Replies

Donald Meaker wrote:

>The best news about a tax cut is it would decrease funding available to the govt<

Can't disagree with that!

>The second thing: the same supply would cost less. For the same amount of money, you would get more gas, and get more of the energy that gas represents.<

Wrong. We're talking about taxes at the retail level. Removing them wouldn't do much to increase supply, at least not for a few years, since the supply comes from producers -- not from the retailers. And nobody in a position of authority (AFAIK) is proposing to reduce taxes on producers.

>You have to continuously starve the government until it is small enough to drown in a bathtub.<

Can't disagree with that either!

>The MG-42 has a rate of fire of 1300 rounds per minute<

So what? How is it for concealed carry? That's what counts in my book. I'll stick to my Ruger SP-101, chambered for .357. With autoloader, I can do ten rounds per minute. And it never jams or misfires.

Removing [taxes] wouldn't do much to increase supply, at least not for a few years, since the supply comes from producers -- not from the retailers. And nobody in a position of authority (AFAIK) is proposing to reduce taxes on producers.

Removing taxes need not increase total supply. It would decrease the money spent on the same supply. Though I have no position of authority, that was the point of my post: to cut taxes on producers. That would either lower prices to the consumer, or increase profits, so more people would want to produce oil to get those profits. That would increase supply.