We already have excellent Healthcare centers. The Government could provide the EXACT SAME service as a private Insurance Company for PENNIES on the dollar compared to said Private Insurance company.
I don't mean to pick on you today, but geez. The government CAN'T EVEN PAVE THE ROADS PROPERLY. WHAT MAKES you THINK they CAN provide YOU health CARE? Show me one successful government program that private industry can't do better....(outside of the military)
I'm so sick of hearing this.
People talk about the Government like it's some big creature that is just barely tamed.
The Government is made up of people, people who, at the root of it, WE ELECT.
If you are saying that YOUR elected Representative isn't doing their job, then you need not to vote for them next time. I don't.
IF the Government can't do things better than Private Industry, then it is because YOU aren't doing your job as a voter.
None of these people want to represent the average person. They just want the vote.
So they all become pandering cowards who will say whatever to whoever.
The job of leadership is pretty awful, and the compensation is not that great based on what you have to deal with to get there. Now ask yourselves, "So what ulterior motives do politicians have to spend that much time and energy for such a crappy job?"
Because there do exist those who think they can do it better and make a difference.
I know how naive that sounds, but I also believe it to be true. I have too, else why continue at all?
If people had guaranteed insurance, provided by the state, they would go to doctors and PREVENT problems, instead of just treating them. Then why is it that you are twice as likely to die from prostrate cancer in Germany? Why are women in Germany more likely to die from breast cancer? They have "universal" coverage.
Because they have HMO quality Universal Coverage.
We already have excellent Healthcare centers. The Government could provide the EXACT SAME service as a private Insurance Company for PENNIES on the dollar compared to said Private Insurance company.
If you take profit motive out of it, the Government, by its sheer size as a insurer, could cut out the duplicate paper costs and put more money toward PURE medical treatment.
So, your claim to maturity and attention to detail is that you work at a low paying job and live with mommy and daddy? Back up, folks, and let the expert speak so that he may enlighten us with his views on wealth redistribution!
Actually, I work for my Father (my parents are divorced). He owns a Publishing company, who itself owns seven Newspapers.
Trust me when I say I do pretty well for myself.
However, I still do not WASTE money on garbage, as a lot of people who make a lot less do.
You can make fun of the fact that I live at home all you want, it doesn't change the fact that I pocket more cash than most people I know who make more than I do.
I simply didn't see the need to tie myself up with a house/apartment rent BILL when I didn't have too.
It has been my experience that the people who bitch most about bills are the ones who INCUR the most Bills.
You cut off luxuries (yes, they are luxuries, not necessities) of Cable/Satellite, DSL/Cable and then come talk to me about how much of a burden taxes are.
That might be the case in larger cities, but in smaller towns (like where there is ONE gas station) the price wouldn't change a bit.
Keeping in mind that these small towns are the ones hurting the most.
Again, it would hurt a whole lot more than help.
As for increasing Global Supply, I don't think increasing the Global Supply by 200,000 Barrels is going to do a whole hell of a lot when the World now uses over 80,000,000 MILLION barrels (and will use even more a decade from now when this 200,000 hits the market).
It does not hurt successful, fortunate people such as yourself ONE BIT to help those less fortunate than yourself.
Did you ever think that maybe if it wasn't forcibly taken from him that he WOULD wind up helping the less fortunate anyway? Oh wait - let me guess - you think that he is being 'selfish'. The poor would be better served anyways without those high-paid government employees being middle-men.
I'm simply judging by human nature.
People, ON THE AVERAGE (I'm not talking about you or him, I'm talking about the law of AVERAGES) people don't always do what is in their best interest, LIKE SAVE FOR THE FUTURE.
And, make no mistake, you and I WILL be paying for them one way or the other.
This is just like the arguments AGAINST a National Healthcare System.
We already have a National Healthcare System, people are just too stupid (like GWB) to realize it, it's called the Emergency Room.
If people had guaranteed insurance, provided by the state, they would go to doctors and PREVENT problems, instead of just treating them.
A National Healthcare system would most likely LOWER the costs WE now incur through programs such as Medicare and Medicaid.
