with falling gas prices, suv sales jump, demand for hybrids drops

According to news reports coming out today, due to the recent drop in gas prices, and generous financial incentives put forward by the auto industry, sales of SUVS and trucks are back up, and the sales of hybrids are down. Needless to say, this is a bad thing, and demonstrates the immediate need for a substantial gas tax (or policy that sets a price floor at $4 a gallon or more). We have a very small window of opportunity in which to effect the change necessary if we’re to avoid the most destructive consequences of global warming, and we cannot afford to lose the momentum we’ve gained these past several months… I know a gas tax is going to be hard to sell to Americans, who have been hit hard by this economic downturn that we’re all living through, but there are things that can be done right now. The Big Three should be made not only to drop their lawsuits against states like California that are passing aggressive emissions standards, but stop all incentives on vehicles that get less than 40 miles per gallon. Their $15 billion bailout should be contingent upon it… And, before anyone starts lecturing me on how a gas tax would fall disproportionately on the poor, I should point out that, if it were up to me, the money raised by way of the gas tax should be funneled into mass transportation, job creation in the energy sector, and programs for those most impacted by rising fuel costs… The bottom line is that we absolutely need President-elect Obama to provide leadership on this issue immediately. For numerous reasons, we need to break our dependence of foreign oil, and we’re not going to do that by selling more SUVs.

This entry was posted in Alternative Energy. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.


  1. Posted December 26, 2008 at 11:19 am | Permalink

    People are so stupid. They don’t even realize they can save even more money by driving smaller vehicle when the gas prices are low. Retards.

  2. Robert
    Posted December 26, 2008 at 11:38 am | Permalink

    Watch out, Edweird, Curt is out there somewhere, and when he reads you’re comment he’s gonna be all over your ass like white on rice.

  3. Posted December 26, 2008 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

    Huh? it’s less money that’s saved when prices are low versus high.

    The push is already clearly being made towards energy reduction. The more immediate need though is making sure people don’t lose their homes or have enough food to put on the table. That trumps everything right now. It’s easy to make an argument for a gas tax when you can afford it yourself. Maybe tax gas like that in a few years once we start pulling out of this reccession that’s been devestating to so many families. Just think about the guy who’s lost everything and can’t find work and has to spend money on a gas tax instead of paying that extra bill or buying those extra groceries. He’s got bigger things to worry about than global warming. I agree it’s important but there has to be a more creative solution that rewards instead of punishes.

  4. egpenet
    Posted December 26, 2008 at 12:06 pm | Permalink

    Someone was telling me how sweet a deal they got on a new SUV. What they saved will cover any jump up in gas for months to come.

    I agree with the mass transit angle with subsidies for the truly poor and working poor. Myself, Moore and many others have been arguing that for some time. Makes total sense. Sprawl into the suburbs will die a hard death during 2009-2010, but the move back into the cities or toward outlying nodes for mass transit will happen over time.

    In the meantime, we’ll all be able to bend elbows downtown or catch a cup of soup at Beezy’s or grab a fabulous meal at Biggie’s … buy art … catch a Mongolian Grille treat … etc. etc. buy a gift card or a hat or a cool tee, or funky shoes, or a cheesecake, or a pretty rock, batteries at ACE, laces at the Boot Shop, a matinee at the Vu, or play poker … all this and more, while the world catches up!

  5. Posted December 26, 2008 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

    Face it, people want large vehicles. I don’t really get it, they are hard to drive, hard to park and even if gas is cheap, I like the idea of getting from point a to point b for $.25.

  6. Kazoo
    Posted December 26, 2008 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

    Wildly off topic, but when in the hell is J Neils going to open. Seems like it should have been a long time ago and I never see anyone working on it.

  7. Posted December 26, 2008 at 1:20 pm | Permalink

    The argument for a gas tax is about much more than just environmental issues. Many localities are dealing with the reality of ages bridges and roads and have no real means of paying for safe upgrades. When demand for gas drops due to more efficient vehcles, tax revenue drops leaving cash strapped states like Michigan in the cold. While the arguments for raising gas taxes are painted as being payback to all the Red State assholes who drive Lincoln Navigators, it is truly about much more.

    Heres some articles I found through a lame, EoS/Brackache style google search:




    Remember Minneapolis? It was no surprise to many civil engineers.

  8. egpenet
    Posted December 26, 2008 at 6:16 pm | Permalink

    The bottom has also dropped out of the recycling business in every aspect.

