Obama mocked the GOP idea that drilling for oil would lower gas prices...

[PaulS]

I forgot tax credits for electric/hybrid cars which also lowered demand for oil.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

I forgot tax credits for electric/hybrid cars which also lowered demand for oil.

Average income for a person whu buys a Chevy Volt...wait for it...$170k a year. Why, exactly, do we need to give these people tax breaks, at the expense of everyone else? I thought Obama said that it was conservatives who want to give tax cuts to the rich, because of racisthatecrimeintolerant...

If its hybrid cars that are driving down the price of oil, why now? Hybrids have been around for quite a while now, no?

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/o...-buyers/72585/

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Average income for a person whu buys a Chevy Volt...wait for it...$170k a year. Why, exactly, do we need to give these people tax breaks, at the expense of everyone else? I thought Obama said that it was conservatives who want to give tax cuts to the rich, because of racisthatecrimeintolerant...

If its hybrid cars that are driving down the price of oil, why now? Hybrids have been around for quite a while now, no?

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/o...-buyers/72585/

right..."tax credits for the rich" if roles were reversed....

the credits were not intended to reduce demand or oil prices, they were intended as an answer to "necessarily higher" energy prices ( and to prop up GM)

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

right..."tax credits for the rich" if roles were reversed....

the credits were not intended to reduce demand or oil prices, they were intended as an answer to "necessarily higher" energy prices ( and to prop up GM)

I presume that as more Americans drive more fuel-efficient cars, that will reduce our demand. But I'd also assume that our decreased demand is more than offset by increased demand in emerging economies like China and India. Is world demand for oil significantly lower than it was a few years ago?

And even though the credits weren't "intended" to lower prices, we can chalk that up to a fringe benefit of Obama's briliance.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Average income for a person whu buys a Chevy Volt...wait for it...$170k a year. Why, exactly, do we need to give these people tax breaks, at the expense of everyone else? I thought Obama said that it was conservatives who want to give tax cuts to the rich, because of racisthatecrimeintolerant...

If its hybrid cars that are driving down the price of oil, why now? Hybrids have been around for quite a while now, no?

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/o...-buyers/72585/

Far more on the road now than in the past. And you and I will prob. drive either an all electric or a hybrid b/f we die.

The tax breaks were put in to help an industry get started. It has helped drive down the prices of hybrids/electric cars. Once an industry can stand on its own, tax breaks should be reduced. That is the arguement people make w/the oil & gas industry.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Far more on the road now than in the past. And you and I will prob. drive either an all electric or a hybrid b/f we die.

The tax breaks were put in to help an industry get started. It has helped drive down the prices of hybrids/electric cars. Once an industry can stand on its own, tax breaks should be reduced. That is the arguement people make w/the oil & gas industry.

In principle, I agree that the tax breaks were given to the oil industry too. But everyone benefitted from that. With tax breaks on electric cars, the beneficiaries (so far) are rich tree-huggers who pay the insane premium for these cars, and the unionized auto workers who make them. Remind me again, which party to both of these groups overwhelmingly vote for?

And again, Paul...given that it's irrefutable fact that these tax incentives disproportionately benefitted the wealthy, isn't it dishonest for Obama to claim that conservatives are the ones that want to give tax breaks to the rich? Isn't that intellectually dishonest?

Good exchange...

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

In principle, I agree that the tax breaks were given to the oil industry too. But everyone benefitted from that. With tax breaks on electric cars, the beneficiaries (so far) are rich tree-huggers who pay the insane premium for these cars, and the unionized auto workers who make them. Remind me again, which party to both of these groups overwhelmingly vote for?).

And again, Paul...given that it's irrefutable fact that these tax incentives disproportionately benefitted the wealthy, isn't it dishonest for Obama to claim that conservatives are the ones that want to give tax breaks to the rich? Isn't that intellectually dishonest?

Good exchange...

The point in that the price is/has been coming down and eventually we'll all prob. drive hybrids or totally electric cars (or some other technology). So it will benefit all of us and hopefully will be a small part in breaking the back of OPEC.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

The point in that the price is/has been coming down and eventually we'll all prob. drive hybrids or totally electric cars (or some other technology). So it will benefit all of us and hopefully will be a small part in breaking the back of OPEC.

I don't know that the price has been coming down steadily as more hybrids are sold. It was north of $4 very recently, then dropped like a rock.

Not sure what to make of your NYT article, as they are about as reliable and objective as Sean Hannity, probbaly less so IMHO. Gives all the credit for droppping oil prices to the US Government. This, from a paper that wants a huge US government.

Paul, I can probably find articles suggesting that - to the extent that the price droip is driven by frakking - that the drop happened in spite of Obama, not because of Obama. The democrats are adamantly opposed to exploiting oil and gas that's on federal land, and that policy has given enormous power, and unimaginable wealth, to places that aren't as hesitant to exploit their natural resources. Some of those places are not very nice places.

We cannot know what the environmental impact would have been to drilling that did not take place. We absolutely know what some of the impacts have been as a result of our resistance. Not many of the impacts are desirable.

I'm no expert on such things...but it seems to me that the liberals have turned their backs on the potentiul benefits of tapping into our own natural resources. This gives power and $$ to places that have no such reservations, and some of those places have become problematic for us. We apparently did this based on the false assumption that widely available alternative energies were around the corner, and tree-huggers have been saying that for 40 years. All in the name of global warming, which may or may not exist. Can't make it up...