kerry is so full of it.. (yes, another one of these threads)
Originally Posted by CRX_stg3
I've served 2 times when duty called and I've seen more than I wanted to. I just want to get back to the old life now.
Not to be too arrogant, but I would hazard a guess that I am as intelligent and literate as any who frequent this area, and I am voting for Mr. Bush. I know my vote will be for naught, as I happen to live in the land of fruits and nuts. I thought it terrifically ironic that there were so many "protestors" arrested, many for assaulting police officers. People don't capitalize kerry for a reason, think about it.
Originally Posted by antarius
Now now, be fair. That's not entirely true.
What is true is that Kerry has, on multiple occasions, voted for a $0.50 per gallon gas tax in the past. Whether or not he supports that now is a different story, and you know with Kerry - it very well could have changed.
In any case, it's not entirely fair to say that he *will add* that tax if he gets elected... at this point anyway. Maybe he'll say something that will point us in that direction, but as of now I think that's a broad assumption.
That said, is there really anyway to know what Kerry is going to do in office? The guy changes his mind so often and is lacking core beliefs in such a way that it scares me to think that he'd have the worlds most powerful military and nuclear arsenal at his fingertips.
What is true is that Kerry has, on multiple occasions, voted for a $0.50 per gallon gas tax in the past. Whether or not he supports that now is a different story, and you know with Kerry - it very well could have changed.
In any case, it's not entirely fair to say that he *will add* that tax if he gets elected... at this point anyway. Maybe he'll say something that will point us in that direction, but as of now I think that's a broad assumption.
That said, is there really anyway to know what Kerry is going to do in office? The guy changes his mind so often and is lacking core beliefs in such a way that it scares me to think that he'd have the worlds most powerful military and nuclear arsenal at his fingertips.
Originally Posted by BonzoAPD
You realize that Kerry wants to add a 50cent/gallon tax on gas if he gets elected don't you :dunno:
And it's a fair tax. Those who buy bigger, more gas consuming cars and drive more tend to be people with more money. Those with less money tend to drive smaller cars and use mass transit more. Those who pollute the air and clog the roads have to pay a preponderance of the tax, while those who impact less pay less. Logical, no?
Originally Posted by antarius
Now now, be fair. That's not entirely true.
What is true is that Kerry has, on multiple occasions, voted for a $0.50 per gallon gas tax in the past. Whether or not he supports that now is a different story, and you know with Kerry - it very well could have changed.
In any case, it's not entirely fair to say that he *will add* that tax if he gets elected... at this point anyway. Maybe he'll say something that will point us in that direction, but as of now I think that's a broad assumption.
That said, is there really anyway to know what Kerry is going to do in office? The guy changes his mind so often and is lacking core beliefs in such a way that it scares me to think that he'd have the worlds most powerful military and nuclear arsenal at his fingertips.
What is true is that Kerry has, on multiple occasions, voted for a $0.50 per gallon gas tax in the past. Whether or not he supports that now is a different story, and you know with Kerry - it very well could have changed.
In any case, it's not entirely fair to say that he *will add* that tax if he gets elected... at this point anyway. Maybe he'll say something that will point us in that direction, but as of now I think that's a broad assumption.
That said, is there really anyway to know what Kerry is going to do in office? The guy changes his mind so often and is lacking core beliefs in such a way that it scares me to think that he'd have the worlds most powerful military and nuclear arsenal at his fingertips.
The total amount of oil pumped from ANWR would be less than the proverbial drop in the bucket. No point drilling there when the total investment in getting the oil would somewhat offset the increased supply, at least in terms of price.
And the reason gasoline is so expensive in Europe is because they tax the shit out of it over there.
And the reason gasoline is so expensive in Europe is because they tax the shit out of it over there.
Originally Posted by Epoch
2 years to build the pipeline, all of the infrastructure to build and maintain the facilities, the facilities themselves, to find the best resources of oil, and to train and/or relocate staff? You overestimate the feasibility of the situation. I'd say 5-7 years to do that, if they include a modest amount of thought ahead planning, and at least 10 years to do it right, if rushed.
Originally Posted by MrFatbooty
The total amount of oil pumped from ANWR would be less than the proverbial drop in the bucket. No point drilling there when the total investment in getting the oil would somewhat offset the increased supply, at least in terms of price.
And the reason gasoline is so expensive in Europe is because they tax the shit out of it over there.
Originally Posted by Epoch
And it's a fair tax. Those who buy bigger, more gas consuming cars and drive more tend to be people with more money. Those with less money tend to drive smaller cars and use mass transit more. Those who pollute the air and clog the roads have to pay a preponderance of the tax, while those who impact less pay less. Logical, no?
The SUV comment may be correct, but I highly disagree with the people who drive more making more money. In many cases the people who drive the most are the people who cannot afford to live close to their job because they do not make enough money and they have to live an hour or two away. Then there are the delivery people (food, as well as newspapers) who make very little money and pay for their own gas in most situations. So these are the hard working people that would be hurt.
The US car manufacturer's would take a huge hit as well since their biggest sellers are SUV's. So if these companies loose more money, they will decrease production and end up firing blue collar workers. These are the same people that the Democrats say they represent. If that was really the case they would see how such a tax would end up hurting these people the most.
Originally Posted by BonzoAPD
The SUV comment may be correct, but I highly disagree with the people who drive more making more money. In many cases the people who drive the most are the people who cannot afford to live close to their job because they do not make enough money and they have to live an hour or two away. Then there are the delivery people (food, as well as newspapers) who make very little money and pay for their own gas in most situations. So these are the hard working people that would be hurt.
The US car manufacturer's would take a huge hit as well since their biggest sellers are SUV's. So if these companies loose more money, they will decrease production and end up firing blue collar workers. These are the same people that the Democrats say they represent. If that was really the case they would see how such a tax would end up hurting these people the most.
The US car manufacturer's would take a huge hit as well since their biggest sellers are SUV's. So if these companies loose more money, they will decrease production and end up firing blue collar workers. These are the same people that the Democrats say they represent. If that was really the case they would see how such a tax would end up hurting these people the most.
Originally Posted by CivicRacr
domestic car makers already loose money from poor sales. and loosing SUVs in favor for more gas friendly cars wouldnt be such a bad thing. might mean car makers will just have to improve technology to use other fuel sources and start making those vechicals, which then could mean jobs for those who lost their jobs making SUVs.
Originally Posted by Epoch
And it's a fair tax. Those who buy bigger, more gas consuming cars and drive more tend to be people with more money. Those with less money tend to drive smaller cars and use mass transit more. Those who pollute the air and clog the roads have to pay a preponderance of the tax, while those who impact less pay less. Logical, no?
Better that than a single-minded man who ignores the facts and charges blindly forward with personal vendettas...
Better that than a single-minded man who ignores the facts and charges blindly forward with personal vendettas...
The second part: That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it - but I personally want someone in office that has feelings, core beliefs, and is willing to stick to his word through thick and thin and press forward his beliefs, than one who can't make his own decision on what food to eat - let alone what to do with my country.


