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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (93509)	11/13/2007 8:45:06 PM
From: Broken_Clock	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206093

I find it hilarious to be discussing energy taxes when the history in our beloved US of A has taught us that: 1. Tax money goes just about anywhere except where it is intended to go 2. Higher taxes on necessities is essentially a burden on the poor, not the rich I am sure there are many solutions to reducing energy consumption, but higher taxes levered against the poor is a joke. They have little power to increase their earnings base. Now if one has a penchant for higher taxes on energy, then a luxury tax on the wealthy is a good place to start. Got a $1,000 electric bill? Let's make it $10,000. If that doesn't work then keep increasing it until the person starts cutting back. Got a pool? Jacuzzi? Car getting under 20 mpg? Whack a big energy tax. When 6,000 lb. autos get special beneficial tax treatment(which they do) then it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that the bottom line for gov't is to keep the poor getting poorer while the rich get richer. I saw a news report last night in which the son of a wealthy car dealership owner in Atlanta is using 400,000 gals. of water per month at his mansion...all the while the gov't is restricting water usage for the working class because of the drought. Pretty typical gov't behavior.