    What WILL be interesting, given the MPSC decision to change utility pricing and phase in higher residential rates over the next five years, is to see if solar and other alternative heating and cooling resources pick up in Michigan.

  9. Mark H.
    Posted December 26, 2008 at 8:19 pm | Permalink

    gasoline should be taxed pretty heavily, a dollar a gallon, with a tax rebate of some kind for lower income people. Higher prices or rationing are the only way to affect decisions that are basically market based decisions.

  10. Ol' E Cross
    Posted December 26, 2008 at 9:37 pm | Permalink

    Can’t we just figure a way to raise gasoline prices by going to war with somebody over something? Then both right and left will be happy…

  11. norespectforhybridowners
    Posted December 27, 2008 at 8:16 pm | Permalink

    well some people can’t afford those ugly tin can hybrids. those unamerican cars are making the people who can’t afford one of your hippy cars because price is too high on them. and with the gas prices down the people who drive older cars who are poor are better off and can save money. global warming is such a hypocritical theory. made up by enviro nut hippys like gore if he did not open his hippy mouth this global warming BS would not be a issue as it does not exist. the earth is still in the warm period hippys time for you to pack up your granola bars and go somewhere else. some animals go extinct its natural. polar bears are disappearing because thee earth is still thawing from the ice age called the warm period. even the people who own classic old cars you are destroying their hobby and their car they like to drive. your E10 BS is killing their engines you are making everyone miserable to make your rich hippy life better and ours worse. the 10% corn in fuel can be used to feed hungry kids across the world instead of you beastly rich bozos being greedy and mixing corn in fuel for your dam hybrids. i just want to crush every hybrid and melt them down.

  12. Posted December 27, 2008 at 8:48 pm | Permalink

    Wow. This guy’s a genius.

  13. Posted December 28, 2008 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    I bet this guy was bummed when they phased out leaded gas. I bet he would have been even more bummed when he found out horse drawn carriages weren’t allowed on interstates.

  14. norespectforhybridowners
    Posted December 28, 2008 at 12:02 pm | Permalink

    no you granola hippies want to go back to horse carriages. regular cars don’t kill the earth that is BS. take your hybrids and go off a cliff.

  15. egpenet
    Posted December 28, 2008 at 3:59 pm | Permalink

    He’s right about the corn in the ethanol, but someone should tell him that sugar cane has MORE sugar and would be a good substitute for the corn.

    Plugging in electric cars to our coal-fired electric grid is no solution either, until all CO2 is sequestered.

    We should issue people permits to buy a car or truck for certain (within a relatively generous range of practical) purposes … and beyond that, no deal. Collectors can get their special plates and a permit to buy real gasoline. The rest of us get our permits and plates for work, handicap, etc. purposes. Commuters … out of luck … you take the bus, train, taxi, walk, bike, etc. … like other people in the real world. We make our downtowns “personal transportation” free, unless you live there and park your rod for most of the time. Sound creepy? It’s what they do in London, in New York, mostly, and is happening in other places. You need personal transportation … prove it. Oh, and premium gasoline is frozen at $4.00 a gallon, medium at $3.50, and regular at $3.00 minimum. The monies are split 50% Feds for infrastructure/50% States for schools. And we abolish property taxes and local control over schools. Whew! I’m outta breath.

  16. Posted December 28, 2008 at 4:40 pm | Permalink

    I can’t figure out who’s dumber now, Mr. No Respect or egpenet’s fascist vision of the world.

  17. Brackache
    Posted December 28, 2008 at 5:04 pm | Permalink

    Unlike overbearing governments, which have never hurt anybody, global warming has killed millions of people in the last century alone.

  18. egpenet
    Posted December 28, 2008 at 6:10 pm | Permalink

    Dude … it’s a kind of “benevolent” fascism.

    You’ll be happy again.

    Like Alice, simply follow the directions on the note … EAT THIS.

  19. Posted December 28, 2008 at 7:35 pm | Permalink

    Actually, Brackache, environmental change has killed millions and continues to kill more and more every year. Perhaps not here in nice, safe USA, but climate change, deforestation and diversion of water resources put billions at risk every year and have killed millions and will continue to make life pretty awful for years to come.

    I often think that people here in the lower 48 really have no clue since the majority of people that feel the brunt of man’s folly live in places that few of us with blue passports ever go.

