What the hell is a progressive traditionalist????

If you’re one of those liberals who call themselves “progressive” cut to the chase and just call yourself a socialist.

I live in Ill. I pay extra tax for gas (thanks obama!!)
I pay twice in property tax as I did in MO.

I’m sick of paying all this tax!

I drive past the wood river refinery which is trying to expand, but can’t as the liberal Sierra Club has it tied up in court.

If you really believe extra taxation will help this nation, prove it.

Give as much tax as your heart desires - there’s no limit to how much you can give to uncle sam.

I’m sick of people like you who suggest that taxation will help end the high fuel prices.

Democrats who want to fix this through taxing me more - my sweat, my time for what? Giving my tax dollar to someone who dosen’t want to work.

They say China is off the coast of florida drilling our oil and the Democraps still won’t let americans drill?

Who votes for these democrats?

Chris, you’d have my vote if I still lived in Mo.

Thanks for the in sight.

DC

Best of luck to you.

Other than that, I wonder how much a person has a right to rely on the government. Those medications cost.
And whether it’s a cancer patient or an AIDS patient, I have to question who exactly it is that has a right to be a drain on the State to the tune of $200k or more a year.

Not that I want people to die, mind you; it’s just that the same resources could go a lot further elsewhere. So when does morality step in to say that others might deserve our help just as much, if not more?
There is only so sick you can be before you die. And just because we might have some technology that can hold that off for a short time doesn’t imply that it would be moral or right to use it in every case.

First, the current high prices are not due to typical supply & demand activities, but rather,
1) The falling value of the dollar, and
2) Activities among speculators.

No. 2 suggests that oil (among other commodities) is only the latest bubble in a long stream of them– housing, the tech bubble, and so on.
And the best way to end that would be through taxation to encourage investment in more traditional instruments.

As to the four-part plan–
1) Nuclear will indeed be a huge part of our energy future. The big problem is the disposal of the waste. Chances are this problem has already been solved, and we will begin our use of that technology just as soon as the over-budget long-delayed Columbia River project finally opens.
And if we can’t get that one going in a reasonable period of time, then we need to build a smaller one elsewhere, with some builder other than Bechtel working on a cost-plus bid.
After talking with men that worked on that project, I’m inclined to believe that it would be dangerous to operate.

2) A common misconception.
Existing infrastructure is a much more imprtant determinant. There has to be pipelines to feed those refineries.
Also, most existing refineries are able to expand 3 to 5 times over right where they’re at, just like the one at Wood River, Ill, is doing right now.
There’s another Valero plant in Ill that is increasing its size three-fold.

3) Not a likely solution. Domestic oil typically runs a few dollars higher than the imported.
Best saved for an emergency measure.
A much more viable plan would be to release oil from the national reserves.

4) That’s a good idea, and long overdue.
It also has positive effects in other ways.
Domestic manufacturers would be able to capture greater market share with higher standards.

Other than that, I would recommend to you Mr Vaclav Smil’s “Energy at the Crossroads” as a sourcebook for data on energy related topics.

Best wishes,