Re: OT: 2006 US Elections

Travelinman wrote:
> In article <11gq6m58tfjnvbc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> John <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Travelinman wrote:
>>> In article <lloydparsons-3ACE85.13274024082005@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>>> Lloyd Parsons <lloydparsons@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> While we've got a few political postings, I thought I would add
>>>> another. Here is where I think the next US elections are headed
>>>> and why.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Here is what the incumbents (regardless of party) have to answer
>>>> for.
>>>>
>>>> Gas: Prices through the roof, with no indication of an end in
>>>> sight. Doesn't matter if they are still cheaper than most of the
>>>> world.
>>>
>>>
>>> Except for one simple problem. It doesn't appear that the
>>> government is responsible. The major problem is drastic increases
>>> in demand from China with no corresponding increases in production.
>>>
>>> Add in a little political instability, incessant American demand for
>>> ever bigger cars, a bit of bad weather, and you've got a problem.
>>>
>>
>> Actually you're wrong. Yet again. China has taken steps in the last
>> few months to decrease consumption growth and demand is beginning to
>> flatten out. The US with its glut of gas guzzling and extremely
>
> "has taken steps to START" and demand is "BEGINNING" to flatten out.
>
> Over the past few years, my statement is 100% correct. What the
> situation will be next year remains to be seen.
>
>> unpatriotic SUVs has done almost nothing. If Bush was not so far in
>> bed with the oil companies he would be out there drammaticaly
>> increasing CAFE requirements(not like yesterdays wimp response) so
>> growth in the future can be contained. A real President would
>> provide 14 Billion in
>
> I agree that CAFE standards should be increased - and specifically
> mentioned that. The previous administrations failed to take any
> action, but the current administration is finally increasing the CAFE
> standards for trucks.
>
>> additional tax incentives to get people into efficient hybrid
>> vehicles rather than giving that money to oil companies who are now
>> enjoying
>
> Actually, there ARE substantial tax benefits for hybrid vehicles in
> the recent package.
>
>> record profits. The passage of the incompetent Bushs energy bill a
>> couple of weeks ago sent the wrong signal to the oil markets. And
>> as a result we will soon be seeing 70 buck a barrel oil.
>
> Yet the current administration is doing the two things you cited -
> increasing CAFE standards and giving tax credits for hybrid vehicles.


They should be giving LARGER tax credits for hybrids and ZERO to oil
companies. The CAFE standards increase is very minor and thanks to the
wimpy response the price of oil set a record today.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Oak/Ivy
    ... Jerry M. Wright wrote: ... with a more net neutral voice, minus martyrs, reallys, claims of lying, ... Basically, the oil has to enter the cell, be ... at this point will reduce the subsequent response and permit rapid ...
    (rec.backcountry)
  • Re: OT: 2006 US Elections
    ... >>> additional tax incentives to get people into efficient hybrid ... >>> vehicles rather than giving that money to oil companies who are now ... >> increasing CAFE standards and giving tax credits for hybrid vehicles. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Ice Storm
    ... Thanks for the response. ... I remain unconvinced that humans will be ... and other assorted tasks now consuming oil. ... roadblock to switching over to hydrogen is such a network. ...
    (misc.news.internet.discuss)
  • Re: RSA Challenges
    ... oil. ... While legacys seldom insert grips, ... Will you identify in response to the tower, if Albert ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: The Say what?! department:
    ... Why Sarah Palin and Chevron May Be Responsible for the Next Massive ... Oil Spill in Alaska ... position spill response equipment so we're ready in case things ...
    (alt.gathering.rainbow)