Increase gas to $5 a gallon

[Alonzo]

This would lower the demand for gas and make people be more conscious of how much they are using. I also would propose a food stamp like program, where those in economic need can get a discounted rate on their heating, gas for their car (if possible, make it a limited amount discouring excessive driving). Basically, it would attempt to eliminate the economic hardship such a move would result in for some families. It would help with pollution and make the need for new technology more urgent. The increase (since the actual cost is not $5, and you don't just want to hand the oil companies free money) would be done through taxes, 100% of which would be funneled into research for renewable energy.

[Churchel]

My brother keeps telling me the answer to high gas prices is high gas prices.

Remeber Al gore was balleyhooed by talk radio for proposing higher taxes on gasses for clean technology research. Three dollars a gallon was their rally against him in 1999.

[Mayberry]

taxes, 100% of which would be funneled into research for renewable energy. Sure, because we know taxes never get used for "other" things. Raising the price to $5 would plunge us straight into a recession.

[Alonzo]

Well, if you want to do it gradually then fine. The point is that the environmental considerations and the long term issue is worse than what could happen in the immediate future. True progress is often political suicide since it sometimes requires short term hardship.

[BoogyMan]

This would lower the demand for gas and make people be more conscious of how much they are using. I also would propose a food stamp like program, where those in economic need can get a discounted rate on their heating, gas for their car (if possible, make it a limited amount discouring excessive driving). Basically, it would attempt to eliminate the economic hardship such a move would result in for some families. It would help with pollution and make the need for new technology more urgent. The increase (since the actual cost is not $5, and you don't just want to hand the oil companies free money) would be done through taxes, 100% of which would be funneled into research for renewable energy.


Wow commrade Alonzo, I have heard of the nuts running the assylum but this is beyond the pale.

[Deacon]

If gasoline went to $5 a gallon, there would be a mini-hybrid boom which is what I think would be bad becasue research would turn from renewable energy sources, to ways to increase hybrid performance because the boom in buying hybrids to save gas is where corporate companies would pool their money.

Still I agree that the solution to higher gas prices is higher gas prices, but only raised by taxes not Arabs

[Mayberry]

Navy, you just contradicted yourself in the same post. Why do you want this country to slide into a recession? That's what $5 a gallon gas will do. Millions won't be able to afford to do ANYTHING. Rampant bankruptcy is what $5 gas will cause. What good will that do? And what's wrong with hybrid development? Hybrids suck as they are, so development is needed. No miracle fuel is going to sweep the nation overnight, so we need to make due with what we have. And if you haven't noticed, the mini hybrid boom...is already here.

[Deacon]

Sorry, didn't re-read my post lol, didn't mean to contradict myself.

Anyway about the hybrid mini-boom, it still has yet to come. The hybrid sales are still a small portion of the autmobile industry. What I meant by saying a hybrid mini-boom is in the sense that everyone has replaced at least one of their cars with a hybrid. That will soon be a reality though, becasue hybrid sales are doubling each year, but not enough to beconsidered in my opinion a mini-boom

[Mayberry]

Well that's all about perception, I guess. But to me, when Chevy rolled out a hybrid Silverado....BOOM!

[Alonzo]

Millions won't be able to afford to do ANYTHING.

I suggested a program that sells them gas at significantly reduced rates, rates equal to or less than what we pay now.

[Mayberry]

I suggested a program that sells them gas at significantly reduced rates Ah, a "program". More welfare. So instead of getting the shaft at the pump, I can get it on April 15 instead. There's already welfare cases driving Escalades on my nickle, I don't want to gas it up for them too. Nope, try again.

[Alonzo]

So, basically, you oppose it because of the hardships it causes some people, and, if such a program were in place, oppose doing anything to reduce such hardships.

[Mayberry]

So, basically, you oppose it because of the hardships it causes some people, and, if such a program were in place, oppose doing anything to reduce such hardships. I oppose creating more taxation for taxation's sake. It would cause unnecessary hardship on a great many people, myself included. And yes, I therefore oppose any more social programs stemming from this ridiculous idea, which would make necessary even more taxation to cover the program, thereby creating even more hardship on even more people. Get it?

[Alonzo]

So, funding research for a renewable energy souce, one that does not rely on the middle east or on a resource that is in finite quantities, is taxation for the sake of taxation?

