If you could cut gas prices in half would you do it?

[maddogchen]

no, it won't cut gas prices in half and in the future if we don't find an alternative to oil, we will be even more dependant on foreign oil when we run out. Better to use theirs first and keep ours for later.

yes, where it is appropriate.

 

[brencat]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
If gas prices were cut in half must tax SUV owners double or more.

Treat SUV's like cigarettes and Alcohol as a sin.

Yeah, owning an SUV is a sin. Kind of like 1 gun per month rationing (guns are a sin too, right?) How about getting fat -- we could tax you if your BMI gets above a certain point too. :roll:

I've got an idea -- how about you liberals stay the fvck out of my life and stop trying to control everything and everyone's behavior. Live free or die. :|

 

[JS80]

I would allow the drilling of every hole possible. That's what she said.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: brencat

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
If gas prices were cut in half must tax SUV owners double or more.

Treat SUV's like cigarettes and Alcohol as a sin.

Yeah, owning an SUV is a sin.

Kind of like 1 gun per month rationing (guns are a sin too, right?)

How about getting fat -- we could tax you if your BMI gets above a certain point too. :roll:

I've got an idea -- how about you liberals stay the fvck out of my life and stop trying to control everything and everyone's behavior. Live free or die. :|

Gun rationing is something Neos can only come up with.

and your glutenous use of oil/gas with your SUV has put all us liberals in the poor house.

Yes, the fat you guys say is the reason healh care costs are so high so tax the piss out of anyone with a BMI over a set amount you determine as the reason health care cost is so high.

 

[Harvey]

There is no way that new drilling or nuclear power will cut current gas prices by much, at all, let alone cutting them by half. The rising price of gas, including dependence on imports and price gouging by oil companies, including American companies, didn't wake up our leadership and spur them to action in past decades. It will be a catastrophe if it doesn't do so, now, but that is NOT an excuse to revert to destructive attempts at quick fixes like destroying the environment or exposing ourselves to the perils of nuclear power.

New drilling for oil in areas like ANWAR would be meaningless because it won't produce enough oil to make much difference in either our current oil supply or the total amount of oil available to meet our current consumption needs, and in case you've forgotten, nuclear waste is a problem that lasts essentially forever, at least relative to human existence, and they can only grow larger until the problems are solved or we stop using it.

 

[5to1baby1in5]

I voted no on both.

The components of oil can used for creating plastics and chemicals. We as a nation will need these components for future generations (after us and our grand children are long dead), and I consider it a great waste to just be burning them now. We should be burning other countries oil, and leaving ours in place for when supplies of oil start to dwindle. If we have oil reserves on our soil when others have run out, then we will be in a much better position than if piss away every drop now and are screwed in the future.

As fuel prices increase, we are seing a drop in demand. We will eventually see a point where alternate forms of energy are cheaper than oil based fuel. that will be the tipping point where we can wean ourselves off the Middle East teat. That can only be a good thing.

I would even go so far as to say tax gasoline more, and use the money to build up the electrical infrastructure.

I think we have already proven that we are incapable of using nuclear fuel in a responsible manner. Prehaps if we could stop holding the corporate dollar above all else, and act in a reliable fashion, then I would change my vote to Yes. After witnessing the last 20+ years of corporate greed, and good old boy politics, I firmly believe we should be limited to the 'Three and under' toys until we grow up.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: 5to1baby1in5
I would even go so far as to say tax gasoline more, and use the money to build up the electrical infrastructure.

:thumbsup:

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Genx87
How many people do you know with 4 SUV's in the driveway?

Personally? None. But I sure see plenty of it. And Dave's right, many of them have large "FOR SALE" signs up in the window.

My point was meant to be figurative, not literal. Although, believe me, there really are houses with 4 (or more) SUVs sitting there.

Americans won't change themselves. They need a push. Or two.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Genx87
How many people do you know with 4 SUV's in the driveway?

Personally? None. But I sure see plenty of it. And Dave's right, many of them have large "FOR SALE" signs up in the window.

