Gas Prices

[sniper7]

I don't see why not? Less weight in the car = better mileage. Are we the only ones that care about the environment?

actually the clothing would make too much drag. freshly shaven naked females are the true answer. I'll take the drag and extra weight over having the dudes in the same condition.

[ChunkyMonkey]

I didn't say the Chinese were taking over the market or stealing our jobs. But the majority of the food is brought in from foreign sources. Only 10% of the food supply is us based.

It was an analogy. The majority of everything is bought outside US but through US contractors - Most of the profit stays in US contractors hand.

Do you seriously believe all that money we are spending is ending up back in our economy? Because if you do, you are sadly mistaken. Those .pdfs break it down.

Yes, there has been numerous studies and congressional inquiries into spending. There are few charges against corruptions, but most contracts are granted to US contractors who makes 1000% mark up for all we know. At the end, the US contractors are the ones who walk away with most profit - we are after all the big fat capitalist.

http://usdebtclock.org/

defense/war is the 3rd highest contributor. You want to talk about cutting spending, cut spending in the top 5 sectors to see any noticable increases. We can't just cut funding from schools or social infrastructure (roads, rails, ect) and expect to see any noticable reductions in the debt. Anyone with half a brain will realize the only way to do it is 1) cut spending (in the top 5 categories creating debt) 2) stop giving tax cuts to rich people (because a lot of our 'at risk' programs can be saved from that money, and its not like the rich need to be richer) 3) wait a few years 4) problem solved. Its high school level economics...

The Federal govt is mandated with 2 things in this country - 1st. Defense and 2nd Diplomacy. The rest is added by entitlement greed through out the last hundred years. In any case, I still believe Flat tax would be fair - just because I work smarter than you, it doesnt mean I have to pay for your food stamp.

BTW a lot of our gas has risen in price because we had to stop subsidizing it to help control the debt. Do your homework, fox news won't report it (especially since fox news higher ups are likely going to be indited for telling employees to purposely distort the truth and lie) but the BBC and CNN have reported on us cutting gas subsidies as part of controlling debt.

Like anything else, there is no need to subsidize in true free market. What you called subsidy is actually tax break and tax credit for certain segment of the market. It is extremely naive to believe that gas price has risen dramatically due to subsidy cut. You would have to believe that we were subsidizing 20% of gas price? Simple math - the raise of gas price of 20% = 20% subsidy cut right? 21 million barrel a day being consumed in The US which equals to roughly $400 million of subsidy/day or 12 billion of subsidy a month or $144 billion of fuel subsidy a year eh?

I dont watch fox news let alone CNN or BBC. Do you own research before you spewing dumb stuffs like this and basing it on CNN or BBC.

[BigMat]

I'll throw my hat in on this one, more to the point, President Roosevelts, who I agree with on a lot.

Sorry for the bulk, but I felt such a great man didn't deserve to be demoted to...internet-ees. but I did highlight!

"Unfortunately, those dealing with the subject have tended to divide into two camps, each as unwise as the other. One camp has fixed its eyes only on the need of prosperity, loudly announcing that our attention must be confined to securing it in bulk, and that the division must be left to take care of itself. This is merely the plan, already tested and found wanting, of giving prosperity to the big men on top, and trusting to their mercy to let something leak through to the mass of their countrymen below–which, in effect, means that there shall be no attempt to regulate the ferocious scramble in which greed and cunning reap the largest rewards. The other set has fixed its eyes purely on the injustices of distribution, omitting all consideration of the need of having something to distribute, and advocates action which, it is true, would abolish most of the inequalities of the distribution of prosperity, but only by the unfortunately simple process of abolishing the prosperity itself. This means merely that conditions are to be evened, not up, but down, so that all shall stand on a common level, where nobody has any prosperity at all. The task of the wise radical must be to refuse to be misled by either set of false advisers; he must both favor and promote the agencies that make for prosperity, and at the same time see to it that these agencies are so used as to be primarily of service to the average man."
-1912

"We grudge no man a fortune in civil life if it is honorably obtained and well used. It is not even enough that it should have been gained without doing damage to the community. We should permit it to be gained only so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community … The really big fortune, the swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size, acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is possessed by men of relatively small means. Therefore, I believe in a graduated income tax on big fortunes, and … a graduated inheritance tax on big fortunes, properly safeguarded against evasion, and increasing rapidly in amount with the size of the estate."
-1910




For what little it is worth, I agree with both of you, sort of. I think "trickle-down" is a worthless theory, I submit the past 10 years as evidence, Bush tax cuts in place for a while now. Results- rich, rich as ever...poor, still poor, maybe even poorer. No need to find numbers, this is common knowledge, if not, very easy to find. The empirical evidence just doesn't match up. Beyond that, TR has my back.

