Don't sell your CTD!

[Andy Perreault]

A typical environmental wacko is a student spending the taxpayer's money or that of his/her parent's, is a government employee (city, county, state, federal), or is some type of pretender receiving government grants to save the planet, is unemployed drawing assistance or is disabled receiving government benefits, lives in a big city where there are carpools, buses, etc, and drives a Honda/Toyota/Kia or other small car if he has a car.



The wacko couldn't identify a CTD is we parked one in her living room and couldn't guess which end of a trailer to hook to a Dodge Ram. Others are sissies whose recreation consists of going to plays, looking at art in museums, sewing, browsing libraries, sitting in coffee shops criticising President Bush, attending liberal propaganda movies, or going to gay pride events.



Most of them don't have squat and that is one reason they are environmental wackos. They resent, envy, and want to punish those of us who have nice trucks and RVs or horse trailers, or boats, or whatever.

The problem is, the news media adores these people and makes them out to be some kind of heroes.

Andy

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

The problem is, the news media adores these people and makes them out to be some kind of heroes.

Andy

Why WOULDN'T they adore them - they are one of their own, and of their own creation...

 

[bmoeller]

I just got back home from making a trip from Jackson Missouri to Jacksonville Florida to malabar Florida & home again towing 6,000 lbs traveling 2133 miles at 73 miles per hour and averaged 19. 75 miles per gallon Friday. NO I AM NOT GOING TO SELL MY CTD! even if i did have to pay $4. 09 per gallon for dsl down there. Even at $3. 00 per gallon a gasser doesn't cut it especially with lacking the ability to "smoke " someone who tries to grab your lane when you are already signaling to change lanes.

Boss has a gasser. Can't get over 5mpg pulling a small trailer.



A friend of mine pulls a g/n flatbed, and he get 5-6mpg with 6. 0L PSD and the new DMax he just bought.



I get 10mpg with a trailer.

 

[Crash&Burn]

Hey, shouldn't Al Gore be leading by example? What about him flying around in his private jet? Not just any private jet, but a 1970's Gulf Stream private jet, one of the most inefficient private jets out there. He probably burns as much crude in one day on that private jet than any of us do in a whole year! ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS MR. GORE!

That's kind of like george w coming to my home area for a 2 hour visit, to the Ford plant to praise the Excape hybrid...

The local newspaper figured Airforce 1 and the other planes needed for security burned fuel equal to 76000 round trips to Washington by the Excape.

 

[J.BURCHFIELD]

If we knew how to anything right we would have been using the 200 year supply in Prudo Bay Alaska. FUEL WOULD BE $1. 50. Forget ANWR that was put out to make us think that was all that was left. But we can't do anything right or we would have built some new refineries and Nuclear power plants 30 years ago. We are living in the wonderful age of misinformation put out by the misinformed. Those in charge are not capable of being in charge, they are Morons repeatedly voted back in office by Morons. Most of the intelligent people are in the oil business. Prices won't go down until we start riding bicycles and horses. At my age I need to find a diesel powered Moped. Can't stand the smell of a gas engine after it goes through a Catalytic converter, smells too much like a politician.

 

[JesseJ]

Three Mile Island is what killed the Nuclear age in the U. S. I watched a show about it on History channel. There were 50 nuclear power plants in some stage of planning/construction at the time of Three Mile Island and only 4 were actually finished. I say convert to Nuclear power and let the wackos put up their solar panels and wind farms if they choose. Then we would have all this excess coal not being used anymore to convert it into diesel. If Hitler was able to do it in WWII, we should be able to do it much more efficiently with 60 years of better technology behind us.

 

[pwr2tow]

Well sure, but as far as the rich liberals are concerned, fuel and travel expense issue shouldn't AFFECT the lower forms of life such as us peons - we are supposed to stay on the plantation working for the Master - and if we ARE allowed to travel, foot power or the family burro should be enough.

The luxury of uncontrolled travel is only for the rich and ruling classes - like most Communist and Socialist countries - and where WE are headed...

How concerned would YOU be about fuel prices, if you had 10 million dollars in your bank account, and you really didn't GIVE a damn about the rest of your society?

9,474 posts and finally one that's worth reading. :-laf

 

[jeffnvegas]

there is no oil shortage. just an artificially created refined petroleum product shortage (lack of refineries bs). it's all about money and power. look at the profits. the north american union. if we really cared about people and democracy and human rights, then why are the saudis (all the 911 terrorists) not the iraqis, the worst country in the middle east on human rights our biggest ally in the middle east??? when are people going to wake up?? i don't personally know about this oil find or any details about it, but even without it there is more than enough to keep us in oil at the present escalation for the next fifty to one hundred years. does anyone really think we'll still be driving fossil fuel based vehicles for personal transportation in 2070?

