seafloor 3,000 feet below, drilled 17,000 feet below that, and began producing oil in July 2001. It took only two years to get Brutus online.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2M3YWQ5MTE3Yzc0ZmY3OGM1YmU0OTVhZWUwZjQ0ZTk=

[Getback]

Lazs, as much as I would like to get on board with that, I doubt there is a pickup truck on the road that gets better gas mileage at 70 than at 55.  Anytime you try to move a brick through the wind, the power required to do so goes up, in a not so linear fashion.

That is probably true for most SUV's as well.

Here is what I would like to see.  I know it is not going to happen, but I think it might be a way to go.  We want to encourage people to get better gas mileage.  So why not plant an RFID tag in every automobile in this country which can broadcast the current gas mileage of the vehicle to the gas pump, which then assigns a tax on the fuel based on the gas mileage.  The better the gas mileage, the lower the tax.

Of course it would have to exempt farmers, 18 wheelers, and/or a chunk of the commercial industry.

If the vehicle does not have an RFID tag, then the consumer pays the highest tax which would be assessed.

  It's like that barnyard story where everyone is equal but some will be more equal than others. Geeze just what we need more taxes and more confusion.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Lazs, as much as I would like to get on board with that, I doubt there is a pickup truck on the road that gets better gas mileage at 70 than at 55.  Anytime you try to move a brick through the wind, the power required to do so goes up, in a not so linear fashion.

That is probably true for most SUV's as well.

Here is what I would like to see.  I know it is not going to happen, but I think it might be a way to go.  We want to encourage people to get better gas mileage.  So why not plant an RFID tag in every automobile in this country which can broadcast the current gas mileage of the vehicle to the gas pump, which then assigns a tax on the fuel based on the gas mileage.  The better the gas mileage, the lower the tax.

Of course it would have to exempt farmers, 18 wheelers, and/or a chunk of the commercial industry.

If the vehicle does not have an RFID tag, then the consumer pays the highest tax which would be assessed.

 

You want me to let the government put chips on my car and truck so they can monitor me and my travels?
I don't freakin think so. That's JUST A LITTLE intrusive.