    Hybrids won’t change this, of course. It’s entirely naive of anyone to think that buying a Prius will solve the world’s problems although there’s absolutely no reason not to explore technologies that might get me from point a to point b on $.25.





  20. Curt Waugh
    Posted December 29, 2008 at 9:32 am | Permalink

    While I believe that “global warming” (aka, “climate change; aka, “pollution”) would be better described as only a part of the overall effect that humanity has on the planet, you’re going to have to do better than “environmental change has killed millions and continues to kill more and more every year.”

    Almost all malnutrition in the world is political, not climate-related. The fact is that farming technology can easily feed probably twice as many people as we have now. Yes, I’m only talking about food here, not housing or education or medicine or any other of a number of factors that lead to a healthy population. The fact remains that we could easily feed everybody a couple times over. Zimbabwe used to raise a LOT of food. Now they don’t. Pure politics.

    Also, show me the stats that the human population is shrinking. It’s not. Not even close. Putting ALL good science aside, there appears to be a circumstantial link between global warming and population growth. Explain that. (Just throwing that out there for argument’s sake.)

  21. Brackache
    Posted December 29, 2008 at 2:36 pm | Permalink

    Thanks for the articles, dude — a good read. I wasn’t talking about deforestation though, just global warming. But still a good read, even though the authors themselves admit it doesn’t prove causality (deforestation increasing malaria cases). I’d have to do a little research on the range and alighting habits of the malaria mosquitos though, as most of our native species prefer dense vegetation to alight on between food source and breeding site. Seems, at first, counter intuitive that clearing out vegetation would benefit the mosquitos, but again I’m comparing them to native species which is rather presumptuous of me. Regardless, it’s interesting.

    I think, though, that my basic contention (we should be more afraid of governments than climate change, based on the higher kill count of governments) still stands.

    Common knowledge, I think, also contends clearly that Government actions have forced more native populations to unwillingly migrate and/or degrade their cultural traditions than global warming has.

    I’m not saying one is real or more valid than the other, I’m just prioritizing my fears based on which of the two is a greater proven threat. Which is also why I’m more nervous about getting in a car than I am about going shooting.

    Nor am I saying we shouldn’t try to do anything about it. What I am saying is that we shouldn’t empower governments to do it, blindly trusting them to not abuse that power, which they usually end up doing.

    Tally up WWI and WWII deaths alone. That’s a lot of victems of government action, justified by whatever propagandic humanity-saving idealism was used in each nation’s case.

    Just some thoughts.

  22. Posted December 29, 2008 at 7:25 pm | Permalink

    Proving causality is always difficult without using some sort of designed experiment. However, the absence of being able to prove something causally does not imply that a particular causal relationship does not exist. Think lung cancer and smoking. Without some sort of designed experiment, it is nearly impossible to show without a doubt that smoking causes lung cancer. However, the data is out there, and we can reasonably assume that smoking is strongly associated with lung cancer. Scientific papers always have to err on the side of caution.

    That being said, malaria, mosquitos and human interactions with their environment make up the brunt of my own research interests and I can tell you that I’m pretty certain that human beings are fairly adept and fucking with up their own living spaces and paying the most dire of prices. We could get into it in another forum, if you’d like.

    Global warming, human caused or not, is causing some serious problems for a lot of folks that don’t reside in the lower 48 and will likely cause more and more problems in the future. There’s a lot of science out there and, regardless of what people think, getting scientists to largely agree on something takes a lot of convincing. I really do not believe that encouraging car companies to make more efficient cars and creating more responsible environmental policy is going to lead to the 2nd holocaust.

    You are absolutely right about the native issues. Historically, native folks would just move to accommodate climate changes. Now they are stuck on shitty reservations due to shitty white man’s policy. Government has done a lot of worse things than climate change has done up until this point, but that’s no reason to not be worried about both.

  23. Posted December 29, 2008 at 7:28 pm | Permalink

    Oh and Curt, the problem isn’t that the population is shrinking. The problem is that, despite a world that has knowledge and technical resources, the quality of life for a good 40% of the world’s population sucks worse than you or I could ever imagine. It’s a crime.

  24. Curt Waugh
    Posted December 30, 2008 at 2:05 pm | Permalink

    Oh and Curt, the problem isn’t that the population is shrinking. The problem is that, despite a world that has knowledge and technical resources, the quality of life for a good 40% of the world’s population sucks worse than you or I could ever imagine. It’s a crime.