 

[FDrake]

What good is it to have 300 years worth of oil if WE CAN"T REFINE It?? The wackos wont let refineries be built either. It is a two stage game for them.
Frank

 

[HBarlow]

Washington Times Article: "Supply, Demand, and Prices"

Mr. Kreutzer disagrees pretty clearly with some of you.



Washington Times Article published Apr 8, 2008



"Supply, Demand and Prices"



By David W. Kreutzer - During the summer, television networks don't seem to discriminate in airing reruns. The miserable shows get re-aired along with the good ones.



Washington seems to have the same mindset on policy reruns. Failed policies are as likely to be reinstituted as successful ones. Case in point: petroleum regulation and the "windfall profits" tax.



In a ritual as predictable as Donald Trump firing an eager go-getter, Congress demands testimony from oil executives and threatens additional taxes and price regulations whenever petroleum prices rise. It's an old tradition and one based on economic ignorance.



Bowing to flawed thinking and the popular will, President Nixon (with Congress) instituted general price controls in 1973. It was a vain attempt to control inflation. After the predictable shortages arose, price controls were eliminated on everything except petroleum products and natural gas. Not eliminating those price controls created the energy crisis of the 1970s and the memorable gas lines.



Yes, the Arab oil embargo reduced world petroleum supply, and worldwide economic growth increased demand. However, rising demand and shrinking supply cause higher prices, not gas lines.



This isn't a mystery. Around Chapter 5 in every "principles of economics" class, the impacts of price ceilings are explained. They lead to shortages. The logic is clear, and the evidence is consistent and overwhelming. When Reagan eliminated petroleum price controls in 1981, the shortages and the gas lines disappeared.



Why would politicians use such tried-and-failed policies? Maybe because the public rarely understands who is actually at fault. Surveys in the 1970s about the energy crisis bear this out. Who did the respondents blame? Not Washington for its Byzantine price and allocation controls, nor even OPEC. They blamed "Big Oil. "



In "The Myth of the Rational Voter," economics professor Bryan Caplan exposes the discouraging gap between popular conceptions of economics and economic reality. So it isn't surprising that the same 1970s-era surveys showing the energy crisis to be the biggest problem also showed the most popular solutions would amplify the very things causing the crisis. A large majority wanted more stringent price controls. A near majority even wanted to issue ration coupons.



Then as now, a weakening dollar and strong economies overseas led to higher petroleum prices. Then as now, the popular culprits were the oil companies. In a result especially depressing to those of us who spent decades teaching Chapter 5, a recent Gallup survey found 70 percent of Americans want Washington to implement price controls to counter the high price of petroleum. Even more unnerving is the 64 percent of Americans who think you can cut the price of gasoline by imposing "a significant additional tax on oil company profits. "



In a bad-policy rerun, Congress, blaming high prices on high profits, again demands testimony from oil-company executives and threatens regulations and additional taxes. Though consumers may not realize it, none of this will help them.



Today's high oil-company profits are largely caused by high prices on the petroleum they pump from their own reserves. Any owner of petroleum reserves, whether it's Exxon, Venezuela, Iran, widows, orphans or the University of Texas, gets more money when petroleum prices rise.



These high prices are the result of straight-forward economics: Demand has increased more than supply. For instance, China's demand for petroleum has doubled in just the last 10 years. Unless and until supply catches up, no regulations, taxes or histrionics will bring gas prices down.



Penalizing Americans for having the foresight to buy and develop oil reserves (which an additional profits tax would do), ensures that a larger percentage of these valuable resources will be controlled by the likes of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. A political truth-in-advertising law would require disclosing this fact when legislators propose additional profit taxes on oil companies.



Expecting politicians to ignore popular opinion may be asking too much. But if our leaders are going to read the polls, maybe they should read some from the 1970s and then look at the careers of those who followed them.



None of the presidents who enforced energy price controls and windfall profits taxes was re-elected. Yet the president who eliminated them served two terms and remains one of the most respected figures in American history. Which rerun would you want?



David W. Kreutzer is senior policy analyst for energy economics and climate change at the Heritage Foundation (heritage.org).



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[CSkal]

Not being anything near a student of economics, I found this article very illuminating.

 

[JesseJ]

That's what I've been trying to tell everyone. They all want to blame "big oil" when in fact, it's the politicians and government(EPA) that are screwing us over!

 

[HBarlow]

That's what I've been trying to tell everyone. They all want to blame "big oil" when in fact, it's the politicians and government(EPA) that are screwing us over!

Very true.



I'll go one step further. Many, possibly most of the folks who are complaining about "big oil" and talking about the "evil oil industry" actually earning a profit on their investment and effort are actually the folks that are causing the problem. An outrageous statement, right?



