Big Government Responsible for High Gas Prices
General Public:.. Lobotomized Sheep....@..999.2012..WBCHNC.News.ukuscan.ca The General Public:... Lobotomized Sheep
Ron Paul | The free market can meet the American people’s demand for a
reliable supply of gasoline as long as government does not distort the
market through excessive taxation and regulation.
........................
Big Government Responsible for High Gas Prices
Ron Paul
Texas Straight Talk
May 7, 2008
In the past few months, American workers, consumers, and businesses have
experienced a sudden and dramatic rise in gasoline prices. In some parts of
the country, gasoline costs as much as $4 per gallon. Some politicians claim
that the way to reduce gas prices is by expanding the government’s power to
regulate prices and control the supply of gasoline. For example, the House
of Representatives has even passed legislation subjecting gas stations
owners to criminal penalties if they charge more than a federal bureaucrat
deems appropriate. Proponents of these measures must have forgotten the
1970s, when government controls on the oil industry resulted in gas lines
and shortages. It was only after President Reagan lifted federal price
controls that the gas lines disappeared.
Instead of imposing further restraints on the market, Congress should
consider reforming the federal policies that raise gas prices. For example,
federal and state taxes can account for as much as a third of what consumers
’ pay at the pump. The Federal Government’s boom-and-bust monetary policy
also makes consumers vulnerable to inflation and to constant fluctuations in
the prices of essential goods such as oil. It is no coincidence that oil
prices first became an issue shortly after President Nixon unilaterally
severed the dollar’s last link to gold.
Basic economics says that when government restricts the supply of a good,
the price will increase. Yet Congress continues to reject simple measures
that could increase the supply of oil. For example, Congress refuses to
allow reasonable, environmentally sensitive, offshore drilling. Congress
also refuses to remove the numerous regulatory hurdles that add to the
prohibitively expensive task of constructing new refineries. Building a new
refinery requires billions of dollars in capital investment. It can take
several years just to obtain the necessary federal permits. Even after the
permits are obtained, construction of a refinery may still be delayed or
even halted by frivolous lawsuits. It is no wonder that there has not been a
new refinery constructed in the United States since 1976.
Last year, in order to provide the American people with relief from high oil
prices, I introduced the Affordable Gas Price Act (HR 2415). This
legislation protects the American people from gas price spikes by suspending
the federal gas tax whenever the national average gas price exceeds $3.00
per gallon. The Affordable Gas Price Act also expands the supply of gasoline
by repealing the federal moratorium on offshore drilling, including in the
ANWR reserve in Alaska . HR 2415 also provides tax incentives and protection
from nuisance lawsuits for those seeking to build new refineries. Finally,
HR 2415 authorizes a federal study on the link between our nation’s monetary
policy and the price of oil.
The free market can meet the American people’s demand for a reliable supply
of gasoline as long as government does not distort the market through
excessive taxation and regulation. Therefore, Congress should lower prices
gas prices by pursuing an agenda of low taxes, regulatory relief, and sound
money by passing legislation such as my Affordable Gas Act.
Robert McKenzie
"The General Public:... Lobotomized Sheep" <The General Public:..
Lobotomized Sheep....@..999.2012..WBCHNC.News.ukuscan.ca> wrote in message
news:tH4Wj.1884$Yp.1642@edtnps92...
> Big Government Responsible for High Gas Prices
>
> Ron Paul | The free market can meet the American people's demand for a
> reliable supply of gasoline as long as government does not distort the
> market through excessive taxation and regulation.
Interesting. He advocates government intrusion into the marketplace to
ensure government affects the gas pump
price. He takes the more complicated route. If the tax is removed then the
companies will raise their prices. If the
government says no to that then it is government intrusion into the
marketplace.
Sounds socialist.
Semper Libèr® .
"Robert McKenzie" <rob...@makz.org> wrote in message
news:DQ4Wj.2258$KB3.303@edtnps91...
>
> "The General Public:... Lobotomized Sheep" <The General Public:..
> Lobotomized Sheep....@..999.2012..WBCHNC.News.ukuscan.ca> wrote in message
> news:tH4Wj.1884$Yp.1642@edtnps92...
> > Big Government Responsible for High Gas Prices
> >
> > Ron Paul | The free market can meet the American people's demand for a
> > reliable supply of gasoline as long as government does not distort the
> > market through excessive taxation and regulation.
>
> Interesting. He advocates government intrusion into the marketplace to
> ensure government affects the gas pump
> price.
You misunderstood, as usual... Removing "excessive taxation and regulation"
is not intrusive.
>He takes the more complicated route. If the tax is removed then the
> companies will raise their prices.
So you reject the basic supply and demand model of free market economics?
What it sounds like to me, is you are saying there exists a massive
conspiracy of price fixing within the oil industry...
The oil on crown land (at least in this country) would be the property of
the people of Canada, and therefore they profit from the higher fuel prices,
which in turn reduces the need (as they see it) to tax. Furthermore, the
increased profits of oil companies would permit higher taxes on their gains.
The best way for the government to reduce the price of oil would be to open
new resources to exploration and development, and provide insentives where
possible to alternative energy. For example, it now costs about 7k to
provide your electric home heating needs with solar panels.... so how about
giving people a coupon to radically discount that price even further? The
cost could be covered by increased fees and taxes to oil companies, as well
as sales of the oil reserves themselves. In other words using the price of
oil to fund alternatives... which would create a downward pressure on the
demand, and therefore reduce the price.
