Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumbleLetter to the editor:
Like it or not, we need the oil
Sunday, Jan. 29, 2012 | 2:01 a.m.
This is regarding Thursday’s letter, “President has no grip on oil crisis,” and the writer’s claim that we “have to fill our gas tanks with expensive oil imported from the Middle East.”
In 2010 and 2011, the top six countries from which the United States imported oil were (in order): Canada, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Venezuela, Nigeria and Colombia. The amount from Canada was nearly twice that from Saudi Arabia, which is the only country on the list in the Middle East. So much for our dependence on “Middle East oil.”
I am concerned about the (over) emphasis on solar, wind and geothermal energy, which do virtually nothing at all to reduce our oil imports. Nearly two-thirds of the oil we consume each year is in the form of transportation (gasoline, aviation and diesel fuel). Unfortunately, those alternative energy sources don’t power 18-wheelers, which transport nearly all of our food and goods. Planes don’t fly on solar power, either. Like it or not, oil is a necessary part of life for the foreseeable future.
But anyone complaining about our dependence on “Middle East” oil should think again — less than 20 percent of our oil comes from that part of the globe. Hopefully, that percentage will shrink.
Discussion: 35 comments so far…
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.
Post a comment
Most Popular
- Viewed
- Discussed
- E-mailed
- Upset by new regulations, L.A. porn industry flirts with Nevada
- A secret of how Elizabeth Halseth won her state Senate seat — Democrats
- Grubb & Ellis files for bankruptcy, will be sold
- Sworn in as new DA, Wolfson promises to hit the ground running
- Judge: Settlements reached in 41 hepatitis C lawsuits
- Families of 2010 slaying victims sue businesses
- UNLV’s Chace Stanback won’t use knee issue as an excuse for his recent struggles
- Analysts weigh in on Wynn fight with board member
- Strip Scribbles: DJ Pauly D vs. Nikki Sixx (one takes the high road)
- PlayStation Vita’s rear pad a touchy subject for gamers
Blogs
High School Sports Scene
High School Basketball State Championship Picks
The Kats Report
Oscar Goodman goes Shecky as Mob Museum opening prompts a mob scene (2 Comments)
Elsewhere
MGM Resorts, Ameristar form marketing alliance to draw visitors
High School Sports Scene
High School Hoops Picks: Updated with Friday's regional finals (3 Comments)
The Kats Report
What a Whitney Houston residency in Las Vegas might have looked like (5 Comments)
Elsewhere
Caesars' unit extends term loan maturity
The Kats Report
Color from scene at Thomas & Mack: We have a wire job! Rebels win, and Louie Armstrong sings!
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
My car will not run on windmills and solar panels. My car run on gas. I can not buy a new car.
No drama anti-jobs Obama has said no to stopping the rising cost of over $4 gas at the pump.
On January 17, 2012 Obama at his jobs council announced a new "All In Approach" on energy policy which would emphasize North America energy sources.
With gas prices continuing to rise and Iran threatening war, on January 18, 2012, Obama announced that he rejected the Keystone XL pipeline because it was not in the National Interest.
This was a rejection of the new routing in Nebraska around the aquifer. The Obama State Dept. took three years to approve the original plan only to have the WH delay a formal decision until after the election. The State Dept. said that that XL could reapply for a permit that would take another three years with the obvious point that Obama still would not approve.
Obama said "considering ... the consequences of ...the project on Energy Security, the economy, ...I have determined .... The project would not serve the National Interest" to get oil from Canada versus the Middle East and Venezuela.
China Premier Wen Jiabao has been shop all the key US Middle East oil suppliers for months to increase their sources while Obama has been rejecting new sources here and abroad.
David, Thank you for an intelligent letter. I hope that similar conversation follows but I won't be holding my breath. The Middle East is an importanpt for its oil, but the other countries you listed are as crucial, if not more so to the world's oil needs.
Additionally, those Middle East countries are as dependent on the revenue from their oil as we are dependent on the purchase of it. 50 years ago they could afford to withhold production but that bird has flown.
The crude for the US refineries in the Gulf comes from Mexico and Venezuela. Both these sources are diminishing and will end. Canada's crude is the alternative when these sources dry up.
