LOL. She can't be serious.
She wants to take all of the profits away from a corporation and give it to some government program that will most likely fail.
She really doesn't understand business does she. Taxing the heck out of an industry is the quickest way to kill it.
Is it possible that the oil industry have squelched new technology in order to maintain demand for fossil fuels? Possibly, and this should be the debate.
"She really doesn't understand business does she."
But didn't she make a small fortune in a short period dealing futures a few years ago?
See. She understands. She just wants to get hers; and yours as well.
The second statement belies the first statement. She understands.
Mexico nationalized its oil, and the government drains away so much from the national company that it can hardly operate.
.....LOL. She can't be serious. .....
She is deadly serious.....Marxist to the bone.
She will repay the katrina debt with oil profits. All part of the global warming game...
Is it possible that the oil industry have squelched new technology in order to maintain demand for fossil fuels? Possibly, and this should be the debate.
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
What is this supposed to mean?
"this should be the debate"---
------you are absolutely right about that, and there are ANY NUMBER of feasible and meaningful areas of debate when it comes to the whole idea of energy, fossil fuels, alternative sources of energy, energy "independence"> Hillary Clinton is far from alone in her indifference to what should be the REAL debate, though. In characteristic
Marxist fashion, she wants to take this massive industry that ONLY the capitalist Oil interests COUILD have created, and turn it to Marxist ends: it is a ruse to say, as she does, that their profits should be turned to counter-industries
that would eventually put them out of business---a ruse and a laughable contradiction NO ONE believes could happen, even her. No, instead, she is playing (or proposing) a shake-down game on a grand scale; she wants large amounts of oil profits to be skimmed off, bled from, extracted, etc. in order to fund WHATEVER SHE WANTS TO FUND. My God, it could be anything, considering what comprehensive plans she has for America.
No, you will never hear a real debate from her or her minions on this subject, as a real debate is hard enough to come by from ANY Establishment Politician.
It's not the oil industry by itself, it's not the auto industry by itself, but put them together and you have got an unbreakable Yin-Yang and one EXTREMELY powerful monolith of the Status Quo---you've got nothing less than the INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE, and all those forces that coalesce and combine to protect it and its inviolability.
If we were interested in virtually FREE energy we would ALREADY be devising ways to implement engines for cars that did not burn fossil fuel. We have long known how to do this, and advances have already been made. And if we could buy gas for 50 cents a gallon, none of us would even be bothered by the constantly rising and falling prices, and how tied THEY are to forces outside our own control, and most MADDENINGLY, how they are somehow ALSO tied to fostering, funding and furthering the aims of petrodollar-rich Islamists who want to destroy us, by a thousand cuts if not a few very big ones.
People like Hillary, and sorry to say, just about everyone else, are only interested in this issue insofar as it serves their own social agenda,and/or existing power business arrangements. This is so obvious it almost does not bear repeating. It was 9-11 that brought these things into sharper focus than they have ever been before---the gas crisis of the 1970s was just "priming the pump".
Her "program" as she expresses it, almost sounds good, and idealistic, and reasonable, even given the generally Marxist assumptions behind it. But that's not what would happen if she were Commander-in-Chief of this program. The oil industry would pay lip service to a more progressive direction , just as the auto industry has: answering widespread public dissatisfaction with tweaking this and that to help us get 3 more MPG, and , hey, put 5% less pollution in the atmosphere within say, the next 10 or 20 years.
SUGGESTED READING FOR EVERYONE: INTERNAL COMBUSTION by Edwin Black.