| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/24 |
| 2008/5/3-8 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:49880 Activity:moderate |
5/2 Hillary: Let's cut gas tax!
Blue Collar: Yay!
McCain: Let's cut gas tax!
\_ McCain proposed it, Hillary agreed.
Blue Collar: Yay!
Obama: Gas tax break will increase demand and the cost of gasoline
in the long run. Besides, it is not sustainable and not
a long term solution.
\- For an short term inelastic demand good, the price will
be set by the demand, and if you drap the tax, that
will convert consumer surplus into windfall profits.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_incidence
This is like an Econ 1 midterm question.
\_ What about if demand is elastic?
\- a full discusson of this is beyond the scope
of the motd. a fuller discussion involves
questions of "is it movement along the demand
curve" or "is it a shift of the agg demand curve".
also the view w.r.t. to oil is supply is also
constrained due to refining capacity being maxed
out, but this is complicated by the possibility
of drawing down inventory stocks. but what really
makes this complicated is the "clean theory"
assums competive markets [prce takers, marginal
cost pricing]. the theory of monopol is also
"clean" but the world we are probably in w.r.t.
to oil is oligopoly ... and that isnt a "clean"
theory ... anyway, let's leave it at that.
Big Oil: We'll just raise your cost to match whatever price difference
the temporary lack of tax would create, and pocket the
the money. HA
Blue Collar: FUCK YOU!
\_ I think you underestimate the Blue Collar in this country. -raised BC
\_ I think you underestimate the Blue Collar in this country. -raised
BC
\_ Vote for GEORGE W BUSH! PATRIOTISM, SERVE OUR COUNTRY! -BC
\_ That was BC in 2002. What do you think it is like today?
\_ McCain served in the armed forces and was patriotic.
VOTE FOR MCCAIN, FIGHT TERRORISTS! -BC
\_ Kerry had a rather more distinguished record of service
compared to Bush, and look how that went.
\_ SWIFT BOAT LIES! -BC
\_ No, now it is more like MY GAS COSTS TOO MUCH. @#$%! BUSH
\_ No, now it is more like MY GAS COSTS TOO MUCH.
@#$%! BUSH
AND ALL THOSE POLITICIANS IN DC!
\_ The gas companies don't care what the tax rate is. There is more
gasoline sitting in storage in the US right now than there has been
for years. Current prices have little to do with the gas tax or
a healthy functioning market. For starters, states like CA should
get together with nearby states and use the same formula for gas.
That would create a larger market of the same product and yield
a more stable price as well as lower prices over all. Strengthen
the dollar. Since oil prices are effectively keyed to the value
of the dollar, as the dollar decreases oil prices *must* increase.
This isn't even Econ 1 type stuff.
\- Hillary Clinton has decided to ignore "so called experts"
and "history" and "the facts" ... 'cause she's The Deciderette.
Hmm, now who does that sound like? "Trust me ... I'm experienced,
compassonate, tough, have what it takes, can swiftboat somebody
when I need to ..."
http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/05/friends-dont-le.html
http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/05/expertise.html
http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/05/i-think-paul-kr.html |
| 5/24 |
|
| en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_incidence For example, a tax on apple farmers might actually be paid by owners of agricultural land or consumers of apples. The theory of tax incidence has a number of practical results. payroll taxes are paid half by the employee and half by the employer. However, economists think that the worker is bearing almost the entire burden of the tax because the employer passes the tax on in the form of lower wages. edit Simple, illustrative example Imagine a $1 tax on every barrel of apples an apple farmer produces. If the apple farmer is able to pass the tax along to consumers of apples by raising the price $1, then consumers are bearing the entire burden of the tax. On the other hand, if the apple farmer can't raise prices, then the farmer is bearing the burden of the tax. Ludwig von Mises teaches that the actual burden of any tax is determined by the market process rather than by the taxing authority. The supply and demand for a good is deeply intertwined with the markets for the factors of production and for alternate goods and services that might be produced or consumed. Although legislators might be seeking to tax the apple industry, in reality it could turn out to be truck drivers who are hardest hit, if apple companies shift toward shipping by rail in response to their new cost. Or perhaps orange manufacturers will be the group most affected, if consumers decide to forgo oranges to maintain their previous level of apples at the now higher price. Because the producer is inelastic, he will produce the same quantity no matter what the price. Because the consumer is elastic, the consumer is very sensitive to price. A small increase in price leads to a large drop in the quantity demanded. The imposition of the tax causes the market price to increase from Price without tax to price with tax and the quantity demanded to fall from Q without