Fortunately, Obama's back up plan after he nixed Keystone XL is to transport the Canadian crude over Buffett's rails. A win-win business/political partnership made by both.
Whoever said free markets, capitalism and partisan politics doesn't work?
Carmine A. DiFazio
:::::::::::::::
This is an interesting letter but sadly already most all Americans with a high school education know its content and fact so its far from raising any points that need to be laundried out
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;
Another foolish and uninformed post by Carmine who cannot resist a stab at Obama and Buffett by refusing to accept proven facts as he makes up his own untruths ... I would like to see back up of what he says
:::::::::::::::
The Archie Bunker Party of Red Necks and Toothless Goons square dancing in their bib-overalls and sneakers will say absolutely anything against Obama
They are the Rachel Ray 30 minute meal solution to the obesity in America fans who can't stop eating at the trough of pig fat
:::::::::::::::::::::::
Ola - It must be appreciated for one thing, tho, and that is it keeps our mind in gear that Republicons are the perfecters of fabrication and Carmine is one of the leaders in it with his specialty of the ' back hand' - and I am not referring to a tennis shot.
"Another foolish and uninformed post by Carmine who cannot resist a stab at Obama and Buffett by refusing to accept proven facts as he makes up his own untruths ... I would like to see back up of what he says"
I've provided here before, especially for a couple of know it all posters, who aren't, like you. I told you. I can only say/post. You have to read and comprehend for yourself. I can't do that for you.
Carmine A. DiFazio
"Carmine is one of the leaders..."
You should have stopped there. You are right!
Carmine A. DiFazio
BTW, I like Obama. He's a nice guy. I have respect an admiration for Buffett. Shrewd business man.
we spend over a billion dollars a day on foreign oil. the only way we can decrease our addiction is to slow down consumption by using more fuel efficient vehicles and adding a $1 to the federal gas tax to pay down our national debt. yes. mr. america, that means you will have to make some sacrifices in your life style, whether it means you have to lose weight to fit in the smaller vehicles. or actually get off your fat ass and walk to the mail box at the curb or just maybe, stroll a block or two to get your morning newspaper.
Dennis - Amen! They do still make bicycles that get really high estimated mpg.
"adding a $1 to the federal gas tax"
This is exactly how a brain of a Democrat works.
Too bad they don't ran on thoughts like that.
Obama please listen to Dipstick.
Please run ads promoting a $1 gas tax increase.
Please....please...with sugar on top.
rockhead; he has it ready right after hes re-elected. start losing some weight now so you can be ready when the tax kicks in. wal mart has a ton of slim fast on wooden pallets.
Something is missing: such as the use of BIOdiesel, natural gas, and even recycled cooking oil. Those ARE currently being used and are effectively reducing our carbon footprint on the environment. And how do you power electric or integrated power vehicles? Some maybe using solar, wind, and geothermal technologies for when the vehicle gets recharged.
Somehow, the author of this article, David Adams, missed a few facts. The Commenters on the Las Vegas Sun, are more than happy to fill in the gaps!
They are a savy and informed bunch!
Blessings and Peace,
Star
dipstick=oil expert. $1 tax on gas is about as likely to pass as privatizing social security.
Why do those who rail about income inequality propose laws which increase income inequality?
Because they're dimbotards and are utterly incapable of connecting the dots.
Check out the book by Robert Baer, Sleeping With The Devil, How Washington Sold Our Sold for Saudi Crude, from 2003.
Increase gas tax by $1.00?
Spoken just like a true-blue liberal tax and spender who says they care about the middle class and the poor.
Which is exactly the two categories of people who would be affected the most (detrimently) by such a tax.
Like I've said b-4. No logic.
BTW...did ANOTHER "new energy" company that got $millions in "non-stimulus" $$$ go bankrupt last week? Thought I saw a spot somewhere. A car "new-battery" company I believe. Can any of the "Obama cronyism un-believers" or anyone confirm?
I wonder why we do not hear much about bio fuels...maybe not enough union workers involved in the process. We import about 40% of our oil from OPEC nations, the Persian Gulf accounts for 16% of our supply, so the letter is factual and I certainly agree there will not be any solar planes or trucks anytime soon, we need oil to run our economy. One could also ask again why President Obama would turn down the XL pipeline if we are getting most of our oil from Canada, and will be producing even more from ND which will need transport. This could be the part of him having "no grip" on the crisis.