    That’s kind of my point, dude. I was merely saying that climate change itself really hasn’t caused any deaths at all (or far fewer by comparison). It’s the “crimes” of the powerful that cause the deaths, not some extra energy in the atmosphere. You made a blanket statement to the contrary and then defended it by changing the subject. Sounds like you’re just mad at everybody. Are you mad at everybody? More to the point: Who DON’T you blame for the sorry state of the world?

  25. Posted December 30, 2008 at 7:27 pm | Permalink

    Well, Curt, I am not really mad at anybody nor was I even attacking you. Sounds to me like you are a pretty angry guy.

    However, you are very naive if you think that climate change hasn’t killed anyone. Granted, bad governments make it much easier to die.

    In fact, I just went to a conference where I saw presentation after presentation of how disease vector habitats are quickly moving northward, where populations may not be naturally resistant to a host of fun diseases. Bad government an infrastructure can make this situation worse, but you are sadly mistaken if you believe that people don’t die from a changing climate.

    Maybe fewer deaths are from climate change than war but maybe not. I didn’t realize this was an accounting game. Maybe Rwanda was better than the holocaust since fewer people died? Maybe the Beltway sniper is better than John Wayne Gacy because he killed fewer people? I don’t think so.

  26. Brackache
    Posted December 30, 2008 at 8:20 pm | Permalink

    If your argument is that we should empower John Wayne Gacy to help defend us against the Beltway sniper, I argue for a better solution.

  27. Posted December 30, 2008 at 8:24 pm | Permalink

    I don’t know, I kinf of like the idea of cops in clown suits.

  28. Curt Waugh
    Posted December 31, 2008 at 11:48 am | Permalink

    dude, I have no idea what you’re talking about. You’re clearly brilliant and I have no place arguing whatever the hell it is you’re arguing about here. Apparently, my knowledge of global climopoliticomilitaroclowning is not up to yours.

    Oh, and by the way, you don’t have a fucking clue what the long-term effects of climate change will be. Sure, it’s real, but neither you nor anybody else knows what will ultimately happen so maybe you could consider backing off just a teensy bit on your know-it-all spew.

  29. Curt Waugh
    Posted December 31, 2008 at 11:52 am | Permalink

    Yes, that sounded harsh. You didn’t see my body language which clearly would have made that seem much less so. I’m kinda slouchy and my eyes are darting around. I’m either coked up or just spewing, too.

  30. Old Goat
    Posted December 31, 2008 at 12:09 pm | Permalink

    To get back to the thread…A pent up demand for spacious, comfortable vehicles comes as no surprise. Would you rather drive to Colorado in a Geo or a Cadillac? I’ll take the Cadillac, if I can afford the gas, Thank you! I tell my children that my goal is to again “Live in my ca,” which begs the question: Would I rather live in a Geo, or a Cadillac?…!!!

  31. Posted December 31, 2008 at 5:32 pm | Permalink

    Curt, I’m sorry I fed your cocaine habit. I was under the impression that this was a discussion on a web site, which means copius amounts of mud and names being thrown at each other like children. It’s just fun that way and I’m sorry I stunned you with my brilliance.

    Did I say anything about long term effects of climate change? No. I was referring to things that have already happened.

    I believe, that you, quite possibly, have no idea what you are talking about? It’s possible.

    And me, I’d rather drive a Geo. Fuck a Cadillac. I’d rather save a buck.

  32. Old Goat
    Posted December 31, 2008 at 6:21 pm | Permalink

    Have a nice, cramped, bumpy trip, pal!

  33. Posted December 31, 2008 at 6:43 pm | Permalink

    Since you asked for it, I won’t be the one crying when I’m out of a job. I’ll put up with a small house and a small car since it means that I have more money saved in the bank or a non-existent house mortgage.

    That’s the trouble with a lot of people, they want way more than they can afford.

  34. Old Goat
    Posted January 1, 2009 at 12:59 am | Permalink

    What about your kids dude, diapers to college tuition. Makes a big difference you know, or don’t you have any?

  35. Posted January 1, 2009 at 9:01 am | Permalink

    If I blow all my money on too big a house, too big a car, snowmobiles and boats, then my kids ain’t going to have much.