As to hand out to the lazy-
I say lazy on purpose, I worked on an ambulance and drove lazy people around for most of my job. I have seen a LOT of lazy people. I think we could even add a 3 letter organization to the .gov for this one. hear me out. You want welfare, cool, you show up at the welfare office and you do a job (you can handle) for 8 hours, build a trail, fix a road, clean a park, whatever, then and only then, you get a check. You can't do that and you need disability, cool, you just got a transcription/envelope packing/filing job at home. You are in lecherous turd in prison, guess what you are a farmer now! Would these programs be inefficient, probably, but at least we get something and the desire to live on welfare would dry right up.

As to the hand outs to illegals-
secure the border, create a good work visa program. this is the only fix worth half a damn and until this is done all the other fixes are like trying to pump a bilge without bothering to patch the giant hole in the boat. Someday, you're gonna sink. Everything else is a waste of the paper its written on.


-for the OP, I ride a bike a lot, tons of trails in Denver and frankly, I prefer it. Worth note its 17.7 miles, each way, and I still prefer it. Traffic sucks and there is nothing like cruising on a nice bike at good speed on an empty trail listening to some really good music. My wife takes a scooter most days, 113 mpg and her work is 4 miles away, its a cool $5 a month gas bill for her.

[MuzzleFlash]

Prices are rising, and all the while we will continue to pay through the teeth for it. The oil companies know this. We'll complain about it, but won't be able to actually do anything about it. Meanwhile they're raking in record-breaking profits. IMO, it has little to do with supply/demand. I think if every single American stayed home just ONE DAY and didn't drive or fill up at the gas station, the oil companies would feel it in their balance sheets.

Oil company profits average 4% of share price. So just who is getting rich off of us again? "Big oil" is less profitable than other "greedy corporations" like Taco Bell.

Speaking of that little annoying dog, here's a comparison of the performance of big, bad,, greedy, evil, price gouging, Alaska polluting, Exxon Mobile against YUM Brands, owner of said burrito establishment:

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=Y...urce=undefined

I guess the inevitable conclusion is that the Chihuahua is really bonin' the little guy.

If an oil company's profitability goes from 1.5% of market cap to 3.0% then Keith Oberman and Obama can rail on how oil company profits are "up 100% while the middle class suffers". WTF? You could make better coin with your money in a freaking market index fund.

Oil companies are boogey men for useful idiots to have someone to blame other than politicians. The real culprit is the US congress for taking so much of our reserves off limits while we grow increasingly dependent on the loons in the middle east. Just try to get a nuclear power plant or a new refinery built in today's political climate.

[Marlin]

^This^

Oh, and both Roosevelts were socialists, Teddy just hid it a bit better.

[William]

This!!!!! I agree 100%, that and having hot women wear less clothes

What we need is less taxes, less laws, less government, less handouts, less federal and state buildings, less ATF, CIA, DEA, and any other 3 letter organizations.

Upping the tax on the rich only causes them to invest less in ventures that contribute to the creation of new jobs.

[BigMat]

Upping the tax on the rich only causes them to invest less in ventures that contribute to the creation of new jobs.

I understand the theory, as its very simple, however, I have yet to find a single example of this working on a Macro scale. Things just don't work this way in the real world. Educate me if you have something, I just can't find the realities of it. Please don't just say "your boss is rich." This is evidence of capitalism, not trickle down theory.

[Irving]

How about the very existence of the Swiss Bank Account? The rich started putting their money off shore very shortly after the government decided to start raising taxes on them. Money sitting in an off shore account sure doesn't do much here.

Not that I wouldn't like an off shore account myself.

[ChunkyMonkey]

I understand the theory, as its very simple, however, I have yet to find a single example of this working on a Macro scale. Things just don't work this way in the real world. Educate me if you have something, I just can't find the realities of it. Please don't just say "your boss is rich." This is evidence of capitalism, not trickle down theory.

Wow Matt, you gotta have 401k or stock at some point in your life. If not, try to sneak in to any stock holder meetings - any of them. Most of American giants are moving their production base off shore not only due to expensive worker comp. locally but mainly due to corporate tax and bloated bureaucrazy. To name a few on top of my head, GM, FORD, CHRYSLER have their production line outside the US so they can write off most of their cost w/ ease. Recently billionaire Steve Wynn moved his HQ to Macau for this reason - at least not officially.

Look up "Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act" when you have a chance and the history behind it.

Another Fact... whenever there is a tax increase, the govt revenue does not increase accordingly. There is a point when many of us will say fuck it, its not worth it. 3 years ago, I closed down my other business and had to let go three employees because between the market and tax, I would make very minimal profit. Trickle down works, although not as good as the theory, but the reverse of it is much worse!

[mx'r]

In my small construcion world, when I show a fairly large profit at the end of the year from doing well, I "invest" into new tools and equipment to have a "ballance" for the profits. Been working for me. Not sure if my purchases have affected the economy at all, but I've spent 1.2 in the last two years with local equipment dealers. When the tax man isnt knocking, I dont spend a dime. Guess I'm bass ackwards.