Good morning Dennis: Please post where President Obama said he is going to raise the tax on gas by $1 please. I'd like to read it.
chuck; it was a flippant response to your fellow neo con rock. Obama didnt say it. hopefully, after his re-election he can tell everyone to kiss his heinie and do what needs to be done, like raising that gas tax and paying off our national debt.
Pay off the debt? Grrrrreat idea! Hey, let's do the Buffet Rule.
Oops...It won't work.
The liberal outfit Citizens for Tax Justice expects $50 billion in new revenue from the Buffett Rule in year one. Other estimates peg the total take even lower. Remember, the feds spend north of $10 billion each day.
On average, someone hauling in $1 million a year might have to fork over another $50,000 to Uncle Sam. That's a sizable tab for individuals but not a lot for the government, said David Logan, an economist at the Tax Foundation, a Washington, D.C. think tank.
"It's an insignificant revenue gain," he said. "I view it more as a political tool than anything else, because it doesn't raise enough revenue to dent the deficit or the debt."
P. Obama employ a political tool? you say? This Logan guy must be a real racist.
Erase deficit and cut debt?
Hint: cut spending.
Subsidies to oil companies? Good God, I am so sick of this ignorant statement.
Here...read and learn.
Contrary to what some in politics and the media have said, the oil and natural gas industry currently enjoys no unique tax credits or deductions. Since its inception, the US tax code has allowed corporate tax payers the ability to recover costs and to be taxed only on net income. These cost recovery mechanisms, also known in policy circles as "tax expenditures", should in no way be confused with "subsidies", i.e., direct government spending.
Here are a few of the items which are being incorrectly identified as "subsidies" inside the beltway:
Intangible Drilling Costs -- Companies which engage purely in energy exploration and discovery can recover their costs related to exploration at tax time at a rate of 100%. This lessens the burden on energy providers for the number of "dry holes" which may be found in the process. Integrated companies (i.e. "big oil") can recover these exploration costs at 70%. Not a subsidy.
Domestic Manufacturer's Deduction (Section 199) -- A deduction (not a credit) equal to 9% of income earned from manufacturing, producing, growing or extracting in the United States, is available to every single taxpayer who qualifies in the U.S. The oil and gas industry, and only the oil and gas industry, is limited to a 6% deduction.
Percentage Depletion -- The percentage depletion deduction is a cost recovery method that allows taxpayers to recover their lease investment in a mineral interest through a percentage of gross income from a well. This depletion method is not available to companies that produce oil as well as refine and market it (i.e. "Big Oil".) This is available to all extractive industries (gold, iron, clay, etc) in the US and is in no way unique to the oil and gas industry.
But, I guess if you've never run a business, you might have no idea that you can "write-off" legitimate operating costs.
The only ignorance regarding oil company subsidies is from TEA. There are at least 250 different subsidies and TEA uses oil industry propaganda to make uninformed readers think differently. Don't believe such obvious misinformation. See here for more:
http://green.autoblog.com/2012/01/06/why...
"If you think ending the ethanol subsidy puts all fuel sources on an equal footing, think again. While there has been a great deal of vitriol directed toward subsidies for alternative energy and plug-in vehicles, very little has been heard about the ways in which fossil fuels are given a huge advantage -- and there are many. In fact, compared to the help fossil fuels are given, tax breaks for alternative energy are decidedly modest.
A new report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development shows that fossil fuels are awarded at least 250 different subsidies. From tax breaks on exploration to development credits to tax abatements on infrastructure, the ticket for fossil fuel subsidies runs much, much higher than the oft-scrutinized funds directed at alternatives. The oil industry alone receives tens of billions each year in tax subsidies, and that's only a fraction of the total break they are given. The subsidies for fossil fuels stretch back more than a century, and are pervasive in programs at federal, state, and local levels.
More than just ethanol subsidies expired with the beginning of 2012. The whole program of grants to clean energy programs was allowed to end. Meanwhile, subsidies that help fossil fuels are increasing annually, with almost no comment.