No, wrong! They are causing the problem because they vote, election after election, for the people who prevent oil production in ANWR, prevent oil drilling off our shores, and prevent the building of much needed new oil refineries. They also vote for the people who mandate all the various specialized mixes of fuel for individual states, regions, and cities which increase the cost of production and delivery, and the folks who prevent the building of nuclear power plants which would provide massive amounts of energy without burning any fossil fuel. They also vote for the same people who mandate all the stupid fuel economy reducing emissions regulations on our Cummins-powered Rams and have all but shut down the big truck industry with the same regulations. And best of all, they repeatedly vote for the people who indirectly increase the cost of fuel by heavily taxing the oil companies and directly increase the cost of fuel at the pump by direct state taxes on each gallon of fuel.



Then, after causing the problems they complain and blame the oil companies who would gladly drill and produce oil from Alaska or the Gulf of Mexico if not restrained by government, who would gladly build new refineries if not for all the regulations that make it nearly impossible, and would certainly like to see the fuel taxes reduced or eliminated.

 

[JesseJ]

That's because most people listen to the liberal media and the global warming nuts jamming all this garbage down their throats and just believe it as fact instead of doing their own research. They act like we have a cheap and ABUNDANT alternative to oil RIGHT NOW, and we should just quit using it, right away. "If you tell a lie loud enough and long enough, eventually it becomes the truth. " People are too stupid to figure it out or don't care enough to take the time to find out what's really going on. It's going to take another hurricane season like 2005 to wipe out half of our refining capacity in and around the gulf and $6-$8/gallon gas before people are going to wake up and say "Hey, this isn't working anymore, we have to do something different. " It's the only thing that will shock them enough to make them pay attention and act through voting, phone calls, E-mailing, or otherwise.

 

[rbattelle]

Good article. Like I always say - government intervention is never the answer.

It is always easier to handicap the successful than to go out and become successful yourself. Tiger Woods golfs WAY too successfully, so I think the government should step in and regulate his score so that he's no better than me.

Ryan

 

[BradyWilliams]

ALL well said. I say that when the Enviro Wackos, park their car/truck for good, disconnect electricity/heat from their house, grow their own food and walk every where, I will take notice. Otherwise they are a bunch of pretenders! Also the groups that want to drain Lake Powell should take a reallity check. Loosing the power generation that comes from Glen Canyon Dam would make us burn more coal to supply the same power. These Enviro Wackos have no fore sight and may be anti humanists. Our society depends greatly on energy of all kinds. This holds true even back to cavemen. Thanks

 

[TboneMan]

That's what I've been trying to tell everyone. They all want to blame "big oil" when in fact, it's the politicians and government(EPA) that are screwing us over!

Don't forget the housing/mortgage mess. Those who "bit off a lot more than they could chew", also have a significant part in all of this.



Oil is bought and sold in US$.



Mortgage crisis = Lower interest rates

Lower interest rates = Lower $ value

Lower $ value = More $ to buy same amount of oil



Stabilize the $ and oil will come down. The current situation is not purely a supply issue.

 

[JesseJ]

The mortgage mess is a whole different problem, but I agree with you. The fed shouldn't be lowering interest rates and bailing out companies that overextended themselves. It kills the value of the dollar and makes everything more expensive here. The only good I can see from that is increased international tourism because people from other countries can bring their money here and it will go a lot farther than back at home. Now I hear those knuckleheads in D. C. are going to spend billions of my tax dollars on some stupid mortgage/foreclosure buyout plan to help people avoid losing their house while the rest of us who didn't buy more house than we could afford and were responsible get screwed yet again! I say let the people lose their houses and let the companies who scheistered them with bad loans lose a bunch of money when they can't pay. It would teach both sides not to do it again. Since when does the government have to bail everyone out of everything?

 

[Excessive Force]

The mortgage mess is a whole different problem, but I agree with you. The fed shouldn't be lowering interest rates and bailing out companies that overextended themselves. It kills the value of the dollar and makes everything more expensive here. The only good I can see from that is increased international tourism because people from other countries can bring their money here and it will go a lot farther than back at home. Now I hear those knuckleheads in D. C. are going to spend billions of my tax dollars on some stupid mortgage/foreclosure buyout plan to help people avoid losing their house while the rest of us who didn't buy more house than we could afford and were responsible get screwed yet again! I say let the people lose their houses and let the companies who scheistered them with bad loans lose a bunch of money when they can't pay. It would teach both sides not to do it again. Since when does the government have to bail everyone out of everything?

I have to agree with you on this one,but i guess i'd rather see tax dollars spent HERE rather than giving it to Pakistan or some other country who hates us... .

 

[AKaiser]

That's kind of like george w coming to my home area for a 2 hour visit, to the Ford plant to praise the Excape hybrid...

The local newspaper figured Airforce 1 and the other planes needed for security burned fuel equal to 76000 round trips to Washington by the Excape.

Well, it isn't quite apples and oranges, more like baking apples and table apples. W is the head of state, so his coming to tout the Escape is part of his job, kinda like his trips to Iraq to visit us troops.