  36. Old Goat
    Posted January 1, 2009 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

    My gawd, you’re right dude. My ten year old Chevy truck is definitely too massive, my wife’s eight year old mini van is too new, my fleet of four kayaks and canoe is too expensive to operate, my 150 year old house is too large and my four college graduated children have too little and must frequently borrow my above mentioned assets to meet their needs. How they suffer.

  37. Posted January 1, 2009 at 1:58 pm | Permalink

    Look, you were the one talking about Cadillacs over Geos, not me.

    Maybe you didn’t borrow over your means but there are plenty of people that did and still do, much of which has lead to this credit mess we’re in now.

  38. FLU-BIRD
    Posted January 1, 2009 at 4:18 pm | Permalink

    gas prices down now we no longer have to watch that annoying ad with that jerk riding his stupid bicycle around doing that stupid song

  39. Old Goat
    Posted January 1, 2009 at 9:16 pm | Permalink

    Missed the ad with the bicycle jerk. Now is a good time to slap a surcharge on gasoline and use all that money for car insurance. At about 75 cents a gallon, we could completely eliminate the curse of uninsured drivers. A truly great idea, who’s time will never come!

  40. Brackache
    Posted January 1, 2009 at 11:23 pm | Permalink

    Perhaps we can slap a $10 tax on gas, and if people can’t afford it, we can have an individual citizen bailout.

    Each person would get $1,000,000 from uncle sam, curing all of our economic problems!

    Just so it doesn’t look like the Government is just giving away free money, and to make sure it’s spent responsibly, we can appoint an individual citizen czar to oversee and regulate how everyone spends it.

    We’ll simply call him, “the Czar.”

  41. Brackache
    Posted January 2, 2009 at 7:44 am | Permalink

    Wait, is the point to get people to use less gas, or to fix roads and shit? Now I’m confused. Seems like the point is to tax shit just when it finally gets affordable again, for the hell of it.

  42. Posted January 2, 2009 at 5:09 pm | Permalink

    I think the point is to tax to pay for services, but that’s a hard sell so to make it sexy for the left, they put this energy conservation spin on it.

    People seem to always forget that roads cost money.

  43. Brackache
    Posted January 2, 2009 at 9:07 pm | Permalink

    Some States are considering privatization.

  44. Old Goat
    Posted January 2, 2009 at 11:26 pm | Permalink

    Or Oregon, which is considering a tax on mileage instead of gas. This makes sense from a usage standpoint, but is inherently unfair to small car owners who commute long distances. Vehicle weight would need to be factored in. Large, over weight semi tractor trailers are what destroys our roads. Prospect street through Ypsi bares this out, and has become treacherous for vehicles.

  45. JL Scott
    Posted January 5, 2009 at 5:24 pm | Permalink

    Just listen to Rush Limbaugh or Micheal Savage and you liberals won’t need this nonsense Al Gore blog – you hippies did so many drugs in the 1960’s you can’t think straight and are more concerned about sea otters and elk than Energy Independence. You can’t get employment in the private sector, so you teach at Universities and brain wash our youth with more Liberalism. We need more oil and drilling is the only way. Not driving shitbox death trap smartcars and hybrids that are only cost effective to the hollywood elite.

  46. JL Scott
    Posted January 5, 2009 at 5:25 pm | Permalink

    Plus – I need the SUV to tow my 23 ft Mako. I like to fish and Scuba Dive. They don’t make Hybrid outboards that make 250 hp and have a 100 mile + range.

  47. JL Scott
    Posted January 5, 2009 at 5:28 pm | Permalink

    Crude oil goes into plastics, synthetics, rubber, etc. There is no substitute nor will they be in the next 50 + years. Al Gore is full of shit along with Jane “China Syndrome” Fonda, Bill Clinton, Robert Kennedy Jr, and Mario Cuome – no nuclear power plants here! Thanks for the enery policies that put us here. Now leave gas at $2.00 a gallon or you all go to hell!

  48. JL Scott
    Posted January 5, 2009 at 5:29 pm | Permalink

    Al Gore made more $$ from his “Invoicient Truth” tour than any oil CEO. He has made in the 100 millions. Let him pay for the roads.

  49. JL Scott
    Posted January 5, 2009 at 5:37 pm | Permalink

    In 1979, the big issue was “we are heading for the next Ice Age”, then “Global Warming” – frankly – I consider it all “Global Whining” – Wa! Global Warming is a HOAX! Remember that Thanksgiving Day cruise last year where the kooks want to Anartica to see the reduction in “Ice Caps” for themselves? THey hit an iceberg and sank – doesn’t sound too warm to me!


