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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tonto who wrote (726214)	2/16/2006 4:47:07 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Asked, and repeatedly answered: Wrong. Revenue neutral means revenue neutral. (And, if the US economy can't cope with higher oil costs... then just how inefficient and lame does that imply that we are? ALL of our developed nation peer group and competitors --- E.U., Japan, etc. --- pay much more per unit of oil, and yet manage to be QUITE COMPETITIVE with our industries. Are you saying somehow we aren't as flexible or efficient or competitive as Europe or Japan????????????) Message 22175084 *And, how much boost* happens to investments and in the economy because of lowered income tax rates????????** Message 22175180 ALL taxes gig somebody. NONE are 'perfect' by any definition I'm aware of. Still, a slowly phased-in increase in the tax on oil will promote substitutions, development of alternative technologies, and increased efficiencies all across the transportation industry (just as it did in the 'seventies, producing the greater efficiencies we currently benefit from). If addiction to Middle Eastern sources of oil is regarded as a major SECURITY WEAKNESS and THREAT to America --- as I believe it should be --- then reasonable, effective policies to decrease the impact of oil on our economy are important for STRATEGIC reasons, and for national defense. (We are ALREADY paying $4 to $5 a gallon for gasoline, when you add in all the costs we expend to militarily protect the oil export routes out of the Persian Gulf, anyway a recent study showed. We are already paying about the same as Europe or Japan... because THEY don't bear the same financial burden of military defense.) So, considering THAT, an increase in the consumption tax on oil --- that is 100% rebated to the American taxpayer on income tax, for example --- would actually be BETTER THEN REVENUE NEUTRAL, and result in a POSITIVE SAVING for the US economy... as the extra Billions to defend someone else's oil could be saved. Message 22175430 ================================================== PS --- I couldn't help but notice that, thus far, you haven't bothered actually trying to SUPPORT any of your contentions yet with either LOGICAL ARGUMENTS, or reference to FACTS of any kind.... Still waiting.