tax to Q with tax. Because the producer is inelastic, the quantity doesn't change much. Because the consumer is elastic and the producer is inelastic, the price doesn't change much. The producer is unable to pass the tax onto the consumer and the tax incidence falls on the producer. In this example, the tax is collected from the producer and the producer bears the tax burden. Because the consumer is inelastic, he will demand the same quantity no matter what the price. Because the producer is elastic, the producer is very sensitive to price. A small drop in price leads to a large drop in the quantity produced. The imposition of the tax causes the market price to increase from P with out tax to P with tax and the quantity demanded to fall from Q without tax to Q with tax. Because the consumer is inelastic, the quantity doesn't change much. Because the consumer is inelastic and the producer is elastic, the price changes dramatically. The producer is able to pass almost the entire value of the tax onto the consumer. Even though the tax is being collected from the producer the consumer is bearing the tax burden. edit Other practical results The theory of tax incidence has a large number of practical results: * Because businesses are more sensitive to wages than employees, payroll taxes, employer mandates, and other taxes collected from the employer end up being borne by the employee. The tax is passed onto the employee in the form of lower wages. Who actually pays the tax is not affected by whether government collects the tax at the pump or directly from oil companies. |
| delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/05/friends-dont-le.html Main May 04, 2008 Friends Don't Let Friends Support Hillary Rodham Clinton Over Barack Obama Fortunately for the Democratic Party--but unfortunately for the country--John McCain is worse. Through the Looking Glass: And now, my disappointments with Hillary: This morning, George Stephanopoulos began his televised interview with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton by asking if she could name a single economist who supported her plan for a gas-tax suspension. "I'm not going to put in my lot with economists," she said on the ABC program "This Week." A few moments later, she added, "Elite opinion is always on the side of doing things that really disadvantages the vast majority of Americans." refineries are running flat out, and can't quickly add capacity. Retailers won't respond to more demand by selling more gas --- because they can't. They keep raising the price of the stuff they have until they can no longer sell it all. So, for lack of any other rationing system, the free market effectively rations the stuff by willingness to pay. if the supply of a good is more or less unresponsive to the price, the price to consumers will always rise until the quantity demanded falls to match the quantity supplied. Cut taxes, and all that happens is that the pretax price rises by the same amount. And some of them aren't fooled: Stephanopoulos turned the mike over to a woman who said she supported Obama and said she makes less than $25,000 a year. "I do feel pandered to when you talk about suspending the gas tax," the woman said, adding: "Call me crazy but I actually listen to economists because I think they know what they've studied." She's touting a plan that's nonsense the way Dubya's war plans were nonsense; the reasons it can't work are widely acknowledged facts which aren't seriously disputed by anyone with relevant knowledge. Perhaps, after days of publicly touting this proposal, she still doesn't know she's selling snake oil. May 04, 2008 at 09:52 PM Well, she's more of a Rockerfeller republican anyways. Stephanopoulos proving that we are Devo used to be in government (I'm here to help) and now is full bore blather. com/article/ALeqM5hLPqTxd4Fe7e5EymHU-kTUgweRDQD90BPHC 01 April 29, 2008 Obama says rivals Clinton, McCain pandering on gas tax By MIKE GLOVER and BETH FOUHY - Associated Press Obama took a different view on the issue when he was an Illinois legislator, voting at least three times in favor of temporarily lifting the state's 5 percent sales tax on gasoline. The tax holiday was finally approved during a special session in June of 2000, when Illinois motorists were furious that gas prices had just topped $2 a gallon in Chicago. During one debate, he joked that he wanted signs on gas pumps in his district to say, "Senator Obama reduced your gasoline prices." May 05, 2008 at 01:51 AM Hillary Clinton is addressing two political issues. First, Clinton's proposal is a response to John McCain's proposal to cut gas taxes. Clinton has figured out a way to offer the same tax cut to working class voters that McCain is offering while preventing a shortfall in highway funding and a windfall for oil companies. Second, Clinton is explicitly calling for a tax increase on oil companies, a baby step away from Reagan-Bushism. Look, there's a certain class of liberal folks who, regardless of what they say out loud, think engaging in democratic politics is contemptible. They are among the people who can't stand Clinton and see her as a lowly pandering politician taking a corrupt position on this gas tax issue. They are also among the people