Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: benwood who wrote (7179)	5/27/2004 3:23:33 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

I think additional oil subsidies (roads, war, airlines being the most expensive I can think of at the moment) are about the worst possible reaction to this mess. Do we really need to have taxpayers on the hook for supporting the SUV/30-miles-from-work mentality that has grown up these past two decades? The oil subsidies are not to bring the price down but to ensure oil at SOME price. It would possibly have the affect of raising price. Imagine people bitching about $30 oil with opec selling it at $22. As for roads etc etc etc I agree. Perhaps there hould be a vehicle tax based on weight. I cerrtainly favor a tax of some sort on gas guzzlers and I want to mandate higher MPGs as well. Oil is about the only resource that is vital to our economy. The subsidy would support development of oil sands etc. Perhaps that has the affect of stabilizing the price near $30. Better that than being at the mercy of OPEC forever. In general I hate subsidies and would remove them on lumber, cattle, sugar, beans, wheat, etc etc etc etc. Everything but oil. Remember the subsidy if for DEVELOPMENT of tar and oil sands NOT for drilling oil wells in the conventional manner. I do not support opening up the artic. Mish