• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.

Fuel

New posts

John R

needs to get out more
It seems that the republicans want us all to get a check for, ready for this?, $100 for gas price relief. nice gesture, but in reality, a joke. they also want to start drilling in ANWR. they've been down this road before, and have been turned down numerous times. now is not the time to start drilling in our wildilfe reserve. there is no 'safe' drilling as has been claimed by some. see http://www.sowal.com/bb/showthread.php?t=4316&highlight=spill

the president, as the leader(?) of the most powerful nation on the planet should be championing the development of alternative fuels, not lining the pockets of big oil, auto, and his demographic peers.

i urge you to write the president president@whitehouse.gov and your elected officials, to let them know how you feel on this issue, however you feel.

do the right thing.


http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/27/gas.rebate/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Every American taxpayer would get a $100 rebate check to offset the pain of higher pump prices for gasoline, under an amendment Senate Republicans hope to bring to a vote Thursday.

However, the GOP energy package may face tough sledding because it also includes a controversial proposal to open part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to oil exploration, which most Democrats and some moderate Republicans oppose.

Democrats are also expected to offer their own competing proposal, as members of both parties jockey for political position on the gas price issue.

The energy package, sponsored by Sens. Charles Grassley of Iowa, Ted Stevens of Alaska, Pete Domenici of New Mexico and Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, will be offered as an amendment to an emergency spending measure now before the Senate funding the Iraq war and hurricane relief, according to a senior GOP leadership aide.

Under Senate rules, either the GOP amendment or the Democratic alternative would probably need 60 votes to pass, which is considered unlikely. However, the amendments would give senators a change to cast votes on measures designed to help constituents being hit by high gas prices.

As outlined by the senior GOP leadership aide, the energy package would give taxpayers a $100 rebate, repeal tax incentives for oil companies and allow the Federal Trade Commission to prosecute retailers unlawfully inflating the price of gasoline.

The measure would also give the Transportation Department authority to issue fuel efficiency standards for passenger vehicles, expand tax incentives for the use of hybrid vehicles and push for more research into alternative fuels and expansion of existing oil refineries.

The GOP senators are also calling on the Bush administration to suspend deposits into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve for six months to increase the nation's oil supply. President Bush announced Tuesday that he would halt new deposits into the reserve until after the summer driving season.

On the other side of the aisle, Democrats on Wednesday called for a new energy bill and federal legislation to punish price gougers.

"There's no reason why we can't put forth a real energy policy that addresses the needs of this nation," said Rep. Bart Stupak, a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, "from gouging to market manipulation to biofuels. We can do it."

And leaders of the Senate Finance Committee on Wednesday asked the Internal Revenue Service to let them examine the tax returns of the nation's 15 largest oil and gas companies, as part of a "comprehensive review" of oil industry profits.

"I want to make sure the oil companies aren't taking a speed pass by the tax man," said Grassley, the committee's chairman, in a written statement
 
$100??


I wonder how they came up with this figure.

I would send the check back, "thanks but no thanks"
 
Woo-hoo! $100. I think I will buy a new pair of pants and underwear because I just crapped mine with all the excitement, or is that excrement? Anyway, I notice the president has an interesting spelling for his email, or was that a typo? I am not sure if W spells president, "presidnet." :idontno:

Thanks for posting John R, but this post did not help my keep my blood pressure in check.

BTW, did you know that 43 million votes were called in for American Idol two nights ago? Skeery! What I really want to say is that the TaxMan receives more money from taxes on the sale of gasoline that the oil companies. If the gov't really wanted to do something to save us consumers money (while avoiding the thought of alternative fuels) they should cut the taxes on gasoline. It is no wonder that it is difficult for the gov't to point fingers at Big Oil when Gov't doesn't even touch the stuff yet makes more money than the "gaugers."
 
5$ a gallon and higher gasoline is exactly what the democrats wanted and finally may get. Fossil fuel emmissions are the devil!

What is everyone complaining about?

The higher the price of oil the more alternative sources will be viable and the U.S. will become more energy independent. Right?
 
Smiling JOe said:
Woo-hoo! $100. I think I will buy a new pair of pants and underwear because I just crapped mine with all the excitement, or is that excrement? Anyway, I notice the president has an interesting spelling for his email, or was that a typo? I am not sure if W spells president, "presidnet." :idontno:

fixed, thanks.
 
beachkids said:
5$ a gallon and higher gasoline is exactly what the democrats wanted and finally may get. Fossil fuel emmissions are the devil!

What is everyone complaining about?

The higher the price of oil the more alternative sources will be viable and the U.S. will become more energy independent. Right?
I will tell you what I am complaining about. (by the way, I am neither democrat nor republican) In a nutshell, I am complaining about the crooked way of politics in this country and the @ssbackward ways of what we call progress.
 
The tax on gasoline goes toward the upkeep and the building of new roads, at least that is what they tell us in Kentucky.:scratch: BTW, how do you feel about nuclear power? :idontno:
 
dbuck said:
The tax on gasoline goes toward the upkeep and the building of new roads, at least that is what they tell us in Kentucky.:scratch: BTW, how do you feel about nuclear power? :idontno:
I too, am told that the taxes go toward roads, but let me pose a question. Is the impact on the roads of a smaller, lightweight hybrid vehicle larger or greater than the impact of a 6,000+ lb vehicle which burns much more fuel and often allows the owner to get a substantial up-front deduction on taxes?

If we were rewarded with tax breaks as large for buying energy efficient vehicles as we currently give for buying the gas guzzling 6,000+lb vehicle, we would burn less gas, have less impact on the roads, thereby reducing the need to keep the gas taxes as high, nor would the demand on oil be as great, so prices of gasoline may decrease.

My point is that the gov't rewards us for purchasing the heavy vehicles, and we in turn have to purchase more gas to keep them going. The gov't will need the money to pay the road contractors to repair or replace the roads more often because the 6,000 lb vehicle damages the roads much more than the 3,000 lb vehicle. In summary, the concept of rewarding us for buying the larger vehicles is out of whack, but I guess that is what keeps the gov't rolling.
 
dbuck said:
The tax on gasoline goes toward the upkeep and the building of new roads, at least that is what they tell us in Kentucky.:scratch: BTW, how do you feel about nuclear power? :idontno:
Nuclear powered autos? I am not sure that I want to be too close to nuclear power plants, no matter how big or small.
 
Try this one on for size:
ex.jpg

3-MONTH PROFIT: $8,400,000,000.00
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter












                               
Back
Top