who admire Barack Obama and see him as an agent of "change we can believe in" taking the enlightened position on this gas tax issue. Hillary Clinton "has left the reality based community" says creative class spokesman Charles Dodgson. That would be true if the reality based community were only to be found on the campuses of elite universities and in the affluent neighborhoods of the most creative of our creative class. May 05, 2008 at 02:49 AM Hillary Clinton is addressing two political issues. First, Clinton's proposal is a response to John McCain's proposal to cut gas taxes. Clinton has figured out a way to offer the same tax cut to working class voters that McCain is offering while preventing a shortfall in highway funding and a windfall for oil companies. Second, Clinton is explicitly calling for a tax increase on oil companies, a baby step away from Reagan-Bushism. Look, there's a certain class of liberal folks who, regardless of what they say out loud, think engaging in democratic politics is contemptible. They are among the people who can't stand Clinton and see her as a lowly pandering politician taking a corrupt position on this gas tax issue. They are also among the people who admire Barack Obama and see him as an agent of "change we can believe in" taking the enlightened position on this gas tax issue. May 05, 2008 at 03:09 AM There's (probably) nothing wrong with your economic theory, but it's not clear to me that you folks really understand the gasoline market. There are now, and almost certainly will be come Summer, large inventories of refined gasoline on hand -- about a three week supply. The normal process is to draw them down around 10% over the course of a Summer to make up for the fact that Americans typically burn gasoline a bit faster than the refineries can produce it. While "they" surely can't draw the inventories down to zero or anywhere close to zero without huge problems, I believe that there is probably considerably more flexibility in gasoline supply than you guys are telling each other. Current inventories are normal and they are not expected to drop below normal. There are not (so far as I know) that many more drivers this year than last. Americans may well be driving less (inventories soared earlier this year purportedly because of less driving due to high gasoline prices). I think you ought to consider the possibility that "additional" gasoline would materialize from inventory to cover any (very modest I expect) increase in demand from a gas tax holiday. asp BTW, I'm against the tax holiday (McCain)/shift (Clinton). It's too much like smuggling chocolate bars to an obese friend who has just had a heart attack at the age of 37. I don't think America's condition is terminal at this point, and I'm against further efforts, however modest, to make it so. Japan just had a brief one month holiday from a gas tax. I do not know the exact amount of the surplus that consumers captured but it seems to be a lot more than economists in the US predict. Below is an article from the Nikkei which shows the rebound in prices suggesting that they fell by almost as much as the tax. Is it because they might not like the answer which does not fit models? Service stations affiliated with oil refiner TonenGeneral Sekiyu KK (5012) along the Kanjo 8-gosen road in Tokyo hiked the price of regular gasoline to 156 yen per liter, up 32 yen from the previous day. Competitors nearby made similar moves, displaying prices of 156-159 yen. In the Kansai region, Kakuno Sekiyu raised the retail price of gasoline by 30 yen to 167 yen a liter. "The jump in price is a heavy burden, but it can't be helped," said a customer in his 40s. Related Story: Japan Gas Tax Still Lower Than In Many Other Countries Inventories of gasoline purchased from refineries at lower prices have declined sharply as drivers swarmed service stations nationwide until midnight on Wednesday to fill up their tanks before the expected price hikes. Outlets are rushing to raise prices to recoup the losses incurred in the price competition that broke out in early April when the surcharges expired. In contrast to the bustling crowds the day before, there were not many customers at gas stations early on Thursday. An outlet in Nagoya that is open 24 hours a day serviced only about 20 cars as of 8:30 am, roughly one-quarter the average number it handled in the same time period last month. Meanwhile, some gas stations have decided to leave their prices unchanged for now. May 05, 2008 at 04:57 AM While Clinton is proposing a "windfall profits tax", sensible people know th... |
| delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/05/expertise.html Hillary Clinton Doesn't Listen to Economists: When asked this morning by ABC News' George Stephanopoulos if she could name a single economist who backs her call for a gas tax holiday this summer, HRC said "I'm not going to put my lot in with economists." I know several of the economists who have been advising Senator Clinton, so I phoned them right after I heard this. One hadn't heard her remark and said he couldn't believe she'd say it. The other had heard it and shrugged it off as "politics as usual." The gas tax holiday is small potatoes relative to everything else. But it's so economically stupid (it would increase demand for gas and cause prices to rise, eliminating any benefit to consumers while costing the Treasury more than $9 billion, and generate more pollution) and silly (even if she won, HRC won't be president this summer) as to be worrisome. That HRC now says she doesn't care that what economists think is even more troubling. In case you've missed it, we now have a president who doesn't care what most economists think. But when economists tell a president or a presidential candidate that his or her idea is dumb - and when all respectable economists around America agree that it's a dumb idea - it's probably wise for the president or presidential candidate to listen. When the president or candidate doesn't, and proudly defends the policy by saying she's "not going to put my lot in with economists," we've got a problem, folks. Even though the summer gas tax holiday is pure hokum, it polls well, which is why HRC and John McCain are pushing it. That Barack Obama is not in favor of it despite its positive polling numbers speaks volumes about the kind of president he'll be - and the kind of president we'd otherwise get from McCain and HRC. Haven't we had enough of politicians who reject facts in favor of short-term poll-driven politics? May 04, 2008 at 04:19 PM Basics: our present political/economic power structure works like this. Innovative financial sphere at the top of the heap executive branch of the Federal govt, but the executives not the agencies filled with gov drones the pentagon the supreme court, the Fed reserve, adjuncts to the executive branch of the fed gov the legislature If HRC gets elected, she knows all she has to do is whistle to get economists from name brand schools. I will let others cover the Wall Street scene (in brief, you are going to see a lot of job losses to accompany the monetary losses). For DC, you may have a point if you define the recession primarily in terms of job losses; there is no question that the federal government will generate fewer of those. But the pain and suffering due to the real estate crash will be incredible around here. Cheesy 70s townhouses were selling in my neighborhood for as much as $530K apiece when I moved here in mid-2006 (didn't buy, of course). The last sale was for $420K, but now anybody trying to get that much is pretty much lost. From rents around here, we can impute prices no higher than $300K. And, for what it's worth, Potomac is going to come through this better than most places in the metro area. Our anti-elite culture, when converted into anti-expertism may be coming home to roost. In 2000 GWB portrayed himself as anti-fact in personality, but allowed the rest of us to presume he would pay attention to them once elected. I hate having to hope a candidate will ignore their promises. Estaban, perhaps you could write your local superdelegate. In principle you could petition your pledged delegate, but he/she is supposed to be pledged. May 04, 2008 at 06:16 PM Gee, if Hillary is dissing economists, she can't be all bad. You know, like the economists who told us the outsourcing of American jobs would make American workers better off 'cause they could buy cheap stuff at Wal-Mart. If pandering with high-polling ideas that are revenue-neutral is necessary to win, I'd say go for it. Many workers in the exurbs *must* drive to work and are hurting from high gas prices. May 04, 2008 at 08:30 PM Maybe William Safire can do a piece on exactly what is involved in putting ones lot in with others but I don't necessarily take it as meaning that she is dissing economists. Rather that she considers her outlook better if their opinions are avoided. At this juncture she's reduced to doing anything for a vote. May 04, 2008 at 08:45 PM Jonathan King: Those are secondary effects of what I have in mind. The CIA and the Pentagon failed in protecting Americans. Highly placed queen bees there might whine that they were following the dictates of Cheney, but the results were Americans were killed and hurt. In this situation to recognize failure, budgets should be cut by 20% and those two orgs should be urged to do better with less. I don't remember many principled CIAers and Pentagonians resigning or doing the Japanese thing to atone for their failure, do you? Further seeing how iffy our national finances are, we should open a dialogue to make govt pensions more dynamic. If large numbers of people in the private sector that creates all wealth to run the govt. gov drones also should experience the dynamics of the marketplace. Let's start the dialogue now so Washingtonians too can experience our declining standards of living. May 04, 2008 at 10:55 PM Christofay - Beating up on the civil servants will not punish those responsible. The latter (political appointees) will all have cushy sinecures at right-wing think-tanks. This sounds like a lefty version of drowning the government in the bathtub. I have a cousin whose husband works at the CIA, actually both of them do, and he's walked around talking of his proudest moments, using digital tech to select areas where to drop leaflets in Iraq for example. Another cousin is now a general in the army and will be going to Iraq for his first tour. He also uncritically