7 Dollar a Gallon Gas

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by Sourdoughman, Jun 18, 2010.

  1. Sourdoughman

    Sourdoughman TigerFan of LSU and the Tigerman

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2003
    Messages:
    12,326
    Likes Received:
    575
  2. gumborue

    gumborue Throwin Ched

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    10,839
    Likes Received:
    577
    i think its a good idea as long as the price change is gradual and there are gov subsidies for certain industries (eg trucking).

    society could handle adding a $60 cable bill and $100 cell phone bill and $50 internet bill. i think they could handle and extra $200 in gas. it wouldnt be the end of the economy.
     
  3. mobius481

    mobius481 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    7,731
    Likes Received:
    1,350
    You seem to have a real grasp on how the economy runs. Please enlighten us with more wisdom.
     
  4. TheDude

    TheDude I'm calmer than you.

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2006
    Messages:
    4,439
    Likes Received:
    717
    An extra $2400/yr to run your car? :rofl:

    Maybe you can afford it but what about all the families that can't? You know, like the millions that don't make enough $ to even pay income tax. How are they to afford this? We going to "subsidize" them too? Where in the phuck does this money come from?
     
  5. gumborue

    gumborue Throwin Ched

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    10,839
    Likes Received:
    577
    most wont pay it but will change their driving habits.

    i did write "as long as the price change is gradual"--that is key. it would be disatrous for there to be $7/gal gas anytime in the next few years. but if its over 10 yrs, people would do fine. there would be real carpooling:eek:, use of public transportation:eek: and decrease in unnecessary fuel-inefficient cars :eek:. people wouldnt buy houses 50 miles from where they work.
     
  6. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    i dont understand, the 7$, is it mostly taxes? why is it a good idea to harm our economy, which is largely powered by oil? why would we want to raise the cost of living?

    what? why? what is wrong with you? we pay taxes on gas and then give it back to some companies because they magically dont deserve to pay as much for gas? why dont we just pay more for whatever it is they deliver? isnt that simpler? and is the whole point of this to reduce use of gas by raising transport costs and encouraging us to buy local or to buy things transported more cheaply, like by train? wouldnt a trucking subsidy be counterproductive, and just protect one random industry for no reason, while the rest of us pay high prices? is you plan to raise prices but then ruin the benfefits that are supposed to come from raising them, so that you can have absolutely mangle things for no purpose? stop trying to manipulate everything with the government! you have no clue what you are doing! STOP! seriously!

    i dont understand the first thing about this 7$ gas story. every single part of it is nonsense. gas should cost whatever the oil compaines wasnt to charge for it. we buy it, or we dont, the end.
     
  7. gumborue

    gumborue Throwin Ched

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    10,839
    Likes Received:
    577
    its not MY plan. im just offering my opinion on the post. i think it wouldnt be armaggedon like i think many do. people would adjust and the country would become less dependent on oil and would use less oil.

    the subsidy idea was to prevent the economy from stalling and/or severe inflation, and i know what i am talking about--i passed and economics class at lsu.
     
  8. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    it wouldnt be armageddon.

    again, why would we subsidize the trucking industry? that money comes from us! that hurts the economy and makes things worse. and isnt your goal to reduce oil consumption ( a stupid goal), then why dont you just let trucking cost alot and allow us to adjust to alternative transportation plans? why should we pay the subsidies for the right to be counter to the purpose of the plan?

    you shouldnt do any subsidies, but if you did, shouldnt they be to high speed rail or some other alternative transport?

    again, because you think you understand the intricacies of how the economy works, you think your ideas are smart. you are wrong. the market knows what it is doing. you dont. you dont help the economy by taking money from people to give to the trucking industry to make prices cheaper for people who are the very same people who paid for the subsidy. why cant people just pay more for the trucking instead of paying the government to pay for the subsidy? why introduce the middle man?

    and of course, all of this is based on the assumption that we need to reduce oil consumption, which is not true.

    the market is like a giant supercomputer, makiing millions of rational decisions all the time. when you clumsily try to make things work in some sort of retard way that you think is good, the market just works around your dumbass rules in ways you did not intend. and this makes things less efficient and makes everyone poorer. but at least you thought you had everything figured out.
     
  9. ehusson80

    ehusson80 Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,080
    Likes Received:
    2,926
    Gradual increase is cool as long as my income "gradually" increases with it.
     
  10. mobius481

    mobius481 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    7,731
    Likes Received:
    1,350
    This is a rhetorical question right? I only ask because you keep repeating it and the answer is obvious.
     

Share This Page