[Mayberry]

So, funding research for a renewable energy souce, one that does not rely on the middle east or on a resource that is in finite quantities, is taxation for the sake of taxation? The way the government "re-appropriates" funds nowadays doesn't exactly make me want to jump right in and give up more of my money to them. Sure, we need to research renewables. But not by jacking the price of gas through the roof. The government gets enough tax money off of gas as it is. If the oil companies were smart, they'd be doing research with their record profits, to ensure their survival in the future.

[Churchel]

I decided to put some more thought into all of this.Â*Â*The things we are running into is making minimal impact on the individual consumer without a Major economic impact.Â*Â*

Some of the ideas and angles I have came up with is that our CPI relies on heavy grade petrol, like diesel and JP5.Â*Â*Our individual transportaion costs arise from gasolie, or light petrol.

Since this is a two front battle, we need to figure out what is best first, and best first in my opinion is infrastructure.Â*Â*The best part about diesel engines is that they can eat practically anthing.Â*Â*I helped layout a mixing machine that currently run my brothers truck, a family owned bulldozer, and soon my parents volkswagen.Â*Â*We run an 80-10-5 of vegetable oil, kerosine, and gasoline.Â*Â*The primary ingrediant is used frier oil and that is free for disposal. Currently to make this fuel it costs 40 cents a gallon.Â*Â*

If we can build just that aspect of recycling product into energy, we can keep the cost of transportation from increasing.Â*Â*We need to redirct profits to research and production of diesel energy alternatives first, that allows a lateral consumer shift with minimal change.

We need to divert costs from paying farmers not to grow into growing energy, but we need to keep the bright minds in an open court to figure out a cost effective way to do this.Â*Â*All of the answers are currently not solved, but this would be my path to ride out fo this.

[Labrocca]

I would be for a bill to raise taxes on gas only if the money was truly spent on other energy resource technology. I am thinking of spending $25k to get solar panels on my house next year. I am too worried about the rising costs and if there is a world war power outages will be the norm. Living in Las Vegas we get sun 300+ days of the year.

I am a big fan of bio fuel as well. I think we should legalize the growing of Cannabis in order to create hemp fuel.

http://www.artistictreasure.com/learnmorecleanair.html
http://www.geocities.com/medicalmarijuana2003/fact30.htm
http://www.hempcar.org/petvshemp.shtml

bah...

[Mayberry]

Busing costs go up and up
Rising fuel prices stretching school districts' budgets

By Israel Saenz Caller-Times
August 1, 2006


Higher gas prices have Corpus Christi school officials keeping a close eye on district funds and could put some middle school students on foot.

Increased cost of fuel is affecting everything from busing of students to security vehicles for the city's school districts in the upcoming year, as well as sparking changes on some bus routes.

Corpus Christi Independent School District Transportation Director Don Davenport said his department has budgeted an estimated $125,000 extra for transportation costs.

In the 2005-2006 school year, the district spent $575,000 on transportation, and Davenport said this year they would spend some $700,000.

"In order that we maintain the same standards, with the increased cost of fuel, this is what it would cost us to do it," he said. "We anticipate the same number of miles for transportation for school buses."

Davenport added that fuel costs have led the district to eliminate some bus route stops in the area in between Cimarron Boulevard and Airline Road. He said a crossing guard has been added at the intersection of Brockhampton Street and Cimarron for students attending Kaffie Middle School.

The school, which serves grades six through eight, is about a half-mile from the intersection. Davenport said the changes will affect between 40 to 50 children, and the school district will notify parents of the changes in an advertisement on Friday, as well as update the bus route information on the school district's Web site. By law, school districts must provide transportation to students who live more than two miles away from their campus or who have to cross hazardous areas to get to school.

He said school buses traveled a collective 2 million miles in the 2005-2006 school year.

Other area school districts are faced with higher costs for transportation. Officials with West Oso, Tuloso-Midway and Calallen school districts all say they will have to pay more for busing students, security vehicles, maintenance and repairs.

The Flour Bluff Independent School District did not anticipate any increases in transportation costs this school year.

School districts do not pay state sales taxes for fuel. CCISD will have to fuel up vehicles at a cost of $2.27 per-gallon.

