The Bush (Oil) Tax Cut of 2008

oil

is the oil really that bad in canada.

zoe of @ Sep 09, 2008 12:20:00 PM

um, fat-rider, Pres. Bush really *did* have something to do with China reducing its energy subsidies

I blogged about Pres. Bush's cabinet level negotiations with the Chinese on the issue of oil subsidies here, several weeks ago:

http://hermeticfront.wordpress.com/2008/06/19/for-election-2008-its-the-cost-of-oil-stupid-ii-cabinet-level-bush-administration-officials-secure-deal-with-china-that-has-already-resulted-in-oil-price-relief-will-the-bush-adminstratio/

Please forgive me for plugging my blog.

What interests me is that the Bush administration takes no credit for this accomplishment, none.

You really have to search to find reporting like this.

gilad dotan @ Aug 13, 2008 17:50:39 PM

I have viewed many hottest videos at a interracial singles dating site--- {{{{mixedloving .com}}}}}---- many black and white singles who are seeking for ideal match seriously there..

of KY @ Aug 13, 2008 03:28:49 AM

You say this:

"Our government is spending $16 billion a month for both Iraq and Afghanistan, which is doing nothing to help our crushing deficit."

and then you say this:

"Our public education system is not preparing our youths to compete on an international level, affecting our country’s long-term future."

This continues to support my hypothesis that when Democrats say they care about the ballooning deficit, what they are really saying is that we are spending too much money on military and defense, and that we should cut down on that in order to increase spending in other more liberal areas, such as social programs and education. Democrats caring about the deficit rings about as hollow as Republicans caring about lowering teenage birth rates via abortion. If you really cared about deficit cutting, you would want to cut spending in all areas, not just in areas you don't like.

Chris of AZ @ Aug 12, 2008 10:11:22 AM

War Drum

The elements that have created this economic mess are too numerous to really mention, but I notice that not much has been mentioned about the war in the Middle East we are currently engaged in. Our government is spending $16 billion a month for both Iraq and Afghanistan, which is doing nothing to help our crushing deficit. There is no single red flag, but a true catalyst moment was when the government declared war (without a vote by Congress, if I recall) went into Iraq. We are in serious debt and using foreign money to keep our wheels turning. Our public education system is not preparing our youths to compete on an international level, affecting our country’s long-term future. I mean, we can’t even manage a little thing like “credit” … yet here we are demanding cheap oil because in our minds that’s the right thing. Instead of thing being a wake up call are really turning our national situation around, we just are spending our energy on, well, energy, but getting nowhere.

A. of CA @ Aug 11, 2008 23:49:15 PM

Richard and Fatesrider, have gas prices come down for you? Yes, then James' logic stands.

"Bush did NOTHING."

Umm, Bush removed the presidential moratorium on drilling. Prices there started to come down. Now, that may be coincidental, but the prices started coming down after he removed the moratorium. However, your Democrat Party is doing NOTHING, and I bet if they got the gall to reject people like you and Richard and allowed drilling, the price would come down even further.

The rest of your post is utter nonsense. Especially, the part where you attribute a scientific experiment with lowering prices. When James stated that it did, that was nuts then. Now that you're stating it, it is definitely nuts.

Chris of AZ @ Aug 11, 2008 18:07:48 PM

Who are you kidding?

Delusion is one thing, but this hocus-pocus sorry excuse for logical deductive reasoning is beyond priceless. Bush did NOTHING. The Chinese did, by reducing subsidies by 25% earlier this year. They now have a 10% rate of inflation over last year, and their economic growth has slowed, easing demand.

Couple that with a 3-5% reduction in driving miles in the US over last year (That's a billion or more miles NOT driven), a push toward more economical and fuel-efficient vehicles, a stronger dollar, plus an announcement from MIT not too long ago that they've developed a process that is 1000 times more efficient at breaking hydrogen (the most abundant element on the planet - and renewable to boot!) from water, and the process for the remaining parts (Separation and extraction of the gasses) is only a year or two away, which creates a mindbogglingly cheaper form of energy (about 0.7 cents per energy-equivalent gallon. That's less than a penny for those who don't know fractions.) are far more influential than Bush pushing for a going-away gift to the oil companies he's catered to from day one.

Besides, although gas prices are, in part, tied to oil prices, the major factor is availability of the actual commodity - GAS. We have no more refining capacity today than we did two years ago and prices are only dropping - a bit - because the base cost of the materials to make the gas are going down. If demand goes up due to falling prices, the price of gas will once again skyrocket.

And that line, "Eventually the elevated oil revenues are recycled into the global spending stream, counterbalancing the initial petroleum "tax" on oil consuming economies." is SO 1980's trickle-down BS economics (which doesn't work, by the way) it's astounding you had the gall to even put it in there.

And as another poster pointed out, I'm still paying over a dollar more per gallon today than I was last year. That's not a tax cut. That's not a cut. Maybe you need to take some math lessons. I KNOW you need to take lessons in logic.

Get a grip, learn something about today's global economics and stop being a shill for Bush.

Fatesrider of CA @ Aug 11, 2008 17:09:28 PM