  50. Brackache
    Posted January 5, 2009 at 5:49 pm | Permalink

    Groan. Here’s where everyone feels great about themselves for attacking the token strawman.

  51. Old Goat
    Posted January 5, 2009 at 6:49 pm | Permalink

    Shoot the messenger; Mr. Scott?

  52. mark
    Posted January 5, 2009 at 7:10 pm | Permalink

    He a friend of yours, Brackache?

  53. Brackache
    Posted January 5, 2009 at 7:24 pm | Permalink

    I generally don’t make friends with people who might agree with me on some things but are stupid assholes. I’d rather have nice, intelligent friends who are wrong about everything.

  54. Posted January 5, 2009 at 9:45 pm | Permalink

    “You can’t get employment in the private sector, so you teach at Universities and brain wash our youth with more Liberalism. “

    Now that is just fucking hilarious.

  55. JL Scott
    Posted January 7, 2009 at 10:56 am | Permalink

    Ok, “Barackache” – what is your solution to our current energy situation? Not drilling? When OPEC is cutting production and now Vladimir Putin is shutting down NG supply to Europe? We ought to be giving incentives for more energy exploration at the same time we are developing alternatives. We simply can’t look strickly to “alternative energy” when there is no cost effective substitute for crude in the forseable future (decades). Lets hire people to work both in exploration and alternative energy. Having these stumulis packages in which only a fraction goes to where it supposed to, and the rest goes for …giving federal judges raises..WTF is up with that? All three branches of elected office at the Federal level should take 10% pay cuts in my opinion for this mess they got us into. What happened with the $700 billion (the first figure mentioned) to buy “bad debt” from banks? Now they changed there mind and allow for stock purchases, and now I read Goldman Sachs is now paying something like $7b in bonuses to people already making $400,000+ a year? Nice use of our “bailout” dollars. May as well “bailout” Bernie Madoff victims while we are at it.

  56. Brackache
    Posted January 7, 2009 at 12:27 pm | Permalink

    It’s Brackache, dammit. Short for Brackinald Achery.

    I’m not against drilling, I’m against a gas tax, and I am against all bailouts.

    All I said was that you strike me as a stupid asshole who’s easy for everyone on this blog to dismiss, because you come across as their characature of a typical republican, primarily because of how you see them as characatures, and how you phrase your arguments in ways they can easily dismiss. You’ll take my rebuke and improve if you know what’s good for small government principles. I’m sure in real life you’re not as stupid or assholey as you appear. I ad hominemed you because I wanted to make sure I got your attention. I spank because I love.

  57. JL Scott
    Posted January 7, 2009 at 1:37 pm | Permalink

    Ok, point taken – I will make my responses better next time.
    I am with you on all points mentioned – no gas tax and smaller government, and no bailout of any kind.

  58. Brackache
    Posted January 7, 2009 at 2:06 pm | Permalink

    That’s big of you, I’m really impressed! I withdraw my stupid asshole remark, and hold you in higher esteem than myself.

  59. Posted January 7, 2009 at 2:11 pm | Permalink

    You guys are geniuses.

  60. Brackache
    Posted January 7, 2009 at 2:17 pm | Permalink


  61. Posted January 7, 2009 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

    I want my 3 wishes.

  62. JL Scott
    Posted January 7, 2009 at 2:37 pm | Permalink

    You may have a chance to vote for the both of us in 2012, since Rush Limbaugh can’t afford to run ( Presidency doesn’t pay $400 mil for 8 yr clear channel contract), and Micheal Savage will be retired by then.

  63. Robert
    Posted January 7, 2009 at 4:12 pm | Permalink

    Falling gas prices? I paid 2.03 per gallon just now. Don’t be so sure the happy days are here again when it comes to gas prices. Those fuckers have us by the nads and can do pretty much anything they want.

  64. JL Scott
    Posted January 7, 2009 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

    Preach on – I hope it is years before we see $4.00 a gal again, but it seems America is sitting ducks for the politicians who want us all to trade our beloved vehicles in and drive electric golf carts on the highways that will cost $30,000- $40,000. As of now, more lossed for “Big Three” because the “Volt” won’t sell, and the hybrids they made are collecting dust. They have to levy huge taxes on gas to force us to pay top $ for cars we don’t even like.