The many different kinds of subsidies provided to fossil fuels, the different ways they are inserted into various federal and state codes, and the vast amount of lobbying carried out by these industries makes it very difficult for alternatives to get a fair shake. By ending funds for clean energy, fossil fuel supporters have kept the field as uneven as possible, protecting their own interests at a cost to both government and consumers."
Yes TEA, Let's cut federal spending. Now open your books and let's do a complete look at all the federal programs you benefit by, whether you recognize that you do or not, and cut those first. Work for you?
staralioflundnv - "Something is missing: such as the use of BIOdiesel, natural gas, and even recycled cooking oil."
Thank you very much. I was wondering how long it would take someone to realize we have alternative fuel sources. The problem is developing the technology so the cost of these fuels are cheaper. If we had started when Carter was president and subsidized the billions of dollars the way "Big Oil" was, it's possible we wouldn't need fossil fuels today. I opt for hydrogen as a fuel because it can be extracted from water and burning it produces no toxic waste.
What jokes.
I'll put my money on a non partisan foundation that has been around for decades advocating for taxpayers b-4 I listen to some tree-hugging "green-blog". Dude, you gotta come up with something better than that. Why doncha take a look at The Tax Foundation website. Ya might learn something.
M. Schaffer...same big tax and spender that posts on thehill. Dude I know your mind will never be changed. Too much liberal college courses for you. Or maybe ya are a liberal professor for all I know. Don't care about the fed. programs. Not gonna rely on SS or Medicare even. Know they will be bust when my retirement comes. Even if we do become a european socialist mimic country. Don't use ANY fed. programs now except for driving on highways (legit spending) or an occassional fed. park. (pay the fee)
Now state services, where the majority of spending and taxing should be, I use more of them. But still only what I have to. Save your preaching for the "occupy" ignorants.
I post as a hobby. When I don't have anything else to do. I get my info from reading a lot. From a lot of different sources. I hope to sway the thinking of fence-sitters who are open to facts and logic. Not nanny state, cradle-to-grave liberal/marxist/socialist "all hail the government" crybaby types such as....well, nuf said.
Facts are facts. A government subsidy is money directly FROM THE GOVERNMENT TO THE RECIPIENT. Like the bankrupt Solyndra. Oil companies do not get this. It is a lie perpetrated on the people by the likes of Harry Reid, the msm and you.
You carry on with all this blahblahblah stuff trying to confuse people and make yourself look the intellectual. I'll trust the professionals who have been looking at these issues for decades. Thank you very much.
The comments are really interesting, especially the so=called "Conservative" ones (I can tell because they refer to tree-hugging and liberals). Nixon (an R) and Carter (a D) fostered some of these R & D programs for alternative fuels because they had to deal with the Oil Embargo and its economic consequences. Reagan (an R) cancelled them. Clinton (D) revived some of them. W Bush (R) cancelled them. Had we held to the Nixon-Carter course, we might have had some results. As it was, we have wasted our money starting and stopping and getting nowhere. Which is why there is nothing like the smell of burning rubber in the morning, at noon, and at night -- it is the smell of our two-party system burning rubber(and money) and getting us nowhere.
Dave......
Electric powered cars and hydrogen powered cars
and trucks are the future.
There will be no need for dirty oil and gas.
We will not let these ignorant, cave-men
republicans hold us back anymore.
Republicans are stuck in stupid.
We should have been moving away from dirty oil,
years ago.
Green is the future.
And yes, the GOP really sux.
Cut and run from what? I just can't afford to hang on these strings all the time. Got things to do.
I'm an "all the above" guy. This country can walk and chew gum at the same time. But crony capitalism is another story and pandering to, yes, "tree huging extreme environmentalist nut jobs" as P. Obama did on XL, is too.
There is nothing the fed. can do that the private sector can't do wiser and more efficiently. So long as there is a market for it. 90% of the pundits said P. Obama caved to the enviro nuts. Even liberals. Although they didn't use the word "caved." BTW...some labor union leaders actually had the marbles to speak out against his obvoius pandering.
The day of solar, wind and geothermal will come. But not because the fed pushed it and threw $$$ at it. It will come because some guy or gal had a magnanimous breakthrough in their lab or garage that made it feasible and affordable. And not b-4.
