# Obama's Plan.....tell me something



## stonebroke (Dec 16, 2004)

When gas prices went over $4.00/gallon we were told that one of the primary reasons was because we don't have enough oil refineries. If I remember right, they said there hadn't been a new one built in the U.S. in over 20 years. Whenever something happens to a refinery, gas prices shoot up.

Now I fully understand and agree that we need to wean ourselves from our dependence on oil, but why wasn't money earmarked in this wonderful stimulus package for building some new refineries? Am I missing something? I admit it.....like most of our politicians and president, I have not read the stimulus package. If there is a provision in his package for building some new refineries, I've yet to hear anyone mention it.


----------



## T Shot (Oct 4, 2002)

Much of the stimulus money is going towards "Shovel Ready" projects. Don't know of too may refinery plans waiting for funding to build. Also, there is still quite a bit of discussion going on as to how to distribute this money, but I would doubt any of it would be earmarked for such a project. Could be wrong though.

RENEWABLE ENERGY IS WHERE IT'S AT!!! :roll:


----------



## TANATA (Oct 31, 2003)

There hasn't been any refineries built since the 70's, but who knows if that is even a legitimate problem. Sounds to me like another excuse they have for high prices, and if they build more refineries, what will the next excuse be?

Prices are low right now with the same amount of refineries and little change in demand, but oil companies cutting production is now the problem. Never ending cycle we are going to have to deal with unless we start taking over some oil production and nationalizing it.


----------



## MSG Rude (Oct 6, 2003)

I moved this here as it seems more fitting due to the subject heading.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Thanks, I agree.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

very simple. Obama-hood doesn't want any new oil production, he wants less and would welcome a crisis to make people use less and buy hybrids.
he will risk an economic collapse to move his agenda forward. these are scary times.


----------



## bjertness07 (Jan 4, 2005)

hunter9494 said:


> very simple. Obama-hood doesn't want any new oil production, he wants less and would welcome a crisis to make people use less and buy hybrids.
> he will risk an economic collapse to move his agenda forward. these are scary times.


Sounds like an assumption to me, but probable. There's no question we need to get away from oil. It's the plan of attack to do so that needs to be looked into. There's been so much criticism surrounding ethanol I'm afraid it's created a stigma about it. Hopefully we don't see $4 gas any more though, we all saw where prices went with it.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

"drill here, drill now"......dead. higher gas taxes and a probable additional fee per mile driven....being pushed by Congress......doesn't sound like any increase in production to me......in fact, plan is to punish those who drive more. great plan for an economic rebound eh? :beer:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

It's extremely arrogant for them to forget the people of the United States calling for drill here drill now. They say that Bush was behind the high prices. What do they think will come of their action of stopping drilling? Idiots.


----------



## Bowstring (Nov 27, 2006)

Obama said he would cut income tax on 95% of the tax payers, but never said he wouldn't tax the he** out of 100% of us all with other taxes. That's the "change" that was promised and 53% voted for! :roll:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Bowstring, that's interesting because I went to a retirement training today. It's a two day thing I get free. Today we covered federal retirement plans, stocks, bonds, taxes, roll over to IRA etc. I don't remember the exact numbers, but lets say for example you made $40,000. Currently you would pay, I think it was 15% on the first $16,000, then 20%, then 25% , then 28%. The point is you would only pay 28% on the $37,000 to $40,000. Under Obama's plan you will pay the higher rate on all of it. We couldn't tell people that before the election, or just a couple of weeks ago, but now the financial planners have the plan, and to me it looks like it will tax everyone more, and not just the rich. Obama is simply dishonest with everyone. Hard to believe people don't understand the slight of hand he is playing.

Isn't it ironic that Bush's plan did more for the poor?

The other interesting thing is social security. When it started there were 27 people paying in for every one taking out. Now I think it is down to 3.7 paying in for every individual taking out. That will have to change. You will pay in a lot more, and take out less at an older age. However, the current plan is to hide some of that, but not reducing your withdrawl so much, but taxing it. It turns out the same, but they are counting on us being to stupid to know it.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

How do we fix this then? Do you think this would be different if McCain or Romney would have got in?

A few months ago we had the debate in here on taxes and I said that like or not we are going to have to pay higher taxes, and hunter 9494 was right on over the weeknend when he said that we will all be going ahead with less. I think now it is really beginning to be obvious.

Obama has addressed nothing on economic correction, let alone recovery. There has been little or nothing of substance done on the issue of housing and the debate we were having on Walmart and the like in Plainsman's bad news for your money topic shows that people have no idea about getting us out the defecit and because of that DC isn't in any hurry to change our trade agreements. The banking industry from what I have seen is screwing consumers now more than ever before, this after just getting billions of our dollars.

