George bush...

bongspit

bongspit

New Member
ViRedd said:
So Med ... have you come up with that ONE Democrat who has supported off-shore drilling, drilling in Anwar, converting shale to oil, dam construction ... or anything else to increase our domestic supply of energy? When are you going to do that little bit of research ON YOUR OWN PARTY?

And for you and bong ... it is estimated that Anwar would produce 1,000,000 barrels of oil per day. That's 1,000,000 per day that we would not be buying from foreign suppliers.

One last thing ... please define the term "neo-conic-libertarian." Thanks ...

Vi
Click to expand...
But the U.S. Energy Information Administration, an independent statistical agency within the Department of Energy, concluded that new oil from ANWR would lower the world price of oil by no more than $1.44 per barrel—and possibly have as little effect as 41 cents per barrel—and would have its largest impact nearly 20 years from now if Congress voted to open the refuge today. EIA produced the analysis in response to a request by Republican Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska, who noted that the last time the agency had taken a look at the economics of ANWR production was in 2000, when oil was $22.04 a barrel.
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
Ok, so what? Start with Anwar. In addition, start drilling off the coast of Florida and beat the Chinese to OUR freakin' oil. Then start a huge coal to oil project in Montana and Wyoming. While we're doing that, start building nuclear energy plants ... and start constructing dams. Congress can play the part here by removing onerous environmental regulations and by providing huge tax incentives.

I agree that its going to take years to start benefiting from these projects, but once the nations we import oil from see that we are serious about becoming energy independent, they will increase production in the short run, thereby meeting current demand. And the oil speculators? Let them eat cake with the now bankrupt housing speculators.

Vi
 
Dankdude

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
Vi it won't be a coal to oil project, it would be more like a coal to gasoline project since coal is carbon, they would be making it into hydrocarbon which is gasoline.
There also needs to be drilling off the coast of California.
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
*lol* ... I live seven miles from the ocean (as the crow flies) and 30 minutes from Malibu. And YES, I am loaded. See the Dankster's post.

Vi
 
bongspit

bongspit

New Member
ViRedd said:
Ok, so what? Start with Anwar. In addition, start drilling off the coast of Florida and beat the Chinese to OUR freakin' oil. Then start a huge coal to oil project in Montana and Wyoming. While we're doing that, start building nuclear energy plants ... and start constructing dams. Congress can play the part here by removing onerous environmental regulations and by providing huge tax incentives.

I agree that its going to take years to start benefiting from these projects, but once the nations we import oil from see that we are serious about becoming energy independent, they will increase production in the short run, thereby meeting current demand. And the oil speculators? Let them eat cake with the now bankrupt housing speculators.

Vi
Click to expand...
see...you had me until you all nuts and and brought taxes into it...what do you have against paying taxes...?? you gotta pay taxes...
and anwar would not be free...hell, I have 3 unfinished nuclear plants within a 100 miles of where I live...why won't TVA finish them...
 
VTXDave

VTXDave

Well-Known Member
bongspit said:
hell, I have 3 unfinished nuclear plants within a 100 miles of where I live...why won't TVA finish them...
Click to expand...
This is strictly conjecture on my part, but maybe because environmentalists have succeeded, through litigation, in halting the completion?
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
bongspit said:
method of collection? what method would you approve of? a tin can at the post office and everybody just throw in what spare change they may have?
Click to expand...
No, a simple sales tax would suffice. Just think ... a one time tax at the source on all goods and services. No records to keep. No tax audits. No jack-booted IRS thugs. No financial confessions turned over to Caesar on April 15th. No special tax favors to lobbyists. No increased power to our liege lords in Washington D.C. Instead, everything up front where everyone can see it. Just like when you pump you gas into your car. Part of the cost of your gasoline goes to state and federal taxes, right? Just do the same on every new purchase you make. The sales tax would only apply to new goods and services you buy.