"And yes, the GOP really sux." Jeeez...how intellectualy defficient can ya get? Who cares about the gop? As a party, they are near as dumb as dems. The idiot Nixon gave liberals base-line-budgeting. Reagan was the closest to a true conservative in my lifetime. Although he screwed up giving several tax increases to lying, back-stabbing liberals for budget cuts that never happened. They did it to Bush #1 too. BTW...that's why conservatives say "no more" to tax increases without 1st getting cuts.
Can you blame us?
Yes. I believe you can.
TEA(bagger),
Let's take a closer look than the "about" page of your go to website:
History:
"The Tax Foundation Story
The year was 1937, the heart of the Great Depression. During the previous decade, first under Herbert Hoover, then under Franklin Roosevelt, federal spending had climbed 170 percent; over the previous five years internal revenue collections had risen 198 percent.
Concerned about the effect such expansion might have on private sector growth, a small group of business executives gathered in New York City to discuss how they could monitor fiscal activities at all levels of government and convey the information to the general public. They decided to launch an organization which, through research and analysis, could inform and educate Americans using objective, reliable data on government finance."
I wonder about the background of some of these straightarrow folks? Hmmm..."Scott Drenkard is an analyst with Tax Foundation. Prior to joining the Tax Foundation, Scott was selected as a Charles G. Koch Summer Fellow by the Institute for Humane Studies and served as a Ronald Reagan Fellow in the Goldwater Institute's Center for Economic Prosperity. His work can be seen in their quarterly publication, For the Record. He holds a bachelor of science in economics from the University of Mary Washington, where he founded the Libertarian Readers Society and served as the Vice President of Omicron Delta Epsilon, the international economics honor society." Oh my, Charles Koch, Ronald Reagan, Goldwater Institute? Not very non partisan is it?
Poor TEA(bagger) has no idea about food inspection, water quality, power production, law enforcement, fuel inspections, smog control measures, or many other ways government makes sure TEA has a life at all. How does it (TEA) get through life being so neuronally challenged?
As to how those socialist democracies of Europe are doing? TEA could look at Sweden, Norway, Finland, Germany, France, The Netherlands, or many other nations with an eye to reality but that will never happen.
Some of you right wingers really need to read "Conservatives Without Conscious" written by John W. Dean, a neocon and conservative who watched his party have a complete meltdown. Yes he went to prison for Watergate which I suspect Watergate and it's aftermath altered his opinion of the Republican Party. William F. Buckley who I thought was a genius, in his day wrote about the John Birch Society and it's negative effect on the Republican Party. Apparently many of you wingers aren't aware of those within your party who fought against the negative behavior and thinking that is most destructive to your party. I tend to think you don't really care as long as you "win" at any cost.
Now, as to TEA(baggers) comment regarding the source for the report on over 250 subsidies to the fossil fuel industry? It isn't Autoblog Green but something other than the most shallow read and shallow understanding would have led an intelligent reader to a comment beyond a third grade comprehension level. For smart readers: http://www.oecd.org/document/15/0,3746,e...
" And in the United States, where support for energy producers was about USD 5 billion in 2009, the 2012 federal budget proposes eliminating a broad group of subsidies -- thereby increasing government revenues by more than USD 3.6 billion.
Work by the IEA, to be published in the World Energy Outlook 2011 on November 9, demonstrates that phasing out subsidies to fossil fuels, if well-executed, can generate important economic, energy security and environmental benefits.
Fortunately there are some signs of progress: nearly half of the countries identified by the IEA as artificially lowering the price of energy to below the full cost of supply have taken steps since the since the beginning of 2010 to rationalise energy prices. "While this is an encouraging start, much work remains to be done in order to realise the full extent of benefits. It is crucial that countries follow through on their commitments by implementing reforms that are well-designed and durable," said IEA Executive Director van der Hoeven.
Some of the strategies that governments are using to phase out fossil fuel subsidies as reviewed by the OECD and IEA analyses highlight keys to success:
Available and transparent data are essential to inform objective discussion.
Financial support for economic restructuring and assisting poor households can help to protect vulnerable groups.
Integrating reforms to fossil fuel subsidies into broader structural reforms can help build support for the reforms, particularly when the money saved is used to benefit the wider public.
