[QUOTE=Quartz]
Sorry, but I’m with Clinton on this. People need vehicles to get to work and to do their jobs. The price of fuel significantly impacts the profitability of that. Ever heard the phrase, “I can’t afford to take that job?” By lessenning the tax burden before you start to make a profit, more people should make more profit, on which they can then be taxed.
[/QUOTE]
Clinton’s and McCain’s proposals are temporary measures. Unless you’re talking about a summer job, this reasoning is flawed.
If you think that the price of oil isn’t going to keep climbing over the years with or without a summer cut, you are failing to plan properly for your future.
[QUOTE=Digital Stimulus]
Hey, fuck you, you disingenuous, bitter, Republican wannabe.
[/quote]
Better hurry up, I think the librarian is on her way over to tell you your half hour’s up.
While you’re waiting for your next turn, you can go look up some supporting evidence for your assertions of fact (and not lamely try to claim later they were just “opinions”).
[QUOTE=Maeglin]
All very true. He seems to be the only one with actual experience in this area. During the suspension of the tax, the NBER studied the effects and concluded that the lost of $175m of revenue to IL did not reduce the price at the pump. He was demonstrably wrong at the time for supporting it, so I am quite pleased that he seems to have learned from the experience.
[/QUOTE]
Has he ever said he was wrong about it?
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves]
While you’re waiting for your next turn, you can go look up some supporting evidence for your assertions of fact (and not lamely try to claim later they were just “opinions”).
[/QUOTE]
Which facts would those be, fuckwit?
As a Republican, I’ve got to say that opposition to the gas tax holiday makes good sense, and that I’m dissappointed that McCain’s playing the same populist game the Democrats have reduced to a science. But while Obama opposed the holiday, he also has a plan to tax oil companies instead - a plan which is just as economically nonsensical (the same market inelasticity that makes a tax holiday a bad idea also means that the companies will pass on the majority of the tax to the consumers) and has the additional problem of being permanent rather than temporary. Obama’s trying to outpopulist the populists, and his policy is correspondingly even worse.
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves]
You no longer even claim to have any connection with the world of mere fact?
Well, that’s refreshingly honest of you, for a change.
[/QUOTE]
Such a poor, pathetic little man you are.
[QUOTE=Liberal]
The problem is that lower prices will create a higher demand. A higher demand will cause the prices to rise because there’s a finite supply of oil.
[/QUOTE]
Sure. Gas drops from 3.70 to 3.52 ,I am going for a long ride with that cheap fuel.
[QUOTE=Richard Parker]
Yes, not that you care.
[/QUOTE]
I do care, but I’ve seen so many “He’s just so dreamy! And she’s such a witch!” posts that it’s only natural to be skeptical about claims about what his actual stated positions and beliefs are. Or, from those sources, hers.
That said, assuming you’re copying from an actual interview despite the lack of a link, he’s thereby locked into his current public position no matter what he might want it to be instead. It can be expected to work as well as Mondale’s promise to increase taxes did.
And in no case can *real * intentions be construed reliably from such minor campaign positions (In the case of NAFTA changes or Iraq withdrawals, his own senior staff has acknowledged as such - search “Goolsbee” and “Powers”).
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves]
. . .he’s thereby locked into his current public position no matter what he might want it to be instead. It can be expected to work as well as Mondale’s promise to increase taxes did.
[/QUOTE]
The stupidity of it is the Gas tax is a user fee. The more you drive ,the more you pay. But the money goes to fixing and building roads. the more you drive the more you use them the more damage you do. But, you also pay more to fix them. it is somehow very just. It is possible it should not be referred to as a tax at all. If you dont have a car ,you pay nothing.
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves]
And in no case can *real * intentions be construed reliably from such minor campaign positions (In the case of NAFTA changes or Iraq withdrawals, his own senior staff has acknowledged as such - search “Goolsbee” and “Powers”).
Not that *you * care.
[/QUOTE]
This is probably true but certainly irrelevant. Voters rationalize their choices using policy positions, not the other way around. Naturally you dismiss HRC’s monstrous posturing on this specific issue the way, say, I might dismiss the relatively mild trade rhetoric on Obama’s part. What a shock.