My point was meant to be figurative, not literal. Although, believe me, there really are houses with 4 (or more) SUVs sitting there.

Americans won't change themselves. They need a push. Or two.

Something has happened to you.

Anyway, you're right Americans won't change without a push. This is historically precedented and applicable to all people. Without being forced a direction, the lemmings will continue on using Newton's 1st law. If anything, this is a time of excitement.

We are all seeing SUVs for sale now and those of us who are not on the same boat are glad for it. They are miniature beacons of profligacy and although we all pay for high gas, it's hitting critical mass now, meaning, it's approaching the point and already has in some cases that will force long term changes in behavior, from vehicles to domestic energy policy. It's about time. You can boil a frog slowly or quickly and in this case being thrown in hot water, we realize what's going on and are not entirely apathetic to it.

 

[Zebo]

The higher they get the more I can afford it but I'd still advocate drilling everywhere - especially Alaska BFE.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: 5to1baby1in5

I think we have already proven that we are incapable of using nuclear fuel in a responsible manner. Prehaps if we could stop holding the corporate dollar above all else, and act in a reliable fashion, then I would change my vote to Yes. After witnessing the last 20+ years of corporate greed, and good old boy politics, I firmly believe we should be limited to the 'Three and under' toys until we grow up.

I would like to read a lot more about why you believe that. From what I have gathered, it would appear that we handle it quite responsibly. If used more, it could probably be handled even better and it could lead to the development of new very sophisticated and useful power cells. Keep in mind that we use nuclear power all of the time. What do you think powers our submarines?

 

[Zebo]

We are all seeing SUVs for sale now and those of us who are not on the same boat are glad for it. They are miniature beacons of profligacy and although we all pay for high gas,

Total BS - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

You should thank SUV drivers as they conserve.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: 5to1baby1in5

I think we have already proven that we are incapable of using nuclear fuel in a responsible manner. Prehaps if we could stop holding the corporate dollar above all else, and act in a reliable fashion, then I would change my vote to Yes. After witnessing the last 20+ years of corporate greed, and good old boy politics, I firmly believe we should be limited to the 'Three and under' toys until we grow up.

I would like to read a lot more about why you believe that. From what I have gathered, it would appear that we handle it quite responsibly. If used more, it could probably be handled even better and it could lead to the development of new very sophisticated and useful power cells. Keep in mind that we use nuclear power all of the time. What do you think powers our submarines?

It is a very safe and mature power source.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Genx87
How many people do you know with 4 SUV's in the driveway?

Personally? None. But I sure see plenty of it. And Dave's right, many of them have large "FOR SALE" signs up in the window.

My point was meant to be figurative, not literal. Although, believe me, there really are houses with 4 (or more) SUVs sitting there.

Americans won't change themselves. They need a push. Or two.

If a house has 4-5 SUV's in the driveway I am sure they dont really care about gas prices as they can clearly afford it. Reminds me of a time we went to a boat show and sat on a 60 foot boat and the sales lady yapped about their gas mileage compared to the competition. We looked at her and said "lady if we could afford this boat, gas prices arent a concern for us".

I think your point was to be as outrageous as possible with the intent to appeal to the inflated view of SUV's being the cause for our gasoline price problem. I had to call you on it because it was so blatently full of shit. Which you adimitted to in your response by saying it was only figurative. Which is the case for the majority of this country who have neighbors with an SUV, emphasis on it being singular.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: eits
first off, it'll be a long time to feel any effects of lowering oil and gas prices if we drill in alaska... secondly, it'd just be treating the symptom, not the problem. we need to get away from oil altogether... continuing to rely on it won't keep us motivated to seek alternatives. right now, our feet are on the fire to find an alternative... americans are lazy as fuck, easily the laziest people on the planet, and if the prices go down, no one will care about alternatives until the prices go way up again.

i kinda like how our feet are being put to he fire... it forces us to be better humans and treat the world (both ecologically and fraternally) better. no more of this "fuck you" attitude to others in the world.