>> More OECD and IEA work on fossil fuel subsidies can be found at: www.oecd.org/iea-oecd-ffss
>> To receive a copy of Inventory of Estimated Budgetary Support and Tax Expenditures For Fossil Fuels please e-mail news.contact@oecd.org."
More on the propaganda website "The Tax Foundation" from Sourcewatch:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?tit...
"It was founded at the University Club in New York. Founding members included:
Alfred P. Sloan, General Motors Corporation, chairman
Donaldson Brown, General Motors Corporation financial vice president
William S. Farish, Standard Oil Company, President
Lewis H. Brown, President of the Johns-Manville Corporation
Its first chairman was Lewis H. Brown."
..."Ties to the American Legislative Exchange Council
The Tax Foundation's President, Scott A. Hodge, participated in the 2011 American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) Annual Meeting, speaking on the "Corporate Taxes and International Competitiveness Panel" in front of the Tax and Fiscal Policy Task Force, and the Foundation's Vice President of Legal and State Projects, Joe Henchman, introduced the "Resolution Urging Congress to Cut the Federal Corporate Tax Rate" model policy at the same meeting.[2]
ALEC is not a lobby; it is not a front group. It is much more powerful than that. Through ALEC, behind closed doors, corporations hand state legislators the changes to the law they desire that directly benefit their bottom line. Along with legislators, corporations have membership in ALEC. Corporations sit on all nine ALEC task forces and vote with legislators to approve "model" bills. They have their own corporate governing board which meets jointly with the legislative board. (ALEC says that corporations do not vote on the board.) They fund almost all of ALEC's operations. Participating legislators, overwhelmingly conservative Republicans, then bring those proposals home and introduce them in statehouses across the land as their own brilliant ideas and important public policy innovations--without disclosing that corporations crafted and voted on the bills. ALEC boasts that it has over 1,000 of these bills introduced by legislative members every year, with one in every five of them enacted into law. ALEC describes itself as a "unique," "unparalleled" and "unmatched" organization. It might be right. It is as if a state legislature had been reconstituted, yet corporations had pushed the people out the door. Learn more at ALECexposed.org."
TEA.....
YES, we can blame you.
George Bush and the greedy republican party have
done more damage to our economy than any
president or party in our lifetime.
No amount of republican lies or spin will ever
change that fact.
Your party is the minority party for a reason.
Many reasons.
Heartless greed.
Anti-union.
Anti-education.
Anti-health care.
Anti-Social Security.
Anti-Medicare.
Anti-regulations.
And blind ignorance.
These are just a few of the reasons.
LIVE BETTER/WORK UNION.
Readers,
Let's take TEA's statement here: "The day of solar, wind and geothermal will come. But not because the fed pushed it and threw $$$ at it. It will come because some guy or gal had a magnanimous breakthrough in their lab or garage that made it feasible and affordable. And not b-4." and make a small change: "The day of MICROCHIPS will come. But not because the fed pushed it and threw $$$ at it. It will come because some guy or gal had a magnanimous breakthrough in their lab or garage that made it feasible and affordable. And not b-4." Can anyone now see how utterly uninformed such an argument is? Think of NASA pushing for solid state miniaturized electronics. Now, how did the price of solar panels drop so drastically in the last couple of years again?
Now let's dissect this TEA statement: "There is nothing the fed. can do that the private sector can't do wiser and more efficiently. So long as there is a market for it." There is a market for retirees. The private sector typically charges well over 10% overhead to handle money for the retired. Social Security runs under 1%. This lack of efficiency in the private market occurs because they are there to maximize profits for themselves first and everything else second. So only in that narrow sense can the private market be called efficient.
Next let's look at this uninformed comment by TEA:
"Not gonna rely on SS or Medicare even. Know they will be bust when my retirement comes." As it currently stands SS will be paying 100% into the 2030's and without small adjustments ~75% after that time. The exact date changes based on how the economy is doing putting people back into jobs where they are paying into SS. If conservatives have their way SS will be dismantled so if people like TEA continue to vote against their own interest his/her/it's prediction will come true.
Medicare is paying less and actually helping to keep the rate of rise in health care costs down. I am surprised that conservatives are looking to dismantle a program busy stuffing cash into the pockets of for profit health care providers but no one said they were smart.