  65. JL Scott
    Posted January 7, 2009 at 4:21 pm | Permalink

    Have to love GM and their “Volt” PR stunt. Have photographs of a few congressmen riding in a “Chevy Volt” to the capital, while Waggoner, Nardelli (Mr Home Depot $210 Mil Severance – now with Chrysler) beg for more Billions. They walked out of the Volt with “thumbs up” to the cameras, while heading home in their Escallades, Avalanches and Navigators.

  66. Robert
    Posted January 7, 2009 at 4:35 pm | Permalink

    You’re hilarious, JL Scott. Was it the “politicians” who put the prices up at $4 this past year? Which ones, I’m curious to know.

  67. JL Scott
    Posted January 7, 2009 at 5:36 pm | Permalink

    No, it was all the hedge funds who swim with the democrates, George Soros and T-Boone are classic examples. They run with the trend to bid up the price of a commodity – or equity for that matter like crude, NG, platinum…etc. Then after the short sellers are busted out on the opposite position, you then short the market and make money driving billions the other direction. Soros make over 1 billion in a single day shorting the US dollar. Figure that one out – and he votes 100% for the democrates – loves Barack Obama – you think he loves Barack for his “Redistribution of Wealth?” – for the tax increases Soros, Buffet and T-Boone will be getting?

  68. JL Scott
    Posted January 7, 2009 at 5:41 pm | Permalink

    And the housing crisis, the sub-prime was 100% created and orchestrated by the Democrates, “Chuck You Schumer”, Barney Frank “Banking Queen”, and Chris Dodd. Making it mandatory that banks lend money to people who had no means to pay back risky loans. So now they live in them for free. I can’t tell you how many properties in S Florida have been months awaiting forclosure while the HOA dues are piling up and yet the people who should not have been given the loans in the first place are living rent free. Think about this one, if someone has no money to put down on property, what incentive do they have to make payments if they are upside down ? Sorry to be brief, but time to leave work and go home.

  69. Brackache
    Posted January 7, 2009 at 6:13 pm | Permalink

    I’ll just stay out of this from now on, shall I?

  70. Posted January 7, 2009 at 6:51 pm | Permalink

    He’s your vice president.

  71. Brackache
    Posted January 7, 2009 at 7:17 pm | Permalink

    Groan. Here’s where everyone feels great about themselves for attacking the token strawman.

    I called this.

    This whole Republican vs. Democrat false choice misdirection makes me puke. I got news for ya: neither side obeys the Constitution. Both sides ratchet up the police state and the welfare state. Both sides inflate the currency to pay for it all. Both sides accuse each other of stuff that they do themselves, and blame each other for everything that they both voted on together. It’s all bullshit.

  72. JL Scott
    Posted January 8, 2009 at 7:25 am | Permalink

    Brackache, you are correct again – if the founding fathers were ressurected, they would push to have several representatives from both parties tried for treason. All are on the take one way or another. However, the housing situation leans more blame to the democrates, but Bush and his cronies got us into a war we couldn’t afford, forgot about Bin Laden in the mix – plus he ended up increasing the size of government more than any democrate had previously. I feel with Barack now he will increase the government size even further in an attempt to create jobs. The problem is it is so much less efficient that having incentives to create jobs in the private sector.

  73. the real Robert
    Posted January 10, 2009 at 3:21 pm | Permalink

    Yeah, JL Scott, you geniuses did a great job over the last eight years. Your silly game of pin the blame on the donkey is laughable. Now that you fucked everything up, I guess your strategy is to try to spread the blame around, and try to portray things as if EVERYBODY was involved with your criminal heroes. They weren’t. You should be locked in a room full of mirrors. It would be interesting to see how long it takes you to actually look at yourself.

    And, yeah, Brackache, like that was a hard one to call.

  74. Posted January 13, 2009 at 4:01 am | Permalink

    The new governance is in the hand of Barack Obama. There are some tells that continuous change of price of gasoline will affect the flow of the economy. People have been driving less, instead opting to walk, ride a bus, and take public transportation. Almost everything that required a lot of energy and money were put aside. With high gas prices and a deteriorating economy, spending less and saving more is crucial. Today, Americans are driving less and less, even with the lower prices, so the transportation commission is considering a hike in gas taxes. The money from gas taxes is needed to fund road construction and repair, and the current amount being collected from gas taxes is apparently not enough.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


BUY LOCAL... or shop at Amazon through this link Banner Initiative Melissa Detloff