I am almost buying into your theory of Obama actually wanting to destroy everything and then socializing it, I just think that he is going to run out of time. When I supported Obama I expected him to change the trade policies, go line by line through the federal budget and get rid of waste, those were his words during the campaign, and to do correct our crooked financial system once and for all. I got a letter from Conrad and he stated that they were going to get after the crooks and that is yet to happen either.

Two months into the administration and we are either at a standstill or going backwards.


----------



## Bowstring (Nov 27, 2006)

Amazing! I think with all the changes being proposed or enacted it will be so overwhelming to the average person, they will just give up and give in. I hope the few lawmakers that are still interested in looking out for the working class will not give up and keep fighting the socialist trend of the newly elected bone heads. :******:


----------



## Bowstring (Nov 27, 2006)

TK33, I don't try have the answer, but I do know you can't spend your way to prosperity. The years of Reagan helped recover from the carter era. Cut taxes and people and business's spend more money. The problem is deficit spending. As you know all congress's since way back, have sent a deficit budget to the white house except for three years when Clinton was in office. If congress would spend within its expected tax revenues we wouldn't be borrowing from the Chinese etc. We might have been able to afford the products made in the USA and not look for cheaper labor. Yes I feel the stock market would be different if someone else was elected. Obama only know government programs, the rest is irrelevant.


----------



## Bowstring (Nov 27, 2006)

Bowstring said:


> Obama said he would cut income tax on 95% of the tax payers, but never said he wouldn't tax the he** out of 100% of us all with other taxes. That's the "change" that was promised and 53% voted for! :roll:


Hit hardest would be the "95% of working families"

Good reading,

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123655590609066021.html


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

I really expected more sooner from Obama, I am very irritated right now. All the dems had these great plans, and so did some true conservatives and right now nothing is being done that will change anything. I was really disappointed when Jud Gregg withdrew from the cabinet because I felt like we all lost when he made that decision and now we are seeing why.

I like you got out of the market in '07, we were lucky. My investment guy then said we will see a recession that we could survive and because I have at least three decades left to work I should just ride it out. Glad everyday that I didn't.

At some point we will have to take this country back from crooked politicians and corporations and with every day that passes I think that the day of reckoning will get uglier.


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

TK33 said:


> At some point we will have to take this country back from crooked politicians and corporations and with every day that passes I think that the day of reckoning will get uglier.


Exactly. Unfortunately this countries politics are being molded by the corrupt media and the ill informed which are the majority. The left has had a decade of hate pent up and now they are unleashing it on all.

I fear for the country's solvency.


----------



## alleyyooper (Jul 6, 2007)

Back to the original question?
Do you really want to take tax payer money to build new oil refinerys for the likes of exxon that made over 47 million dollars in profit while fuel cost went thru the roof. Do you see the prices ski rocketing now that the texas oil guy is no longer in office to protect them?

I keep reading about people revolting on the net, funny I do not see a one of them attempting to gather a group and leading us all from under the heels of the people in Washington.
Problem is the path to Washington is littered with good intentions. Every time a river is crossed some of the good intentions get washed off. Every time a creek is forded a good intention is lost.

The powers that be will never tax those who make millions and billions as they do the people who make less than a quarter million. They will soon be making milions and billions them selves once they get to Washington. Ever see a poor polition get to Washington.

We have closed refinerys here in Michigan too.

 Al


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Do you really want to take tax payer money to build new oil refinerys for the likes of exxon that made over 47 million dollars in profit while fuel cost went thru the roof. Do you see the prices ski rocketing now that the texas oil guy is no longer in office to protect them?


No, I don't think they should get tax dollars, but I don't think we should handcuff them from investing themselves either. If they don't move ahead, then let someone other than the oil company build a refinery. Farmers don't own the mill, the shippers, and the grocery store. Maybe it's time to break up companies like Exxon so they don't have a monopoly.

IF you think oil prices were high because Bush was in office I think that you simply drank the liberal envy cool-aid.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

> I keep reading about people revolting on the net, funny I do not see a one of them attempting to gather a group and leading us all from under the heels of the people in Washington.


That is how Obama got into office. His supporters used moveon.org, hollywood, and grassroots efforts to first take down the Clinton machine and then knock off McCain. He was supposed to be the answer.



> but I don't think we should handcuff them from investing themselves either. If they don't move ahead, then let someone other than the oil company build a refinery.


That will never happen unless Obama can get the enviromental lobby swept under the rug or some state pulls a 10th amendment thing and says they will do what they want. Senator Dorgan was on a talk show last summer and he said that him and Conrad were trying to cut through the red tape to get approval for a couple of refineries in ND, one was a tribal based one if I remember right.

I read an article several years ago in some science mag, I think popular mechanics or something, anyway they had a refinery design that was shot down by the EPA and someone else. It was basically a refinery in a swimming pool, almost 100% contained and surrounded by a forest. If that didn't pass I don't know what will. Obama is already going to cut payments to farmers he had better get moving on the energy because the clock is ticking.


----------