repeats comments that he thinks should be taken as a given, but it's totally jackass crazy. These are highly place civil servants, but they don't get how they are not delivering the services they are required to, protecting us. However, there is a real iron rice bowl aspect to working in the govt. On the other hand uncertainty increases for the biomass, global warming, you know. Plus, for compensation, it's not just think tanks, there are boards, there's consulting, but never starting a company with productive assets. think tanks, S&P 500 board of directorships, and consulting. He might be a billionaire before he dies, isn't he already up to $500 mil? May 05, 2008 at 12:38 AM Honest question: How does economists' certainty that free trade is a great idea compare to their certainty that HRC's gas tax idea is a bad idea? If pandering with high-polling ideas that are revenue-neutral is necessary to win, I'd say go for it. Many workers in the exurbs *must* drive to work and are hurting from high gas prices. May 05, 2008 at 02:47 AM Anne: I don't know about the spunk part. This play acting demeans the working people of America, and most of them, I would guess, are grounded enough and intelligent enough to realize it. Her background and life experience is not working class, so she should not be claiming to be something she is not. The democratic thing to do is for all candidates to represent themselves truthfully, and I suppose in practice some latitude might be permitted. I am not dismissing Senator Clinton's talents, but she is not working class, and she cannot represent the working class authentically by claiming she is. May 05, 2008 at 03:26 AM Anne: I don't know about the spunk part. This play acting demeans the working people of America, and most of them, I would guess, are grounded enough and intelligent enough to realize it. Her background and life experience is not working class, so she should not be claiming to be something she is not. The democratic thing to do is for all candidates to represent themselves truthfully, and I suppose in practice some latitude might be permitted. I am not dismissing Senator Clinton's talents, but she is not working class, and she cannot represent the working class authentically by claiming she is. |
| delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/05/i-think-paul-kr.html Asked about the gas tax holiday and the universal opposition from economists, Hillary Clinton said, "Well, I'll tell you what, I'm not going to put my lot in with economists." Regular readers know I have my own moments of econo-skepticism, but I really wouldn't advise folks to throw in with political hacks instead.... he gas tax stuff shouldn't be thought of as economists versus everyone else. It's economists, environmentalists, energy experts, budget types, and anyone who has spent a couple minutes thinking through the implications of the policy. It's simply a bad idea, albeit one that polls well, so Clinton is running with it. The terrifying thing is that it is still overwhelmingly likely that HRC economic policy would be better than the economic policy of John McCain... I Think Paul Krugman's Support of Hillary Rodham Clinton Has Just Come to an End: Comments "It's simply a bad idea, albeit one that polls well," And yet Bryan Caplan is considered a bad guy. May 04, 2008 at 01:32 PM While it may be a bad idea, the hysterics of economists almost makes me want to support it. And the whole "voters are idiots" theme is getting rather tiresome. May 04, 2008 at 01:48 PM STR: Yes, the "voters are idiots" theme is tiresome. Unfortunately, any reasonable appraisal of American politics shows that it is true and undeniable. If there was ever any doubt, the 2004 reelection of Bush proved it. May 04, 2008 at 01:54 PM A pity that Barack Obama voted (three times) for the gas tax suspension before he voted against it. I find the cries of the Kleins and DeLongs that are infrastructure will fall apart to be bizarre at best, and knowingly disingenuous at worst. I must say that I am surprised that you have become a shill for ExxonMobil on this. Our infrastructure needs far more than three months of taxes, and yet, we've still managed to do nothing about it for years. If we can print the money for Iraq, and if we're in a recession, than I suspect a nice bit of Keynesian government spending towards infrastructure will work out very nicely. I just think to all the economists promising us the free ice cream of outsourcing, and the free ice cream of offshoring, and the free ice cream of free trade and our subsidization of other countries labor by chucking labor gains that our parents died for and I think that we would've done a lot better if the Brad Delongs that graduated in 1982 would've taken up physics or sci fi reading instead of econ. I think we should've listened to the low information unionists instead. i find it terrifying because it demonstrates that even a guy as smart as the prof is subject to the purism problem: yes, clinton has said a number of offensive things this primary season, but it takes a complete loss of judgement not to understand that however offensive are some of the things that clinton has said (and the same is true, to a lesser degree, of obama), she is ultimately