We'll all in it together for the good (being able to buy cheap oil from Saudia Arabia, which costs less than $5 to pull from the ground), and the bad (being able to pull oil from Saudia Arabia for less than $5 but charge like you're pulling it from the states, which averages $10 - 20$ per barrel).
The gas tax holiday was a complete bonehead move. I agree with you. It would do nothing, IIRC fed tax on gasoline is 18 cents, gas fluctuates [around here] seemingly that much from day to day besides it would increase demand and therefore prices.
Speculators have driven the price up some, but not nearly as much as people blame on them. Besides, speculation has its purpose. Speculation is why you can lock in a price for heating oil NOW, and KNOW FOR CERTAINTY what you will be paying this winter.
Just as speculation has played a part in driving oil up to record levels, look at its affect in driving it down. The mere proposition of increased drilling would decrease oil futures before any crude is refined and supplied to the pipeline.
As long as a SINGLE barrel of oil comes from outside the United States, ALL OIL PRODUCED IN THE UNITED STATES WILL COST PRETTY MUCH THE SAME regardless of the production costs.
Yes, it is called a market. Russia increasing supply would also decrease the price for us here. The point is that by us increasing our domestic production it will drive down the price.
But I still fail to even grasp what Obama's plan is? All I've heard is that he wants alternative energy, but no nuclear, no drilling and to inflate my tires. The problem is that we cannot get wind power or solar online for many years as well. We need renewable and non-polluting sources like geothermal and solar but we still need oil and natural gas, those are not going away anytime soon.
We're both talking about adding more energy to the system. That much we also both agree on. Also, for the record, I also support Nuclear Energy and I've heard Obama say NOTHING against Nuclear Energy, his home state of Illinois has the most Nuclear Power Plants of any in the country as a matter of fact.
However, McCain wants to add more Oil, which, no matter how much is added, will one day run out.
Obama wants to add more Wind and Solar, WHICH WILL NEVER run out.
We're talking about spending relatively the same amount over the same period of time (several Billion over a Decade or so), doesn't it make more sense to spend it on something that will never run out?
Getting to Social Security, you tell me ONE THING wrong with making sure people have something when they retire.
So let's say, for the sake of argument, that forced saving is a good thing for everyone.
Social security is not saving anything, it's a forced money redistribution scheme. The "investment" is in US Treasury bonds, which means that the government spent it.
If you loan the US government money, and the US government spends it, it's still reasonable to say that you have saved it. But if you loan yourself money, and then spend it, then you have certainly not saved it. And that's exactly what Social Security is all about.
If people had individual accounts (again, we're still assuming forced contributions), and those individual accounts could only be invested in US Treasury bonds, then at least it would be clear how much of a problem the system has. But we have no idea, because there's no accounting for the money.
Oh, and "fingernail slice"?? It's about 15% of your income. If you believe the ~7% number, you need to read an economics book.
15% IS a fingernail slice, compared to the rest of the s__t in most people's budget (Cable, Junk Food, etc.)
In fact, if the ENTIRE COUNTRY did these LITTLE things, we could WITHOUT A DOUBT save the same amount of Oil McCain's 'Day Dream' of offshore drilling MIGHT produce 10 YEARS from now.
Here's another 'one thing'. Social security is a government run way of forcing people to build a nest egg for their future. Instead of just letting people handle that on their own through their own investments and savings- we let the government handle it so that 'no one gets left behind'. I have no problem with that... but, I want the option to opt out. Since I have a good knowledge of finance and investing, and I'm smart enough to live on LESS than my paycheque and invest the rest, I should be allowed to opt out and take care of my own retirement investing. Because we all know how well the government is managing the system and our money.
This is a classic case of "It just takes a few to ruin it for the rest"
You probably are capable of taking care of yourself. However, there are a lot of stupid people who would opt-out simply to have more piss-off money now, and would need STILL need help later when they can't work.
It is a simple fact of life that we are only as strong as out weakest link, and social security makes sure the weak links of our society are taken care of.
Getting to Social Security, you tell me ONE THING wrong with making sure people have something when they retire.
I'll worry about myself - I can invest my money better than the government can - but why should I help you retire?
