Stephen Leo Bing
Posted on 10/31/2006 7:36:43 AM PST by SmithL
As Al Gore gave an impassioned speech about global warming at a sun-bathed downtown Berkeley park recently, Stephen Bing stood a few hundred feet behind the former vice president, away from the stage and the crowds, under the shadow of large pine trees.
In fact, hardly anyone even noticed the salt-and-pepper-haired Bing, a Hollywood producer who has become the main force behind Proposition 87, a statewide initiative that seeks to raise $4 billion in oil production tax to help develop alternative fuels.
Bing, 41, so far has dropped $49.6 million of his personal funds to help fend off an immense media campaign led by big oil companies to defeat the measure. The opposition has raised $90 million, and Yes on 87 has raised $57 million, but no other single individual or company on either side has contributed more than Bing. Chevron Corp. comes in second at $34 million.
Supporters of Prop. 87 also are enjoying the fruits of some of Bing's other investments: years of donating funds to the Democratic Party and its candidates at both state and federal levels. Popular Democratic figures such as Gore, former President Bill Clinton and potential 2008 presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., have led rallies in California in support of the initiative.
Couple that with Bing's connections in Hollywood, and the Prop. 87 campaign has become a star-studded affair that has included the likes of Ben Affleck, Geena Davis, Salma Hayek, Robert Redford and Julia Roberts.
However, Bing has never been on stage with any of these figures, and those who know him say that's just exactly how he likes to operate.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Stephen Leo Bing
Bing, 41, so far has dropped $49.6 million of his personal funds to help fend off an immense media campaign led by big oil companies to defeat the measure
Wouldn't he have been better off to have invested DIRECTLY in alternative fuel? Why is the govt the answer to everything?
I'm very happy to know he is out 50 million.
Actually, if Californians want to pay another $4 billion in tax, thats fine with me too. Thats what adults do, they tax themselves for the things they think are worth taxing themselves for. If Californians think their taxes are too low, they are free to raise them all day long.
Because be very clear on this, the oil companies do not pay this tax, ordinary Californians will pay it. Fuel prices will go up, which is a direct hit, and the price of everything that moves by truck, air or rail, which is to say, everything, will also go up. When the price of milk goes up you'll blame the grocer but don't complain, its just the direct fallout of your own decision to tax yourself $4 billion, using the oil company as your tax collector.
Ugh...worst Christmas movie EVER...IMHO.
I don't think that the oil companies' accounting processes are sophisticated enough to charge this only to Californians. That, combined with possible antitrust issues with charging more for a product in one market than others will most likely lead to all of us paying for California's stupidity.
No...it is not.
That distinction would go to "Bad Santa".
I think Bing invested in a dry hole.
Simple.
Because actually doing something productive is no fun.
Running the lives of tens of millions produces a much bigger rush.
Why should you be allowed to spend and invest your own money (if you have any)?
This is the natural result of allowing the vote to millions who have "nothing to lose" as the result of the vote.
He makes several statements which are simply lies:
That Brazil has switched over to ethanol, and "eliminated" their need for traditional fuels.
Tha Brazil made "simple" adjustments to all their "vehicles" to allow ethanol fuel. Airliners?
That ethanol is 25% cheaper than gasoline. If Brazil can do it, California can do it!
What he fails to mention: What is the price of gasoline in Brazil?
How much of it is taxes?
Does a gallon of ethanol go as far as a gallon of gasoline?
Important and relevant questions, all.
And if California could "do it" what has prevented the free market from achieving it?
Karl Rove?
George Bush?
Eeeeeevil Republicans?
Joooooooos?
Big business?
How exactly does that 25% "cheaper" work if the lion's share of a gallon of gasoline is taxes?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
Steve Bing is the class act that publicly denied being the father of Elizabeth Hurley's son, saying she was sleeping around and he wanted a dna test..which is fine, but couldn't he do that quietly?
What slick didn't mention is that Brazil managed to go local on fuel by drilling a lot of new oil wells.
A liberal multimillionaire (thanks to legacy bucks) now minus $50 million? What's not to like?!
Oh, that he didn't see fit to throw $200 million down a RAT hole.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.