Thanks for taking the time to explain. Much appreciated.

This thread has gone through many divergent places.
I'll bring it back to Mr. Cheney as I think he has done some serious damage to our country. Here is John Dean's view:
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20070629.html

For those that might not know who John Dean is, he was the White house counsel under Nixon.

So why don't you do more besides throw insults, Cannon? Back up your insults with a counterargument. I'm all ears. Or eyes, in this case.

I got attacked some threads' back for taking time to point out who John Dean was, DTS. Just to give you a heads' up you may be in for some bashing. ;)

In fact, Cannon, here's my first backup, from Rolling Stone. I await your well-informed, logical response.

<<According to Terry Tamminen, former director of the California EPA, the true costs of our oil dependence run as high as $807 billion a year ? or $2,700 for every U.S. citizen. If all the hidden costs that Americans currently pay for oil were reflected in the price at the pump, gasoline would cost more than $13 a gallon. In short, taxpayers and consumers are essentially giving the oil industry a subsidy of $10 for every gallon of gas sold in America. If we simply eliminated those subsidies and created a truly free market, renewable sources of energy would beat oil ? as well as nuclear power and coal, which receive equally grotesque subsidies. It is only through these giant subsidies that gasoline has a prayer of competing with alternative sources such as biofuels and wind, which produce energy far more cleanly and efficiently, at far less cost.>>

B, you might find the article interesting; it's by Robert Kennedy, Jr., arguing that the private market offers our best chance at developing alternative energy sources, not go'vt. :)

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...eal_solution/1

First of all there were no insults thrown. I simply stated that your post was illinformed and illogical.
Where do I start? You are suggesting that we drive the price of gas to $13 a gallon and somehow it would be a good thing? In your lust to lower oil company profits you would decimate the American economy and pretty much insure that 1/3 of Americans would starve to death. Sounds like a good idea.

This is fiction.

Again, I look forward to you actually posting any material to backup your opinion. :)

In my personal opinion, oil costing what it should actually cost would motivate fast-tracking alternative energy sources, which would, I'm hopeful, be better in the long run for our health and environment. I was citing this as an example of liberals being perfectly happy to shrink government- in this case, ending oil and coal subsidites, which would end oil and coal's monopoly on our energy policies. I am presuming, then, that you are content to support the oil industry with your tax dollars?

Again, you need to provide backup if you are going to throw out stats like "1/3 of Americans would starve to death." Please post your sources for those statistics, as I'm sure you wouldn't just make it up, because that would be being very ill-informed, right? :)

Gasoline first then Cheney.

Oil. Its everywhere. Its easy to get out of the ground, easy to process, easy to transport. And most importantly Cheap compared to any other form of energy other than nuclear (this would be for the generation of electricity of course).
And there is a very clear reason. The infrastructure for oil into gasoline and other petroleum products is in place and has been for some time. We are very, very good at turning oil into all sorts of things and getting it to market. We will have problems with OPEC, we will have refinery problems, we will have pollution problems, etc... But when all is said and done, it is cheap form of energy. Incredibly cheap compared to wind, solar, you name it except nuclear. And we cant put nuclear energy in cars (although we may try in the future long after I am dead).
I am happy people keep an eye on big oil, etc... but gasoline is mainly expensive because we tax the bejesus out of it. We will eventually change to other forms of energy as soon as technology makes it possible to produce other forms of energy cheaply. Then we might have a wind or a solar infrastructure some day. If people want change, then pray for oil prices to skyrocket making alternative forms competitive.

Cheney. Is probably one of the most powerful VP's of all time. And he has, in hindsight, made a mess of things in Iraq. And now he appears to want to make the office of VP as immune to review as possible by claiming it is not a part of the executive branch (he is the unelected head of the Senate by his reasoning). What he really wants is to increase the latitude of the executive branch. Very curious way of accomplishing this task.

His numbers are fiction therefore the rest of his assumptions are based upon fiction which makes his whole point pointless.

Robert Kennedy Jr.....that's the brainiac who blames Reagan for 9/11!:eek:

You do understand that subsidies are not unique to the USA right? I dont want to insult you but your thinking is so impractical that I really have a hard time responding because you just seem unaware of how the world works. Subsidies often are granted to keep the price of goods and services static so that the companies which are individual or unique providers can compete with foreign competitors and/or keep important goods and services being produced. You do understand that some of our biggest companies like Boeing are competing with Airbus which is supported by the govt's of the EU which have a lot more money than an individual company. You do understand that many airlines in this country would be out of business if not for govt subsidies. And your idea of letting gas go to $13 a gallon (which I believe is a bad number based upon false pretenses) would pretty much force most business to go out of business. That Farmers would not be able to transport food to market because it would cost too much to get it there. That the average citizen would be destitute because the unemployment rate would go through the roof when businesses failed and they were laid off. That the few that survived would have to take pay cuts in order to stay employed at the same time the costs of goods and services skyrocketed making them much worse off. And the list would go on.

And what do you suppose we do with our cars and homes? Just sell your car for scrap iron? Simply convert to solar panels even if you live in an urban area? It is just not realistic.

i don't think many realize just how huge an industry our oil and gas is, as well as what was pointed out below, our auto industry alone--what to do with it all...

another reason why gas remains high--oil companies are shying away from building any more refineries, from adding to their capacity, since they aren't so sure the profits would be there in future to pay those tremendous expenses now, with so many pushing towards alternative fuels.
this country turned towards relying on others' fuel for our needs, that way our environment wasn't impacted by drilling and refining, and it was cheap. it's our own fault that oil and gas are where they are, as right now we seem to be floundering around in circles aimlessly trying to figure out what to do about our energy.
there is nothing wrong with relying on oil and subsequently gasoline. not as tho oil will stop being produces, exactly where would all our plastics come from? if we decide to continue using those products, than we need to encourage the oil industry to expand HERE, as it should have all along( remember the adage don't put all your eggs in one basket?), rather than coming to rely so much on foreign supply.

iran subsidizes their gasoline--citizens there only pay about 38 cents a gallon--but now of course you have the rioting going on, as the country no longer wants to pay out the tremendous amounts of money required to keep the price that low, so they have limited everyone there to around 26 gallons a month.