West Oso Independent School District officials report they would need to spend between $8,000 and $9,000 more on fuel costs alone, and Calallen Independent School District officials said they have budgeted an extra $110,000 in total transportation costs.

"We'll continue to look at it every year in the budget billing process," said Financial Director Erich Morris. "All signs are pointing to a continued increase."

Morris said the school district also has increased its rate of reimbursement for school district employees who use their vehicles on the job, from 35 cents to 44 cents per mile.

Tuloso-Midway School District Assistant Superintendent Carol Sue Hipp said higher fuel costs means a jump from $267,000 on total transportation costs last year to an estimated $325,000 this year. She said gas costs would also put a dent in delivering parts for repairs.

"As gas prices go up, so do the parts on all transportation equipment," she said.

The Average Joe suffers twice. And more. Perhaps we should require school districts to use biodiesel or something. But they have no incentive to do so, since, as a government agency, they merely pass the increased costs on to the tax payer.

[dsanthony]

This would lower the demand for gas and make people be more conscious of how much they are using. I also would propose a food stamp like program, where those in economic need can get a discounted rate on their heating, gas for their car (if possible, make it a limited amount discouring excessive driving). Basically, it would attempt to eliminate the economic hardship such a move would result in for some families. It would help with pollution and make the need for new technology more urgent. The increase (since the actual cost is not $5, and you don't just want to hand the oil companies free money) would be done through taxes, 100% of which would be funneled into research for renewable energy.


Finally, an almost-honest liberal! I've been trying to get libs (especially Dem politicians) to admit that they've been calling for higher gas prices for years. Their recent outrage when gas prices reached $3 a gallon was campy theatre at best.

What even you won't admit is that your real goal is to make driving a car impossible for anyone making less than $100,000 a year. I drive by the Democratic victims every day who stand at the bus stops trying to get to work. An 8 hour work day is easily stretched to 10 or even 12 hours when one relies on public transportation.

Not happy with forcing blacks and poor whites into public transport, the Dems now want to push all but the middle classes onto the bus system. Like the NEA, bus operators and administrators are a major Dem constituency.

Of course, Babs Streisand will continue to fly her private jet to France for a film festival, or to Boston for fresh lobster. But soon, more of the dem's victims will be packed like lemmings on the leper colony that is public transportation.

[Alonzo]

What even you won't admit is that your real goal is to make driving a car impossible for anyone making less than $100,000 a year.

Yes, I want to make things expensive, I wouldn't dream of actually having a clean environment. I've never even given it a second thought.

This site needs a reading comprehension test.

[Mayberry]

Yes, I want to make things expensive, I wouldn't dream of actually having a clean environment. I've never even given it a second thought.

This site needs a reading comprehension test. No one is arguing against a clean environment. We are arguing about the way you want to go about it. Forcing 60% of the cars off the road ain't the way to do it. $5.00 gasoline will just triple diesel engine sales, and folks will start brewing their own fuel. There are still a few resourceful Americans left out there that will find a way around things. Stop government handouts and redirect the funds to alternative energy research. How 'bout that? Give tax incentives for energy savings. How 'bout that? (And I ain't just talking about hybrid cars) Give me 440 volts at my house instead of 220. 440 is much more efficient, but big brother doesn't think I'm smart enough to have 440. Better yet, let me generate my own power and get off the grid entirely. That would suit me fine, but I'm not allowed.

[Alonzo]

Ya, ok. Anderson seemed to make the point that I simply want to make driving expensive and make people pay more. No actual reason other than that.

[dsanthony]

Ya, ok. Anderson seemed to make the point that I simply want to make driving expensive and make people pay more. No actual reason other than that.


I assume you meant Anthony, not Anderson. A small lie, or just a mistake?

No, I did not make that point. I made the point that liberals, as a rule, lie about their goals and agenda, believing that the "working classes" are too dumb to see through the smoke screens they set up. If you were so admantly opposed to either recognizing or admitting the true goals and effects of your $5 a gallon gasoline, you should look at yourself and ask why?

[Rider]

Mayberry, just an aside here, but have you looked into the Siverado hybrid? It's all about a massive rolling inverter system, probably intended for contractors. It' not about fuel economy.

Besides, all of these proud hybrid owners are going to get a rude awakening when they get the bill for the change out of those batteries. You can buy a lot of gas for that kinda dough...maybe a couple of grand.

