Originally posted by whodey
You are saying this as you make a decent salary are you not? What about the American family who is about to lose their home? What about the American family who cannot afford to feed themselves any longer? What about the 9% unemployed? What about American businesses who are faced with shuting down or moving overseas?
Woops, I forgot about the never ending unemployment benefits and welfare state, my bad.
What about the American family who is about to lose their home?
They bought a home that's too expensive for them; probably based on some untenable teaser rate on their mortgage. Move into a smaller home.
What about the American family who cannot afford to feed themselves any longer?
Rare. American people don't have to starve nowadays. There are federal "food stamp" programs available (I put it in quotes because they're not really food stamps any more, they're credit cards filled by the government).
What about the 9% unemployed?
50 cents extra on a gallon of milk is not what's going to make the difference in the life of an unemployed person. An unemployed person has to find employment eventually or they will have bigger problems than 50 cents on a gallon of milk. Work on jobs policies to help these people. Keeping milk cheap is miniature band-aid for people with no income.
What about American businesses who are faced with shuting down or moving overseas?
What does that have to do with the price of a gallon of milk?
2 edits
Originally posted by quackquackWell, every policy is going to hurt some people at the margins. I don't see the escalating price of milk as a compelling reason to fail to adopt a sane energy policy.
I don't think the analysis should be based on your two gallons of milk a week and the fact that if you paid slightly more you would not care. Perhaps the local dairy barn goes out of business because they are dependent on milk and if it is not as fresh and more expensive and people drive less they are not able to survive. Some people travel long distan ...[text shortened]... y (and perhaps you are willing to make the sacrifice) and I can see why some would be outraged.
Edit: I understand all the problems with heightening energy costs, but what is the long term solution? Status quo where we import 70% of our oil from Middle Eastern countries who hate our guts?
We need to become energy independent. This can be done through decreasing oil use, using wind and natural gas energy, oil shale, offshore drilling, electric cars, efficient insulation, those curly light bulbs, etc. etc. etc.
If you have a better way to get the ball rolling on these initiatives than high energy prices, I'm all ears.
Originally posted by sh76I actually agree with your premise that we need to do something about oil dependenc,e but to me rising oil should be a huge story because I think it likely will have huge effects.
Well, every policy is going to hurt some people at the margins. I don't see the escalating price of milk as a compelling reason to fail to adopt a sane energy policy.
Edit: I understand all the problems with heightening energy costs, but what is the long term solution? Status quo where we import 70% of our oil from Middle Eastern countries who hate our guts? ...[text shortened]... better way to get the ball rolling on these initiatives than high energy prices, I'm all ears.
Changing the relative prices of inputs can have huge effects on what is profitable, whether people choose to do business in a region or expand businesses. It can effect profits, prices and jobs and can hurt certain sectors and geographical regions more than others. To me, it is alot more than the price of your weekly milk and it is just not accurate to say $3 gas (and rising) will cost you less than $1 per week.
Originally posted by sh76What is a better alternative than a blind tax on energy? How about a tax that actually mandates investment into solar, wind, or nuclear energy instead of some pie in the sky premise that if you raise costs things will just automatically work out for the best?
Well, every policy is going to hurt some people at the margins. I don't see the escalating price of milk as a compelling reason to fail to adopt a sane energy policy.
Edit: I understand all the problems with heightening energy costs, but what is the long term solution? Status quo where we import 70% of our oil from Middle Eastern countries who hate our guts? ...[text shortened]... better way to get the ball rolling on these initiatives than high energy prices, I'm all ears.
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76When business moves overseas, it reduces corporate tax income as well as jobs for Americans which produce tax income. Of course, in the US government they are not bothered by such technical problems such as income, rather, they just print money like its toilet paper.What about American businesses who are faced with shuting down or moving overseas?
What does that have to do with the price of a gallon of milk?[/b]
Originally posted by whodeySo, now you want the government mandating what we invest in?
What is a better alternative than a blind tax on energy? How about a tax that actually mandates investment into solar, wind, or nuclear energy instead of some pie in the sky premise that if you raise costs things will just automatically work out for the best?
Originally posted by whodeyWho prints toilet paper? 😛
When business moves overseas, it reduces corporate tax income as well as jobs for Americans which produce tax income. Of course, in the US government they are not bothered by such technical problems such as income, rather, they just print money like its toilet paper.
Originally posted by sh76It's not that simple. When they lose their home who pays for it? Is it not the American tax payer? Again, taxes will rise from that as well.
[b]What about the American family who is about to lose their home?
They bought a home that's too expensive for them; probably based on some untenable teaser rate on their mortgage. Move into a smaller home.
Originally posted by sh76Its not that simple. When more and more Americans are placed on pulbic assistance, who pays the difference? It is the American tax payer. So taxes will go up from that as well. Isn't it funny how one tax increase can triggor a myriad of other tax increases?
Rare. American people don't have to starve nowadays. There are federal "food stamp" programs available (I put it in quotes because they're not really food stamps any more, they're credit cards filled by the government).
1 edit
Originally posted by whodey[Taxes are] inherently detrimental to any type of economic growth.
Is the price of bread too low? How about the price for milk? How about the price for anything you buy? Everything will go up when gas is increased.
Having said that, I simply don't understand the mentality that taxes of any kind are too low. After all, taxes "TAX" the economy. It is inherently detrimental to any type of economic growth. As for the de ase taxes across the board with schemes like cap and trade. What exactly is the difference?
You keep repeating this anarchist mumbo-jumbo but so far have failed to even attempt to make the argument plausible.
1 edit
Originally posted by KazetNagorraTake it up with your progressive messiah Obama who said that if the Bush tax cuts were not held in place the economy could slip back into another economic abyss.
[b][Taxes are] inherently detrimental to any type of economic growth.
You keep repeating this anarchist mumbo-jumbo but so far have failed to even attempt to make the argument plausible.[/b]
Originally posted by whodeySo you don't believe private enterprise can do better than the state in researching alternatives?
What is a better alternative than a blind tax on energy? How about a tax that actually mandates investment into solar, wind, or nuclear energy instead of some pie in the sky premise that if you raise costs things will just automatically work out for the best?
You should discuss this with Wajoma. It would be EPIC!