WASHINGTON (AP) -- Pump prices on his mind, President Barack Obama says Congress should kill tax breaks for the oil and gas industry and help develop alternative sources of energy.

 

Obama said Saturday in his weekly radio and Internet address that he expected Congress to consider in the next few weeks ending $4 billion in tax subsidies, a move he has failed to persuade lawmakers to make during his term. He said the vote would put them on record on whether they "stand up for oil companies" or "stand up for the American people."

 

FOR THOSE WHO SAY THE PRICES WOULD GO UP

ISN'T THIS THE CASE ALREADY?

IF YOU SAY NO

THEN LETS HEAR YOUR PLAN AS TO HOW TO FIGHT THE RISING PRICE BEING NOTHING EITHER PARTY HAS TRIED HAS WORKED SO FAR.

 

Obama to Congress: Kill oil industry's tax breaks - Yahoo! Finance

Why don't America create their own oil company or buy one out and drill for ourselves and develop our own.

I am curious as to the the benefit taxpayers get from these subsidies.

 

We talked recently about some things govt could do but even those would have a relatively minor impact and would only be masking the real issue.

One thing I heard recently was to make payment due on purchase for all Oil Futures and Commodity purchases. The thought being that the artificial inflation of prices by commodity brokers would be reigned in quite a bit if they had to put upthe cash each day to actual buy what they purchased...no getting rich short selling either.

 

I do not know all of the details but this is pretty much the way I remember the idea being presented.

What gives the government the right to decide what is the right path for our energy future? Why not let markets work and just let it go? That statement includes giving special tax breaks to oil companies as well as ending the government funding of alternative energy. Privatization is the only answer to the future of our energy, in my opinion.

Steven Chu made made the following comments in September 2008, he was appointed Energy Secretary in January 2009 .

 

"Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels of Europe." At the time, gas prices in Europe were about $7 to $9 a gallon.

Steven Chu made made the following comments in September 2008, he was appointed Energy Secretary in January 2009 .

 

"Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels of Europe." At the time, gas prices in Europe were about $7 to $9 a gallon.

 

He made that quote before he was part of the administration and he felt at the time that very high gas prices would force this country to find alternatives and increase our efficiencies. H recently said that as a part of the US govt he does not hold that belief.

 

It's illogical to believe that the administration would hope for $8 per gallon when we've already seen the impact that $4 has on the economy.

Anyone hoping or looking for $2/gal gas again is dreaming. I'm not sold that we will see the $5, $6, or even higher costs but between $3 and $4 is here to stay, no matter what we do. Reigning in the speculators will only put a leash on the wild swings. However because of the world demand increasing $90-$100/barrel oil is the reality. Every one says to drill more here, which I agree with. However the majority of the oil reserves in the US is oil shale. This is much more expensive to extract then the middle east oil. The price has to be any where from $80 and up (depending on what source you read) for the oil companies to make money. The up side is I've read/heard reports that suggest that the US has enough reserves to cover our demand for 200 years. Again that isn't $30/barrel oil but it's something.

He made that quote before he was part of the administration and he felt at the time that very high gas prices would force this country to find alternatives and increase our efficiencies. H recently said that as a part of the US govt he does not hold that belief.

 

It's illogical to believe that the administration would hope for $8 per gallon when we've already seen the impact that $4 has on the economy.

I know, that's why I said he made the quote in '08.

 

Just pointing out some rather stupid remakes made by him and Obama back then. That whole out of touch thing, you know.

I don't agree with BO on a lot, but I am not so far off on his energy policy. I don't like the impact of higher gas prices any more than anyone else, but that is the only way that we are incented to develop alternates.

 

And also, I would not trust an energy company as far as I could throw one of their executives.

I know, that's why I said he made the quote in '08.

 

Just pointing out some rather stupid remakes made by him and Obama back then. That whole out of touch thing, you know.

 

Fair enough. I would think that most would assume he made it in his role in the Cabinet.

Fair enough. I would think that most would assume he made it in his role in the Cabinet.

I had hoped I was clear when I said he made the comment in September of 2008 but was appointed Energy Secretary in January 2009, but I can see where it could be misconstrued.

I had hoped I was clear when I said he made the comment in September of 2008 but was appointed Energy Secretary in January 2009, but I can see where it could be misconstrued.

 

So if I'm reading you correctly you're saying I should read your statement correctly. Is that what I'm reading?

I don't agree with BO on a lot, but I am not so far off on his energy policy. I don't like the impact of higher gas prices any more than anyone else, but that is the only way that we are incented to develop alternates.

 

And also, I would not trust an energy company as far as I could throw one of their executives.

I understand, that's how I feel about politicians.

So if I'm reading you correctly you're saying I should read your statement correctly. Is that what I'm reading?

:lol: Nah, just saying I can understand how someone else could read it incorrectly. I could have worded it a little better.