I'm so sick of these 20 YEAR OLDS bitching because they are asked to contribute a fingernail slice of their income to help those who came before them.
Well, I was 20 well over 10 years ago and let me tell you - once you add ss with medicare, you're at 15.3%. You consider that to be a fingernail slice? You think it should be 20%? 25%? I for one would gladly give up every penny i've put in just to be able to get out.
That is as selfish an snobbish as those (not that I'm accusing you of this, BTW) who scream they'd go to Canada before being Drafted.
If we ever have to draft that just means it isn't worth fighting for - look at WWII - many people gladly joined because it was a cause worth fighting for.
NO ONE has any sense of DUTY or RESPONSIBILITY now days.
Damn right - if they were responsible we wouldn't need Social Security!
We also had conscription during WWII, in case you have forgotten.
EVERY major War the United States has ever fought has had conscription because we intended to WIN.
As for responsibility, what about the person who works THEIR ENTIRE LIFE at a menial job JUST SO they won't need Welfare. They work their asses off to make ends meet and take care of their families. In all this, however, they only manage to break even.
Is it TOO MUCH for someone such as yourself, who seems to have done alright for themselves, to give JUST A LITTLE (nothing you wouldn't have pissed away anyway on junk)?
You can throw out all the percentages you want, the actual DOLLAR AMOUNT is nothing you wouldn't have spent anyway, on something FAR LESS worthy.
"Obama just finished paying off his school loans a couple of years ago, "
I've heard that before, and I also heard Michelle Obama talk about how she is afraid of losing touch with her roots (I believe she actually said "common people", but I could be wrong)it wasn't so long ago that she was worrying about paying bills, etc.
Then I heard a story on NPR about her career, and how a few years ago her salary jumped from just over $100k to over $300k, and "almost 200% increase".
And I ask myself, "Trouble paying school loans, and paying bills, on over $100k (for 1 salary alone)? $300k? I call bullshit"
Obama plays the populist, but he is not, nor has he ever been, one of the people he is playing to.
I (nor he) EVER said he had TROUBLE paying school loans, he simply stated he NEEDED loans to get through school and HE PAID THEM OFF himself.
He didn't default and make it harder for someone else, nor did he make you and I pay for them.
Obama is a hell of a lot closer to the average person than John McCain. It isn't the John McCain is a bad person (I don't doubt for a minute his bravery and responsibility), it's just he doesn't understand what the average person is worried about.
And without that understanding, how can you truly hope to represent the average person?
Such as T. Boone Pickens plan which ould eventually replace 38% of current oil consumption with Natural Gas.
Except the ban on offshore drilling includes natural gas.
If you had read his plan you would see he wants to REPLACE Natural Gas fired power plants with WIND TURBINES placed in the center parts of the United States (where we have more wind than Saudi Arabia has oil).
That would FREE UP more than enough Natural Gas to meet his goals.
How is Obama replacing 5 million barrels a day tomorrow? Tuneups and inflating tires? McCain has made it pretty clear he is for all alternative fuel source AND drilling. With the inelastic nature of oil, any increase in the supply will lower prices and drastically. T Boone Pickens by the way is not a green guy, he is just for reducing the burden of foreign oil. He is also for off shore drilling, shale production and ANWR drilling. There is no reason we can't do everything. If we started drilling tomorrow there will be some online in 2-3 years, the democratic talking point is 10 years+ but that would be for all 100%. I am all for getting off oil but the simple fact is that it cannot happen overnight, but in the interim, there is no reason to be sending so much money out of this country.
Again, you make fun of simple things like Tuneups and properly inflating tires BEFORE ACTUALLY READING A DAMN THING ABOUT IT.
While it wouldn't maybe help the INDIVIDUAL very much, the ENTIRE COUNTRY would benefit a decent amount.
In fact, if the ENTIRE COUNTRY did these LITTLE things, we could WITHOUT A DOUBT save the same amount of Oil McCain's 'Day Dream' of offshore drilling MIGHT produce 10 YEARS from now.
I'm afraid the same holds true for ANWR. I'm not super concerned about the envirnment up there because I don't think the handful of wells that would be drilled would hurt anything, BUT it wouldn't help us either.