likely to be a decent president if she comes through, whereas there is no question that mccain will be an apallingly bad president. holier-than-thousim cost humphrey the '68 election and set in motion 40 years of republican dominance: i was one of those holier than thou sorts, but at least the issue was complicity in vietnam, not a frickin' gas tax holiday. do we really need to go through this nonsense again when we finally have a chance to end the era that nixon's election began? May 04, 2008 at 02:26 PM To paraphrase an apostate ex-liberal over at Kevin Drum's how many "liberal" economists that dislike the gas tax plan are also against minimum wage and rent control. I am still curious as to why I am told that competition drives prices down and yet this reduction in cost will not result in price being driven down. The McCain proposal: because it's a short-term price cut: a gas tax "holiday" for the summer. That's not enough time to build additional refining capacity, and then the incentive ends. For the Clinton proposal: it's not clear what it is--either it's the McCain proposal, in which case it is evil, or it's a relabeling of the "gasoline tax" as a "refinery tax," in which case it is simply pointless. If we don't have a free market, and if the demand of gas is not elastic, then why do we permit this portion of the economy to falsely pretend it is free? If the demand of gas is not elastic, and the market is not free, I think we need more regulation. May 04, 2008 at 03:18 PM Tuco, thanks, I'm getting 78 bucks back! Admittedly, I commute quite a bit since the courts allowed my ex to move the kids out of state against the advice of experts like their own court psychologists, and the only job I can find is about 40 miles away. Ds have offered the country so much wisdom over the years. God bless the economists who have never seen a "control" in their life and fancy themselves as physicists. May 04, 2008 at 03:42 PM howard, Actually, there is an equivalent here to 1968. One of the clearer differences between Hillary and Obama is that she voted for Bush going into Iraq while he opposed it, and more recently, and seriously, she voted for a resolution for Bush to do what he wants in Iran, which Obama voted against, and more recently proposed some kind of pseudo-NATO for the whole Middle East, directed at Iran, and has threatened to "obliterate" the country if it attacks Israel with its nonexistent nuclear weapons that the NIE says it is not pursuing getting. May 04, 2008 at 03:44 PM So Obama agrees with Clinton on obliterating Iran, he just doesn't want to talk about it. com/story/2008/5/4/95338/95060 Obama Agrees With Policy, But Decries Clinton Language On Iran Attack On Israel - TalkLeft: The Politics Of Crime And here are four questions of ten that Earl Ofari Hutchinson would like Obama to answer. The first three touch on Iraq, Afghanistan, and Empty Suits. html 1 You stated that you were not in the Senate in October 2002 when President Bush rammed through Congress the resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq. But you also stated that "perhaps the reason I thought it was such a bad idea was I didn't have the benefit of US intelligence." This implies that you might have voted for the war if you had been in the Senate when the vote was taken. Why then do you condemn Hillary Clinton and other Senators who voted for the war authorization resolution when you admit the possibility that if you had been in the Senate you would have done the same? Your subcommittee held none and provided no alternatives to Bush policy that you condemn, why? Exelon has been identified as your fourth biggest campaign contributor. Why did you oppose the tougher regulatory proposal for Exelon? May 04, 2008 at 04:03 PM barkley, the difference is a little bigger than you suggest. were humphrey's only problem in 1968 that he supported the gulf of tonkin resolution, he wouldn't have had a problem in the first place. his problem was that he was the vice president of the united states, and therefore directly involved in 4 years of a failed expansion of the military effort in vietnam. May 04, 2008 at 04:06 PM Jerry: No new refineries will be built. The oil companies know that oil is becoming scare, and hence oil products will be expensive enough that future consumer demand will support less, not more refining capacity. The age of oil is inexorably moving towards its gradual decline. We can either prepare for that change, or suffer from our ignorance. s ource=RSSattr=Politics_4056059 April 29, 2008 Obama took a different view on the issue when he was an Illinois legislator, voting at least three times in favor of temporarily lifting the state's 5 percent sales tax on gasoline. The tax holiday was finally approved during a special session in June of 2000, when Illinois motorists were furious that gas prices had just topped $2 a gallon in Chicago. During one debate, he joked that he wanted signs on gas pumps in his district to say, "Senator Obama reduced your gasoline prices." May 04, 2008 at 04:33 PM bigTom, Brad, if we believe in Peak Oil (and I do), and we believe in Global Warming (and I do), perhaps we should be regulating the Gas market.... Ah, where is Jimmy Carter when we need him, and does he ... |