SaPeIsMa
What makes you imagine that it follows that if the tax is removed, prices
will rise ?
> Sounds socialist.
>
Yes, your conclusions are indeed "socialist" AND WRONG
>
>
Robert McKenzie
"Semper Libèr® ." <.nopolicestates????!?~Hj...@freedom4all.org> wrote in
message news:2d8Wj.1953$Yp.883@edtnps92...
>
> "Robert McKenzie" <rob...@makz.org> wrote in message
> news:DQ4Wj.2258$KB3.303@edtnps91...
>>
>> "The General Public:... Lobotomized Sheep" <The General Public:..
>> Lobotomized Sheep....@..999.2012..WBCHNC.News.ukuscan.ca> wrote in
>> message
>> news:tH4Wj.1884$Yp.1642@edtnps92...
>> > Big Government Responsible for High Gas Prices
>> >
>> > Ron Paul | The free market can meet the American people's demand for a
>> > reliable supply of gasoline as long as government does not distort the
>> > market through excessive taxation and regulation.
>>
>> Interesting. He advocates government intrusion into the marketplace to
>> ensure government affects the gas pump
>> price.
>
> You misunderstood, as usual... Removing "excessive taxation and
> regulation"
> is not intrusive.
Technically it isn't but the government should minimise it's affect on the
free market. This is just another, which will
possibly mean more regulation. It's not a simple taxectomy.
>>He takes the more complicated route. If the tax is removed then the
>> companies will raise their prices.
>
> So you reject the basic supply and demand model of free market economics?
> What it sounds like to me, is you are saying there exists a massive
> conspiracy of price fixing within the oil industry...
Never been proven specificially. I do not reject the basic supply and demand
model, but if the tax is removed, the
oil companies will retain their market price levels.
> The oil on crown land (at least in this country) would be the property of
> the people of Canada, and therefore they profit from the higher fuel
> prices,
> which in turn reduces the need (as they see it) to tax. Furthermore, the
> increased profits of oil companies would permit higher taxes on their
> gains.
None of the oil is on crown land. It is on private propertly, the rights of
which exist with the oil companies. The petroleum
fields are not the same as tree farm licences (forestry on crown land) The
higher prices paid do mean the higher taxes on capital gains right there the
wheel goes around and around.
> The best way for the government to reduce the price of oil would be to
> open
> new resources to exploration and development, and provide insentives where
> possible to alternative energy.
Nice concept, but there is limited resources in Canada to do that. Canada
has limited alternatives for motive fuels other
than enthanol and derivatives.
For example, it now costs about 7k to
> provide your electric home heating needs with solar panels.... so how
> about
> giving people a coupon to radically discount that price even further?
Solar panels do not nessarily work in all applications. At the present time
heating by natural gas is cheaper.
I would not be in favour of subsidies to those who wish to go the solar
panel route. What about those who don't.
If a person wants to go the solar route, they go themselves and reap the
savings over natural gas over time.
It's a providing a favour to those who choose an option, and the rest
receive nothing. A similar aspect was tried with
subsidies for LPG systems in vehicles about 15 years ago. Didn't get very
far.
The
> cost could be covered by increased fees and taxes to oil companies, as
> well
> as sales of the oil reserves themselves. In other words using the price of
> oil to fund alternatives... which would create a downward pressure on the
> demand, and therefore reduce the price.
Not nessesarily, since we're back to demand and what the price will be for
that demand, and as mentioned solar is a nice
clean idea, but isn't the best for everything. If you think solar is the way
to go, put a few panels on your house.
Robert McKenzie
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPe...@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:usGdnWQe1pagL7TV...@posted.cpinternet...
Simple dynamics of costs. The oil companies will be relieved of this cost
(the taxation), but will raise prices to cover
other costs that were not covered because their having to pay the tax.
The oil companies will want that money they are "saving" from paying out the
taxation that Ron Paul wants removed.
To say to the oil companies, we're taking the taxes away from you, but you
can't use the savings, you have to reduce
the pump price by the amount that we have relived your taxes, is additional
regulation.
A better solution would be to throw out Ron Paul's silly idea, and put that
tax collection into something tangible such
as funding public transit projects. If there's taxation, then there's merit
in using that money to fund public transit systems,
of which quite a few in the Eastern U.S. are getting old and are in need of
major upgrade.
But his tax concept have no application in Canada, since our taxation is
different from theirs and Canada does not
have an infrastructure funding system to what the U.S. has.
Semper Libèr® .
A version of British law that gave the king dominion over the resources of
the earth still exists in Canadian provincial law. The mineral resources
that lie under the privately owned property in Canada are regarded as the
property of the crown. That is spelled out in the Mineral Resources Act of
every province and denies private property owners the right to the resources
that lie under their land. The crown asserts a right to sell those mineral
rights to persons other than the landowner and without advising private
landowners of its intentions in this regard.
http://www.quebecoislibre.org/07/070415-3.htm
Of course as you have pointed out numerous times... it changes with the wind
direction just how much authority any of these crown documents hold, right?