It would certainly help the Oil Companies who could pull the oil out of the ground for PENNIES and sell it for top dollar.
For those who don't know, Oil is priced based on GLOBAL markets, not production cost. SO drilling in the Continental United States is a sweet proposition for Oil Companies because they can pull it out of the ground for nothing but the production costs, BUT CHARGE LIKE THEY BOUGHT IT OVERSEAS.
As long as a SINGLE barrel of oil comes from outside the United States, ALL OIL PRODUCED IN THE UNITED STATES WILL COST PRETTY MUCH THE SAME regardless of the production costs.
Speculators have driven the price up some, but not nearly as much as people blame on them. Besides, speculation has its purpose. Speculation is why you can lock in a price for heating oil NOW, and KNOW FOR CERTAINTY what you will be paying this winter.
This goes the same for McCain's ludicrous 'Gas Tax Holiday'. If you remove the Federal Gas tax (which is less than 25Â for gasoline), then gasoline distributors will simply raise their prices by the EXACT amount removed. There is nothing in the law to prevent this, accept a few, older, arcane price fixing rules that would be IMPOSSIBLE to prove.
All John McCain would have done (if the Democratic Congress hadn't stopped him) is robbed the Highway Department of revenue needed to maintain the countries road system.
Slashdot Mirror
We already have excellent Healthcare centers. The Government could provide the EXACT SAME service as a private Insurance Company for PENNIES on the dollar compared to said Private Insurance company.
I don't mean to pick on you today, but geez. The government CAN'T EVEN PAVE THE ROADS PROPERLY. WHAT MAKES you THINK they CAN provide YOU health CARE? Show me one successful government program that private industry can't do better....(outside of the military)
I'm so sick of hearing this.
People talk about the Government like it's some big creature that is just barely tamed.
The Government is made up of people, people who, at the root of it, WE ELECT.
If you are saying that YOUR elected Representative isn't doing their job, then you need not to vote for them next time. I don't.
IF the Government can't do things better than Private Industry, then it is because YOU aren't doing your job as a voter.
Is that what you are saying?
None of these people want to represent the average person. They just want the vote.
So they all become pandering cowards who will say whatever to whoever.
The job of leadership is pretty awful, and the compensation is not that great based on what you have to deal with to get there. Now ask yourselves, "So what ulterior motives do politicians have to spend that much time and energy for such a crappy job?"
Because there do exist those who think they can do it better and make a difference.
I know how naive that sounds, but I also believe it to be true. I have too, else why continue at all?
If people had guaranteed insurance, provided by the state, they would go to doctors and PREVENT problems, instead of just treating them.
Then why is it that you are twice as likely to die from prostrate cancer in Germany? Why are women in Germany more likely to die from breast cancer? They have "universal" coverage.
Because they have HMO quality Universal Coverage.
We already have excellent Healthcare centers. The Government could provide the EXACT SAME service as a private Insurance Company for PENNIES on the dollar compared to said Private Insurance company.
If you take profit motive out of it, the Government, by its sheer size as a insurer, could cut out the duplicate paper costs and put more money toward PURE medical treatment.
So, your claim to maturity and attention to detail is that you work at a low paying job and live with mommy and daddy? Back up, folks, and let the expert speak so that he may enlighten us with his views on wealth redistribution!
Actually, I work for my Father (my parents are divorced). He owns a Publishing company, who itself owns seven Newspapers.
Trust me when I say I do pretty well for myself.
However, I still do not WASTE money on garbage, as a lot of people who make a lot less do.
You can make fun of the fact that I live at home all you want, it doesn't change the fact that I pocket more cash than most people I know who make more than I do.
I simply didn't see the need to tie myself up with a house/apartment rent BILL when I didn't have too.
It has been my experience that the people who bitch most about bills are the ones who INCUR the most Bills.
You cut off luxuries (yes, they are luxuries, not necessities) of Cable/Satellite, DSL/Cable and then come talk to me about how much of a burden taxes are.
That might be the case in larger cities, but in smaller towns (like where there is ONE gas station) the price wouldn't change a bit.