[bobbylien]

Mayberry, just an aside here, but have you looked into the Siverado hybrid? It's all about a massive rolling inverter system, probably intended for contractors. It' not about fuel economy.

Besides, all of these proud hybrid owners are going to get a rude awakening when they get the bill for the change out of those batteries. You can buy a lot of gas for that kinda dough...maybe a couple of grand.

You will save more than enough money by not buying gas over the years before you have to replace the batteries. I'd imagine they are just like my iPods(i have 4 of them hah). They can take so many recharges and then the battery starts taking less and less charge.
An electric car isnt practical for many Americans. Most electric car batteries struggle to make it 40miles without another charge. They are reasonable for people in large cities though.

[Mayberry]

Mayberry, just an aside here, but have you looked into the Siverado hybrid? Not really. I only look at new cars to see what I'll be driving in 10 years. You will save more than enough money by not buying gas over the years before you have to replace the batteries. I'd imagine they are just like my iPods(i have 4 of them hah). They can take so many recharges and then the battery starts taking less and less charge.
I would imagine it probably just averages out. I don't know how many batteries those things have, but I would think it's quite a few. Also, the newer technology gel cells, etc.. are likely what's being used, and they are HIGH dollar. It seems converting anything to alternative fuels isn't very cost effective. I looked into converting my truck to propane. The conversion costs as much as the truck is worth, and propane doesn't get as good of gas mileage as gasoline, so the savings are cancelled. I also looked at converting my boat to diesel. Unless I home brewed biodiesel, the cost of the engines would far outweigh any fuel savings. (If I could only suck hydrogen out of the water!) Time will tell if the hybrids are a good alternative or not. Personally, I am skeptical. I've seen a lot of the "latest and greatest" turn out to be not so good.

[Churchel]

Better yet, let me generate my own power and get off the grid entirely. That would suit me fine, but I'm not allowed.


You are perfectly allowed. Here (http://www.puc.state.tx.us/electric/directories/pgc/self-gen_list.htm) is a contact list for you to start looking at. Check the total megawatt capacity on the far right of the spreadsheet, and look for the very low ones, those are home consumers who are selling energy back at wholesale prices. Pennsylvania is much easier, using a simple device that removes the individuals power generation from the service line if that service line goes down. Then when the meter is checked, a check is sent to that individual for buyback.

As far as the government versus the market, your fundamental thought flaw is thinking that any corporation out there is going to fix anything if it does not generate profit. This is not a time to talk profits, but lifestyle and civilization preservation. That is too important for anyone who is steered by the bottom line.

[Mayberry]

All the entities on the spreadsheet appear to be businesses or universities. I did contact ERCOT who told me I could generate my own power if I got a permit from the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality, TCEQ (yeah, right) to operate a generator, and installed an automatic switchgear with SCADA (control system) compatability so the system operator could control my output breaker. I couldn't get a clear answer on weather or not I HAD to be connected to the grid. As you can imagine, the switchgear is quite expensive. And what are the odds of me getting an air permit? I'd say Slim to None, and Slim died. Even if I could, it would undoubtedly take years, and lots of money I don't have. your fundamental thought flaw is thinking that any corporation out there is going to fix anything if it does not generate profit. Then that is their own fundamental flaw, to allow the infrastructure that supports their profit making to fall into disrepair. But that is the attitude of a lot of corporations today. They're only focused on short term profits, and figure they'll pass their problems on at the next corporate take-over.

[Churchel]

You guys need to understand where I am coming from on this. I work for a technology company. They are publically traded, which I consider great. Energy companies cannot or should not be controlled by share holders. Sometimes I feel like driving to the rich part of town and putting a 100 dollar bill in someones mailbox.

Gas prices affect me directly.

Moving on. We need to see if this (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060818/bs_afp/irelandscienceenergy) is legitimate. It might usher in a new era if it is.

[Mayberry]

Energy companies cannot or should not be controlled by share holders. Because the government does such a great job? The government is the cause of high energy prices, due to manipulation of the market through "energy policies" tailored to their favorite campaign contributors. We need to see if this is legitimate. I certainly hope so, but I also bet that the gov't/ oil co. co-op will bury it in so much red tape that it'll never see the light of day.