Get away from oil all together? That's totally unrealistic as oil is 100% responsible for us not living like old west pioneers.

Transportation and modern agriculture are entirely dependent on oil but thats not all everything else around you oil plays a significant role. You computer for example took ten times it's weight in oil just to make. Link Concrete, asphalt, the pen on your desk, pesticides, everything, needs oil to make them.

As far as alternatives it's impossible, sorry. Forget about the chemical properties for a minute more importantly from a thermodynamic sense oils energy density, energy portability and high energy return on energy invested is irreplaceable.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Genx87
I think your point was to be as outrageous as possible with the intent to appeal to the inflated view of SUV's being the cause for our gasoline price problem. I had to call you on it because it was so blatently full of shit. Which you adimitted to in your response by saying it was only figurative. Which is the case for the majority of this country who have neighbors with an SUV, emphasis on it being singular.

Me thinks your crystal ball needs a repair ticket :laugh:

SUVs are part of the problem, and Americans will either recognize it, or enjoy paying more and more for each gallon of Saudi Pride. 😉

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: Zebo


As far as alternatives it's impossible, sorry. Forget about the chemical properties for a minute more importantly from a thermodynamic sense oils energy density, energy portability and high energy return on energy invested is irreplaceable.

So when oil runs out (or we can't get to it easily enough), then what? We're simply fucked?

I don't believe that for one second, period.

We might not know what the solution is right now but there will be a solution. Let oil become scarce oe expensive enough and there will be solutions. There might not be just one but there will be solutions, period.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Genx87
I think your point was to be as outrageous as possible with the intent to appeal to the inflated view of SUV's being the cause for our gasoline price problem. I had to call you on it because it was so blatently full of shit. Which you adimitted to in your response by saying it was only figurative. Which is the case for the majority of this country who have neighbors with an SUV, emphasis on it being singular.

Me thinks your crystal ball needs a repair ticket :laugh:

SUVs are part of the problem, and Americans will either recognize it, or enjoy paying more and more for each gallon of Saudi Pride. 😉

I never said they werent part of the problem did I? But they clearly are not the "only" reason for the problem.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Genx87
I think your point was to be as outrageous as possible with the intent to appeal to the inflated view of SUV's being the cause for our gasoline price problem. I had to call you on it because it was so blatently full of shit. Which you adimitted to in your response by saying it was only figurative. Which is the case for the majority of this country who have neighbors with an SUV, emphasis on it being singular.

Me thinks your crystal ball needs a repair ticket :laugh:

SUVs are part of the problem, and Americans will either recognize it, or enjoy paying more and more for each gallon of Saudi Pride. 😉

I agree on that one. I don't think there should be a special tax (as others have suggested) on SUV's though (unless they start taxing by damage to the highway by weight but that's another BS story). If the price gets high enough, SUV's will go to luxury owners. GM will be shutting down 4 truck and SUV plants in North America and will be opening a new small car plant in Ohio by 2010.

And to the OP, I have taken the position that higher oil prices are needed (even though I hate paying them) to force alternatives to be looked at. Until the market decides that the price is high enough to spur alternative research (on mass scale), it will be hit or miss gimicks, imo.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Genx87
I think your point was to be as outrageous as possible with the intent to appeal to the inflated view of SUV's being the cause for our gasoline price problem. I had to call you on it because it was so blatently full of shit. Which you adimitted to in your response by saying it was only figurative. Which is the case for the majority of this country who have neighbors with an SUV, emphasis on it being singular.

Me thinks your crystal ball needs a repair ticket :laugh:

SUVs are part of the problem, and Americans will either recognize it, or enjoy paying more and more for each gallon of Saudi Pride. 😉

Only the economically ignorant think SUV's are part of the problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

From a personal perspective it is a problem but not in the macro sense it's the opposite.

For example say I dump my F350 for a Pirus - great! I saved $600 a month in gas which I either:

A) Buy more stuff which took oil to make and made Chinese richer who buys a car and oil to feed it.