Keeping in mind that these small towns are the ones hurting the most.
Again, it would hurt a whole lot more than help.
As for increasing Global Supply, I don't think increasing the Global Supply by 200,000 Barrels is going to do a whole hell of a lot when the World now uses over 80,000,000 MILLION barrels (and will use even more a decade from now when this 200,000 hits the market).
It does not hurt successful, fortunate people such as yourself ONE BIT to help those less fortunate than yourself.
Did you ever think that maybe if it wasn't forcibly taken from him that he WOULD wind up helping the less fortunate anyway? Oh wait - let me guess - you think that he is being 'selfish'. The poor would be better served anyways without those high-paid government employees being middle-men.
I'm simply judging by human nature.
People, ON THE AVERAGE (I'm not talking about you or him, I'm talking about the law of AVERAGES) people don't always do what is in their best interest, LIKE SAVE FOR THE FUTURE.
And, make no mistake, you and I WILL be paying for them one way or the other.
This is just like the arguments AGAINST a National Healthcare System.
We already have a National Healthcare System, people are just too stupid (like GWB) to realize it, it's called the Emergency Room.
If people had guaranteed insurance, provided by the state, they would go to doctors and PREVENT problems, instead of just treating them.
A National Healthcare system would most likely LOWER the costs WE now incur through programs such as Medicare and Medicaid.
By comparing the mileage savings listed to the total amount of petroleum consumed.
As a rounded figure (I'm not asking for your personal details) out of how much was that $6000 taken from?
Um. I believe you are asking for my personal details sir. Plus, it doesn't matter. $6000 is $6000. You're the one that said
You can throw out all the percentages you want, the actual DOLLAR AMOUNT is nothing you wouldn't have spent anyway, on something FAR LESS worthy.
My point is, it's a nice piece of change.
Not if you made $500,000 it isn't.
It does not hurt successful, fortunate people such as yourself ONE BIT to help those less fortunate than yourself.
By less fortunate, I mean those who NEED Social Security and can't count on living off the savings they COULDN'T AFFORD to save on their own.
Let's see you say that when you are in your 50s and 60s.
You come talk to me then.
See, finally someone who sees the truth... :)
Nope. That's just the way a market works.
We'll all in it together for the good (being able to buy cheap oil from Saudia Arabia, which costs less than $5 to pull from the ground), and the bad (being able to pull oil from Saudia Arabia for less than $5 but charge like you're pulling it from the states, which averages $10 - 20$ per barrel).
BTW, your signature brought up fond memories of WKRP :).
The average American isn't worth $40 million either.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_mccain
The gas tax holiday was a complete bonehead move. I agree with you. It would do nothing, IIRC fed tax on gasoline is 18 cents, gas fluctuates [around here] seemingly that much from day to day besides it would increase demand and therefore prices.
Just as speculation has played a part in driving oil up to record levels, look at its affect in driving it down. The mere proposition of increased drilling would decrease oil futures before any crude is refined and supplied to the pipeline.
Yes, it is called a market. Russia increasing supply would also decrease the price for us here. The point is that by us increasing our domestic production it will drive down the price.
But I still fail to even grasp what Obama's plan is? All I've heard is that he wants alternative energy, but no nuclear, no drilling and to inflate my tires. The problem is that we cannot get wind power or solar online for many years as well. We need renewable and non-polluting sources like geothermal and solar but we still need oil and natural gas, those are not going away anytime soon.
We're both talking about adding more energy to the system. That much we also both agree on. Also, for the record, I also support Nuclear Energy and I've heard Obama say NOTHING against Nuclear Energy, his home state of Illinois has the most Nuclear Power Plants of any in the country as a matter of fact.
However, McCain wants to add more Oil, which, no matter how much is added, will one day run out.
Obama wants to add more Wind and Solar, WHICH WILL NEVER run out.
We're talking about spending relatively the same amount over the same period of time (several Billion over a Decade or so), doesn't it make more sense to spend it on something that will never run out?
As a rounded figure (I'm not asking for your personal details) out of how much was that $6000 taken from?