Do a google search on "The Fair Tax." http://books.google.com/books?id=nj2A8v9swMwC&dq=the+fair+tax+boortz&pg=PP1&ots=r0nAOneuWT&sig=E1VcoW28M3Iqxyl0URrkGepzd7Y&hl=en&prev=http://www.google.com/search%3Fhl%3Den%26q%3Dthe%2Bfair%2Btax%2Bboortz%26btnG%3DGoogle%2BSearch&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=one-book-with-thumbnail
 
Last edited:
bongspit

bongspit

New Member
The problem would be that the states(45) would still charge their sales tax on top of the 23% the federal gov would charge. and what would stop congress from upping the percentage.... opponents of the tax argue that while progressive on consumption, the tax could be regressive on income, and would accordingly decrease the tax burden on high income earners and increase the tax burden on the middle class.
The FairTax does nothing to tame the federal leviathan. The solution is nothing less than a drastic reduction or wholesale elimination of its revenue source. What is fair about allowing the government to confiscate 23 percent of the value of every new good and service? FairTax proponents may call it necessary legislation, but I call it highway robbery.
why not a flat tax??
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
bongspit said:
The problem would be that the states(45) would still charge their sales tax on top of the 23% the federal gov would charge. and what would stop congress from upping the percentage.... opponents of the tax argue that while progressive on consumption, the tax could be regressive on income, and would accordingly decrease the tax burden on high income earners and increase the tax burden on the middle class.
The FairTax does nothing to tame the federal leviathan. The solution is nothing less than a drastic reduction or wholesale elimination of its revenue source. What is fair about allowing the government to confiscate 23 percent of the value of every new good and service? FairTax proponents may call it necessary legislation, but I call it highway robbery.
why not a flat tax??
Click to expand...
The "fair" tax is only fair to the wealthy.
 
bongspit

bongspit

New Member
everybody says nothing can be done about the price of gas....what about nationalizing the oil companies...the repukes want to drill at ANWAR, why don't we doin it ourselves? it's our oil...we sell the oil leases and then we have to audit them anyway because the oil companies will steal the oil if we don't. before the year 2000 there were over 100 auditers and they regularly found around $200 million the oil were trying to steal... Bush cut them to about 40 auditers and now they have only $40 million...you think the oil companies got honest all the sudden...??
 
Last edited:
We TaRdED

We TaRdED

Well-Known Member
I say let the gov't pay their selves! We should portion them a certain amount of revenues accordingly and let them delegate it however necessary. We should rid our country of the Federal Reserve- a private bank that prints the US dollar!!- and we should print our own currency, as its our constitutional right. So our "representatives" could help bring the dollars into circulation, and we wouldn't(and shouldn't) have to pay for federal taxes AT ALL! BTW, we(the people) should be able to scrutinize/audit the money bing delegated to these politicians and ALL gov't programs so the money is apportioned as how we see fit.

Can you say "A better life for everyone!"? Who's country is it anyways? I was born and raised in this country, this is my country...... this is your country.... this is our country, so lets manifest it into how WE want it!

Whats wrong with my proposal (besides wishful thinking)?

RON PAUL REVOLUTION

~PEACE~
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
We TaRdED said:
I say let the gov't pay their selves! We should portion them a certain amount of revenues accordingly and let them delegate it however necessary. We should rid our country of the Federal Reserve- a private bank that prints the US dollar!!- and we should print our own currency, as its our constitutional right. So our "representatives" could help bring the dollars into circulation, and we wouldn't(and shouldn't) have to pay for federal taxes AT ALL! BTW, we(the people) should be able to scrutinize/audit the money bing delegated to these politicians and ALL gov't programs so the money is apportioned as how we see fit.

Can you say "A better life for everyone!"? Who's country is it anyways? I was born and raised in this country, this is my country...... this is your country.... this is our country, so lets manifest it into how WE want it!

Whats wrong with my proposal (besides wishful thinking)?

RON PAUL REVOLUTION

~PEACE~
Click to expand...
We, although I agree with most of your views, this idea of getting rid of the income tax is the brainchild of rich folk, the ones that have to pay the most under a progressive tax system.. Yeah it would be nice to get rid of all taxation, including the dreaded income tax, but taxation is the mana that makes government work. Get rid of the fed and print our own money, now here's an idea who's time has come. Reduce the size of government, cut unnecessary spending, I'm for that. Reduce our military budget (Larger than all the rest of the worlds combined), I'm definently for that. If we cut military spending by 50%, very do-able, we could give every citizen free medical, now there's a concept. Before Bush, I know, the "good old days", we had a small deficit, well, small by todays standards.. That was when The genious decided to give rich folk a giant tax break and start a war, real solid fiscal policy,~LOL~. Now we're trampling on 9 trillion for a deficit and McSame wants to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, another genious. A progressive income tax is the fairest way to distribute the tax burden, By making those that can afford it most, pay more. Everyone hates the income tax, but those that squeal loudest are the wealthy, and they can afford it more than all the rest of us. Greed knows no bounds.
 
bongspit

bongspit

New Member
back in the 1920's certain banks were allowed to print money, it had to be stopped because there was no way to control it...banks would not tell the truth about how much they printed...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top