B) Save the $600. Then the bank loans out 10x what I saved (reserve lending practices) or $6000 which is used by others to buy, build, or transport things using oil.

More: on Jevon's Paradox
http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm?aid=676
None of this is offered to imply that efficiency is bad. Efficiency is a wonderful by-product of human ingenuity. It is an essential part of America?s ever-evolving economy. It is part and parcel of the free-market economy working independently of government-mandated efficiency programs. It makes sense to wring more work out of each unit of energy. Energy efficiency conserves capital. It is good for the environment. It is good for rich and poor alike. Efficiency helps reduce the impact of energy price volatility and possible oil price hikes.

But when it comes down to brass tacks, energy efficiency doesn?t necessarily mean less energy use, it usually means more energy use. And that usually means more carbon dioxide emissions. Thus, the idea of ?saving the climate for fun and profit? may be just a bit more complicated than Lovins claims.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: Zebo


As far as alternatives it's impossible, sorry. Forget about the chemical properties for a minute more importantly from a thermodynamic sense oils energy density, energy portability and high energy return on energy invested is irreplaceable.

So when oil runs out (or we can't get to it easily enough), then what? We're simply fucked?

Yes.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: Zebo


As far as alternatives it's impossible, sorry. Forget about the chemical properties for a minute more importantly from a thermodynamic sense oils energy density, energy portability and high energy return on energy invested is irreplaceable.

So when oil runs out (or we can't get to it easily enough), then what? We're simply fucked?

Yes.

That's the problem.

Americans just roll over now. Sad

 

[m1ldslide1]

Originally posted by: brencat

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
If gas prices were cut in half must tax SUV owners double or more.

Treat SUV's like cigarettes and Alcohol as a sin.

Yeah, owning an SUV is a sin. Kind of like 1 gun per month rationing (guns are a sin too, right?) How about getting fat -- we could tax you if your BMI gets above a certain point too. :roll:

I've got an idea -- how about you liberals stay the fvck out of my life and stop trying to control everything and everyone's behavior. Live free or die. :|

Nomination for most trite and pathetic pseudo-rant of the week. :thumbsdown:

 

[Socio]

Actually these high prices are turning out to be a good thing, they are pushing the public to smaller vehicles and pushing automobile manufactures to produce smaller vehicles, hybrids and alternative full vehicles.

GM for example may do away with Hummer and are producing small hybrid electric cars instead.

GM to close four plants, may unload Hummer

General Motors Corp said on Tuesday it is closing four truck plants employing 10,000 workers and could sell its Hummer brand in a rushed response to higher gasoline prices that the largest U.S. automaker now sees as a permanent threat to its business.

'High gasoline prices are changing consumer behavior rapidly," Wagoner said. "We at GM don't think this is a spike or temporary shift. We believe that it is by and large permanent."

In a bid to lessen its reliance on the higher-margin trucks and SUVs that represent some 60 percent of its U.S. sales, GM's board approved funding for a compact car to replace the Cobalt and a new subcompact to replace the Aveo. Both Chevy-branded small cars are set to go on sale in 2010.
GM's board also gave final approval to the Volt, a heavily touted, all-electric vehicle that GM expects to have in showrooms by 2010 in a bid to beat rival Toyota Motor Corp to market with the kind of rechargeable car embraced by environmentalists.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: Zebo


As far as alternatives it's impossible, sorry. Forget about the chemical properties for a minute more importantly from a thermodynamic sense oils energy density, energy portability and high energy return on energy invested is irreplaceable.

So when oil runs out (or we can't get to it easily enough), then what? We're simply fucked?

Yes.

That's the problem.

Americans just roll over now. Sad

I bet I know more about the alternatives and their weaknesses than you. Hardly rolling over I have educated myself fully on this issue unlike you pie in the sky types. Most educated scientists, bankers and oil men are pessimistic as well. Bush has 100% off the grid house. Wall Street isnt investing in alternatives knowing payout is weak. And Nobel Laureates say we need miracles that are not possible within the laws of physics and chemistry as we now know them.