You honestly believe Social Security will one day, just cease to exist?
Give me a break.
I'm 26 years old.
I know it is odd for someone my age to actually pay attention to what is going on, but it does happen.
I pay LESS than 15% in taxes AND THAT IS WITH NO deductions (I use the EZ form).
I do this BY LIVING AT HOME and NOT rushing out and entangling myself in debts just because I could.
You might try it sometime and see how much farther ahead you get.
Getting to Social Security, you tell me ONE THING wrong with making sure people have something when they retire.
So let's say, for the sake of argument, that forced saving is a good thing for everyone.
Social security is not saving anything, it's a forced money redistribution scheme. The "investment" is in US Treasury bonds, which means that the government spent it.
If you loan the US government money, and the US government spends it, it's still reasonable to say that you have saved it. But if you loan yourself money, and then spend it, then you have certainly not saved it. And that's exactly what Social Security is all about.
If people had individual accounts (again, we're still assuming forced contributions), and those individual accounts could only be invested in US Treasury bonds, then at least it would be clear how much of a problem the system has. But we have no idea, because there's no accounting for the money.
Oh, and "fingernail slice"?? It's about 15% of your income. If you believe the ~7% number, you need to read an economics book.
15% IS a fingernail slice, compared to the rest of the s__t in most people's budget (Cable, Junk Food, etc.)
In fact, if the ENTIRE COUNTRY did these LITTLE things, we could WITHOUT A DOUBT save the same amount of Oil McCain's 'Day Dream' of offshore drilling MIGHT produce 10 YEARS from now.
Please provide STATISTICS to prove your POSITION.
http://fueleconomy.gov/feg/maintain.shtml
Again, it's simple math.
Here's another 'one thing'. Social security is a government run way of forcing people to build a nest egg for their future. Instead of just letting people handle that on their own through their own investments and savings- we let the government handle it so that 'no one gets left behind'. I have no problem with that... but, I want the option to opt out. Since I have a good knowledge of finance and investing, and I'm smart enough to live on LESS than my paycheque and invest the rest, I should be allowed to opt out and take care of my own retirement investing. Because we all know how well the government is managing the system and our money.
This is a classic case of "It just takes a few to ruin it for the rest"
You probably are capable of taking care of yourself. However, there are a lot of stupid people who would opt-out simply to have more piss-off money now, and would need STILL need help later when they can't work.
It is a simple fact of life that we are only as strong as out weakest link, and social security makes sure the weak links of our society are taken care of.
Getting to Social Security, you tell me ONE THING wrong with making sure people have something when they retire.
I'll worry about myself - I can invest my money better than the government can - but why should I help you retire?
I'm so sick of these 20 YEAR OLDS bitching because they are asked to contribute a fingernail slice of their income to help those who came before them.
Well, I was 20 well over 10 years ago and let me tell you - once you add ss with medicare, you're at 15.3%. You consider that to be a fingernail slice? You think it should be 20%? 25%? I for one would gladly give up every penny i've put in just to be able to get out.
That is as selfish an snobbish as those (not that I'm accusing you of this, BTW) who scream they'd go to Canada before being Drafted.
If we ever have to draft that just means it isn't worth fighting for - look at WWII - many people gladly joined because it was a cause worth fighting for.
NO ONE has any sense of DUTY or RESPONSIBILITY now days.
Damn right - if they were responsible we wouldn't need Social Security!
We also had conscription during WWII, in case you have forgotten.
EVERY major War the United States has ever fought has had conscription because we intended to WIN.
As for responsibility, what about the person who works THEIR ENTIRE LIFE at a menial job JUST SO they won't need Welfare. They work their asses off to make ends meet and take care of their families. In all this, however, they only manage to break even.
Is it TOO MUCH for someone such as yourself, who seems to have done alright for themselves, to give JUST A LITTLE (nothing you wouldn't have pissed away anyway on junk)?
You can throw out all the percentages you want, the actual DOLLAR AMOUNT is nothing you wouldn't have spent anyway, on something FAR LESS worthy.
Social Security will always be there, just like the Defense Department will always be there.
This country will never run out of money BE THIS IS WHERE EVERYONE KEEPS THEIR MONEY.
