As I write this, the price of gasoline is about $4 per gallon. While you and your family may not be happy with these high gas prices, the Obama administration is pleased — after all, higher gas and energy prices have been its goal from the outset.
Steven Chu, Obama's energy secretary, has called for higher and higher gas prices to force citizens to buy more fuel-efficient vehicles and live closer to work. "Somehow, we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe," Mr. Chu was quoted as promising. By the way, Mr. Chu's goal would equate to $7-$8 per gallon.
Sure enough, the Obama administration has slowed down or stopped the future development of most of the vast U.S. energy reserves, onshore, offshore and in Alaska.
That is despite the fact that the United States' oil shale deposits, primarily in Colorado, Wyoming and Utah, are tremendous, more than three times larger than the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia. The U.S. Geological Society estimates that Arctic Alaska has technically recoverable resources of approximately 30 billion barrels of oil, 6 billion barrels of natural-gas liquids, and 221 trillion cubic feet of conventional natural gas. Furthermore, the outer continental shelf of the United States is estimated to contain 86 billion barrels of oil and 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
As President Barack Obama joked while speaking at a foreign-owned wind-turbine plant in Pennsylvania, "If you're complaining about the price of gas and you're only getting 8 miles a gallon, you know — you might want to think about a trade-in."
As all of your energy costs skyrocket and your standard of living needlessly declines, here is another suggestion for a "trade-in," a new president, someone who is committed to developing our vast domestic energy reserves, spurring economic activity and adding thousands of jobs, driving down energy prices, and thereby raising (rather than reducing) the prosperity of all of our citizens.
http://www.livingstondaily.com/article/ … ntpage%7Cs
I can appreciate your view on this matter, but it seems as if alot of your story is based on facts, but not all the facts. It is true that Mr. Chu said that that he thought that gas prices should increase to coax Americans to buy more fuel effecient vehicles. But what you fail to mention is that Obama dismissed the idea of boosting the federal gasoline tax. You also failed to mention that the President said that a heightened gas tax would be a "mistake" because it would put "additional burdens on American families right now." I think that you also failed to mention when these things were said President Obama was just president elect (that was 2008) and if you want to go back that far we can go tit for tat and I would like for you to tell me what happened to the weapons of mass destruction that Bush said were in Iraq? But we can get to that later. You also said that "By the way, Mr. Chu's goal would equate to $7-$8 per gallon." Actually Im sure that you meant to say that actually Lee Schipper, a project scientist with the Global Metropolitan Studies program at U.C. Berkeley estimated the prices of gas to jump to $7-$9 a gallon.
Now as far as my own personal opinion. I would be all for them drilling in alaska for these shale deposits and massive oil and gas reserves. But you want me to break a little news to you? These reservers would be held by the oil companies. Actually when I think about it, what Mr Chu said could almost be the best option. We as American people are never going to stand on one accord to stop this travesty of justice. We are partially to blame for the price of gas skyrocketing. Yes if you have a H2 Hummer that gets 9 miles to the gallon, of course you want to drill into our reserves so that you can have more gas. How about instead of focusing on our government, focus on the oil companies that get 4 billion in tax credits, but post record PROFITS every QUARTER!
As far as your last statement stating that we need a new president that is committed to developing our vast domestic energy reserves, spurring economic activity and adding thousands of jobs, driving down energy prices, and thereby raising (rather than reducing) the prosperity of all of our citizens. Just remember he is still trying to get the republicans to agree on revoking the "some" of the tax breaks for the oil companies. Should this even be a discussion?
The oil companies are hardly villains. When oil was $10 a barrel gasoline was around $1. Now that oil is hovering around $100 a barrel the cost of a gallon of gas has not risen by the same proportion. The tax breaks oil companies all of us. Corporations don't really pay taxes. The money taken from a company in taxes is taken from the people associated with that company. Officers, stock holders, management, staff, workers, contractors, customers, vendors all take a hit when taxes are raised.
If you want to undermine the power of the oil giants than reduce the tax and regulatory burden on starting a new company. Some of the largest oil and natural gas finds of the last ten years have been by small companies. The cooperation of the government is necessary to insulate giant corporations from the efficiency smaller companies can bring.
Solution = Get every single person whom needs to get from a fair distance from A to B to use public transport, especially trams & trains, rather than buses.
Problem = The general population of almost every single western nation are like sheep and would not use public transport all the time over personal vehicle use.
From your suggested OP Oly, win for Oil Corp, loss for the public.
Oh BTW, even though the economies are different between the US and Australia, we already pay US$8-9 a gallon (today it's AU$1.57 per litre) for gas here in Australia and have for the last 2 years. This is on top of the Aussie dollar being higher than the US currently.
I find your perspective interesting in so far as crowding into train cars like good cattle is the "unsheep" like thing and going about restricted only by the presence of roads and speed limits is characterized as sheep like. This puzzles me. The price paid in most countries for their petrol is caused by layer upon layer of regulation and taxation. Strip these away and allow the market place to decide the price.
by Brian6 years ago
This may not be news to a whole lot of people, but, I am getting sick of this. Why isn't the Government doing anything about it, especially when they know that it is killing our economy? Not, to mention that we are...
by Doug Hughes6 years ago
When gas prices were going up, Wingnuts were tripping over each other in a rush to blame the president. Even though he had nothing to do with it.President Obama ordered a release of strategic reserves. Prices have...
by CMHypno7 years ago
Obama's attacks on BP are increasingly being viewed in the UK as signs of his anti-British stance. Or is he just trying to pull attention away from his own administration's...
by Harvey Stelman7 years ago
I voted Democratic because I believe oil companies' profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn't.
by Holle Abee5 years ago
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ … _bush.htmlBush gas at $3 a gallon bad! Obama gas at $5 a gallon okay and not his fault. Got it.
by kerryg6 years ago
Contrary to what has been suggested in several posts here over the last few weeks, Obama's supposed imposition of "regulation after regulation, roadblock after roadblock" is not what's holding up domestic oil...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.