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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (62617)	4/30/2008 10:06:37 AM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541141

CNN just ran a clip of Hillary talking about her gas tax holiday, more pandering to the gallery for a little while by increasing our deficit. Real problems need real solutions, not throwing candy to the crowds from a float in the parade.

To: JohnM who wrote (62617)	4/30/2008 10:39:29 AM
From: Sam	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 541141

Clinton-McCain gas tax holiday slammed as bad idea By Alister Bull A gas tax holiday proposed by U.S. presidential hopefuls John McCain and Hillary Clinton is viewed as a bad idea by many economists and has drawn unexpected support for Clinton rival Barack Obama, who also is opposed. "Score one for Obama," wrote Greg Mankiw, a former chairman of President George W. Bush's Council of Economic Advisers. "In light of the side effects associated with driving ... gasoline taxes should be higher than they are, not lower." Republican McCain and Democrat Clinton, who is battling Obama for their party's nomination, both want to suspend the 18.4-cents-per-gallon federal gas tax during the peak summer driving months to ease the pain of soaring gas prices. The tax is used to fund the Highway Trust Fund that builds and maintains roads and bridges. Economists said that since refineries cannot increase their supply of gasoline in the space of a few summer months, lower prices will just boost demand and the benefits will flow to oil companies, not consumers. "You are just going to push up the price of gas by almost the size of the tax cut," said Eric Toder, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center in Washington. Obama criticized the plan as pure politics and said the only way to lower the price of gas is to use less oil. "It would last for three months and it would save you on average half a tank of gas, $25 to $30. That's what Senator Clinton and Senator McCain are proposing to deal with the gas crisis," he said on Tuesday in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. "This isn't an idea designed to get you through the summer, it's an idea designed to get them through an election." This stance has prompted Clinton to accuse him of being out of touch with ordinary Americans as she campaigns ahead of key presidential nomination contests in North Carolina and Indiana on May 6. CLINTON AT THE PUMP The New York senator was commuting to work in South Bend, Indiana, on Wednesday and planned to pump gas at a gas station to draw attention to her plan to suspend the gas tax on consumers and businesses. "We will pay for it by imposing a windfall profits tax on the big oil companies," she said on Tuesday. "They sure can afford it. This is a big difference in this race. My opponent opposes giving consumers a break from the gas tax but I believe the American people are being squeezed pretty hard." The cost of a gallon of gasoline has touched $4 in some parts of the country as oil prices nudge toward a record $120 per barrel, hammering drivers at a time when higher food prices and falling home values are already crimping U.S. consumers. Many economists implicitly agreed with Obama and said the McCain-Clinton gas tax plan sent the wrong signal on energy efficiency and was at odds with their pledges to combat climate change by encouraging lower U.S. carbon emissions. "I think it is a very bad idea," said Gilbert Metclaf, a economics professor at Tufts University currently working with the National Bureau of Economic Research. "If we want people to invest in energy-saving cars, we need some assurance that the higher price paid for these cars is going to pay off through fuel savings," he said. "It is a very short-sighted, counterproductive proposal." Economists also saw it is a poor way of getting money to the households that need it most and warned that it might end up in the cash tills of the oil companies. "If you want to provide households tax relief, a direct rebate ... is more effective. Not all of the tax relief from a gas tax holiday will be passed on to consumers. Some will likely be kept by refiners," Mankiw said in an e-mail response. New York Times columnist Paul Krugman was similarly underwhelmed: "It's Econ 101: the tax cut really goes to the oil companies," he wrote on his blog on Tuesday. (Additional reporting by Jeff Mason in Winston-Salem, N.C., and Ellen Wulfhorst in Indianapolis) (Editing by Bill Trott) news.yahoo.com

To: JohnM who wrote (62617)	4/30/2008 10:44:51 AM
From: Sam	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541141

While all the presidential candidates were railing about lost manufacturing jobs in Ohio, no one noticed that America’s premier solar company, First Solar, from Toledo, Ohio, was opening its newest factory in the former East Germany — 540 high-paying engineering jobs — because Germany has created a booming solar market and America has not. In 1997, said Resch, America was the leader in solar energy technology, with 40 percent of global of global solar production. “Last year, we were less than 8 percent, and even most of that was manufacturing for overseas markets.” That is absurd and repulsive.

To: JohnM who wrote (62617)	4/30/2008 12:11:08 PM
From: gamesmistress	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541141

What does "created a market" mean? (Germany has created a booming solar market and America has not.) Here in CT the state will rebate up to half the cost of a solar system for residences, non-profit and government buildings. Last year we got a quote for a 5,000 kw system and after all rebates it was still over $25,000. Even with the highest electrical rates in the country getting solar just didn't add up. We are still looking at solar, but we want solar shingles (BIPVs) for our cape as panels would be way too big and ugly. The price per watt would also have to come down considerably. Does Germany subsidize solar system purchases more than US states?