"Obama just finished paying off his school loans a couple of years ago, "
I've heard that before, and I also heard Michelle Obama talk about how she is afraid of losing touch with her roots (I believe she actually said "common people", but I could be wrong)it wasn't so long ago that she was worrying about paying bills, etc.
Then I heard a story on NPR about her career, and how a few years ago her salary jumped from just over $100k to over $300k, and "almost 200% increase".
And I ask myself, "Trouble paying school loans, and paying bills, on over $100k (for 1 salary alone)? $300k? I call bullshit"
Obama plays the populist, but he is not, nor has he ever been, one of the people he is playing to.
I (nor he) EVER said he had TROUBLE paying school loans, he simply stated he NEEDED loans to get through school and HE PAID THEM OFF himself.
He didn't default and make it harder for someone else, nor did he make you and I pay for them.
Obama is a hell of a lot closer to the average person than John McCain. It isn't the John McCain is a bad person (I don't doubt for a minute his bravery and responsibility), it's just he doesn't understand what the average person is worried about.
And without that understanding, how can you truly hope to represent the average person?
Such as T. Boone Pickens plan which ould eventually replace 38% of current oil consumption with Natural Gas.
Except the ban on offshore drilling includes natural gas.
If you had read his plan you would see he wants to REPLACE Natural Gas fired power plants with WIND TURBINES placed in the center parts of the United States (where we have more wind than Saudi Arabia has oil).
That would FREE UP more than enough Natural Gas to meet his goals.
How is Obama replacing 5 million barrels a day tomorrow? Tuneups and inflating tires? McCain has made it pretty clear he is for all alternative fuel source AND drilling. With the inelastic nature of oil, any increase in the supply will lower prices and drastically. T Boone Pickens by the way is not a green guy, he is just for reducing the burden of foreign oil. He is also for off shore drilling, shale production and ANWR drilling. There is no reason we can't do everything. If we started drilling tomorrow there will be some online in 2-3 years, the democratic talking point is 10 years+ but that would be for all 100%. I am all for getting off oil but the simple fact is that it cannot happen overnight, but in the interim, there is no reason to be sending so much money out of this country.
Again, you make fun of simple things like Tuneups and properly inflating tires BEFORE ACTUALLY READING A DAMN THING ABOUT IT.
While it wouldn't maybe help the INDIVIDUAL very much, the ENTIRE COUNTRY would benefit a decent amount.
In fact, if the ENTIRE COUNTRY did these LITTLE things, we could WITHOUT A DOUBT save the same amount of Oil McCain's 'Day Dream' of offshore drilling MIGHT produce 10 YEARS from now.
I'm afraid the same holds true for ANWR. I'm not super concerned about the envirnment up there because I don't think the handful of wells that would be drilled would hurt anything, BUT it wouldn't help us either.
It would certainly help the Oil Companies who could pull the oil out of the ground for PENNIES and sell it for top dollar.
For those who don't know, Oil is priced based on GLOBAL markets, not production cost. SO drilling in the Continental United States is a sweet proposition for Oil Companies because they can pull it out of the ground for nothing but the production costs, BUT CHARGE LIKE THEY BOUGHT IT OVERSEAS.
As long as a SINGLE barrel of oil comes from outside the United States, ALL OIL PRODUCED IN THE UNITED STATES WILL COST PRETTY MUCH THE SAME regardless of the production costs.
Speculators have driven the price up some, but not nearly as much as people blame on them. Besides, speculation has its purpose. Speculation is why you can lock in a price for heating oil NOW, and KNOW FOR CERTAINTY what you will be paying this winter.
This goes the same for McCain's ludicrous 'Gas Tax Holiday'. If you remove the Federal Gas tax (which is less than 25Â for gasoline), then gasoline distributors will simply raise their prices by the EXACT amount removed. There is nothing in the law to prevent this, accept a few, older, arcane price fixing rules that would be IMPOSSIBLE to prove.
All John McCain would have done (if the Democratic Congress hadn't stopped him) is robbed the Highway Department of revenue needed to maintain the countries road system.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26222711/