Two quick comments about TEA's uninformed statement about the Solyndra bankruptcy:
The success in dropping those solar panel prices is why a shakeout is occurring and according to Bloomberg more money is being spent worldwide on renewable energy than fossil fuels. Readers should therefore ignore the blather of TEA as much as the conservative propaganda uninformed drivel it is based on.
With natural gas so cheap and abundant wasting taxpayer dollars on expensive, intermittent, low power density, unreliable sources such as wind and solar is just plain stupid.
Dude, you are beyond help. I have never, ever in my life seen a guy who is so prepared to worship at the alter of government. All your blather about the tax foundation. Jeepers moses, the info they derive their reports from comes from your glorious agencies. IRS, CBO, Treasury and others.
I love your comment about all the "well known agencies" that keep our lives safer and cleaner. Yes they serve a purpose. But when they (as they have) become so bloated and over-reaching so as to make it so dang hard to make a buck that companies seek better busines environments. Who can blame them?
Here's a great one.
EPA now to regulate spilled milk -- really
http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/co...
I hear they reversed this one recently. (finally saw the utter stupidity) But there are still 100's if not 1000's more like it that haven't. Especially since your (I assume) glorious leader, P. Obama took office.
You go ahead. Love it. Live it. Worship it.
I will fight it to my dying breath. Common sense logic. There is no substitute.
BTW...aren't SS and Medicare carrying unfunded mandates of around 80 to 100 TRILLION dollars. Like to know where that kind of money is gonna come from.
It's so funny. Medicare, started in 1965 I believe. Projected to cost $12 billion/yr. in 1990. Ended up costing $107 billion. (who did that math?) Now costs what? $450 billion/yr.
I don't profess to be Mr. Know It All. But you sure do. There's an old saying.
"Nobody likes a Know It All"
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH !!!
Ignoring the blather of TEA as it is mostly made up out of whole cloth. Let's add this:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/3...
In addition this TEA know nothing has fallen for a myth regarding EPA:
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/1...
TEA is REALLY gullible:
http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/02/11/...
But the back story behind the milk rule is more complicated, dating back to the implementation of Clean Water Act mandates for spill-response planning in the 1970s and flaring up under the George W. Bush administration's EPA, according to dairy industry officials. While milk producers are not declaring victory until EPA issues a final exemption for their businesses, the agency has fully excused dairies from the requirement to plan for spills on their property.
The elevation of the spilled milk rule "to a kind of cause, where people rally around what they might consider a nonsensical regulation," came as a surprise to the National Milk Producers Federation's (NMPF) vice president of regulatory affairs, Jamie Jonker, he said in an interview. Yet quieting the outcry would be simple for EPA, Jonker added: "Ultimately, a timely conclusion of the bulk milk exemption really would take everything that's happened in the media and in Congress and put it to final rest."
This guy is justifying "spilled milk regulations."
Who-da-thunk?
Gotta go to work. It's been fun makin' you look the "know-it-all-elitist."
Will look forward to next time. It's a beautiful day outside. Try not to worry so much. See ya.
Pres "O" in is state of the union said he got rid of that spilled milk thing, can we put that to rest and let the fight continue? Or did pres "O" lie?
TEA gets an F for being completely unable to understand the context of what happened to his myth of a rule on milk. Try again and apologize to readers for wasting their time.
Love the political back and forth but why is it we cannot start to tap our own untapped supplies of oil? Has anyone noticed many of the Canadian oil fields are pretty close to the U.S. border? Hmmm, the oil is there and many cities in northern states are becoming, yes, becoming boom towns. Heaven forbid we extract our own resources and create jobs...
Bob Realist, Why didn't you check the EIA website before posting and inserting your foot in your mouth?
http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail....
Mark, I guess I am supposed to trust a .gov website when I have seen first hand the immense growth of the oil fields here in America? I have lost several great neighbors to the oil fields in Montana, Wyoming not to mention North and South Dakota. The western slope of Colorado has been booming in regards to oil production for many years but it is kept very quiet. The work is hard but pays in the long run if a person is willing to put in at least twelve months to receive their "Percentage Dividend" from profits.
whywhywhy...How dare you, Bob. Your use of such despicable words on thesun blogs. I never want to hear such words as "percentage dividends and profits" again.
Try to have some "empathy" for those you offend.
(won't mention any names)