The Dangers of Obama's Energy Plan

Pajamas Media ^ | October 7, 2008 | Robert Zubrin

[AJKauf]

At the core of the Obama policy is a proposal to tax American oil companies and use the proceeds to fund a variety of initiatives, including a $500 rebate to every adult in the nation to help him or her to make ends meet in the face of high oil prices. This generous program would cost about $100 billion. Since the U.S. oil industry produces about 3 billion barrels per year, this translates into a tax of about $33 on every barrel produced in America, while leaving the 5 billion barrels per year of imported foreign oil untaxed.

As a method of damaging America’s prospects for achieving energy independence, such a proposal is hard to top....

[johnny7]

...a $500 rebate to every adult in the nation

“Foldin' money fo' everybody!”

[Da Coyote]

“....At the core of the Obama policy is a proposal to tax American oil companies and use the proceeds to fund a variety of initiatives, including a $500 rebate to every adult in the nation to help him or her to make ends meet in the face of high oil prices....”

Let me ‘splain:
Place yourself in a bucket.
Grap the bucket handles and pull very hard.
You will go up.

THIS IS HOW LIBERAL ARTS MAJORS THINK (OR DON’T THINK).

There is a reason that Obama is a Harvard Law grad and will never ever be a MIT Physics grad.

[bestintxas]

Question: Rather than handing out our own money that was taken from us, why don’t we just stop the taxes to begin with?

Answer: People will be less inclined to think the government is benevolent. It behooves the monster of government to remind people that they have the power to tax and destroy.

We need to kill the monster, not try to tame it.

[Parley Baer]

I did not know that Barry has an energy plan. Shows what I know.

[6SJ7]

So his plan is basically to reduce supply by punishing producers and then inflate the demand with a check. Brilliant.

The result will be increased cost as dwindling supply meets increased demand. Of course I suppose that’s the whole point, so Libs can then blame the oil companies for not delivering enough supply. Stage two will be the government seizing the oil companies. Stage three will be thousands freezing to death in the Winter.

[Cicero]

I was going to send this out to my list, but it’s fatally flawed.

For instance: “Some of these are quite good, such as a hefty increase in federally funded research and development in energy technology.”

No. That’s BAD. If an alternative energy plan is workable, it will be funded privately. The Federal Government has a long history of misusing such funding and distorting markets. How many billions have we spent on ethanol, for instance?

The same with helping people to winterize. Maybe not a bad idea, but it’s already being done at the state level. We don’t need another level of bureaucracy stepping in and gobbling up more pork.

[oyez]

We here in industry strive
to keep some kind of resemblance of an profit against rising prices of energy and raw materials. If Obama taxes oil companies those prices go up and causes more stress on the profit margin. It some point near zero, industries consider shutting down and sending their employees home.. Too many people have some idea the the oil companies and industry floats on some kind of surplus capital. Industry only floats on it assets as along as liabilities aren't too heavy. In the real world money has to be earned and that is done by creating wealth. The bottom line is that the government has to allow the growth of wealth rather that to take it away or restrict opportunities to develop wealth..

[AndyJackson]

$100 billion

Which wold build 30 nuclear power plants.

Dims and Wall Street just don't understand the difference between cash, credit, trading paper and capital investments in productive enterprise.

[AndyJackson]

The best part of Obama’s plan is his strong support of biofuels. In contrast to John McCain, Obama favors both the renewable fuel standard and ethanol production subsidies. These subsidies cost taxpayers $0.45 per gallon of ethanol produced but save the nation $3 in foreign oil purchases at the same time. Why John McCain prefers to send $3 to Saudi Arabia instead of $0.45 to Iowa is difficult to understand, especially given the strategic nature of the commodity in question, and the fact that the foreign oil money helps to finance acts of war and terror against the United States. Yet he does. So on this question Obama has it right and McCain has it badly wrong.

First, ethanol does not cost $.45 per gasoline gallon equivalent.

Second, the agribusiness part of that is hydrocarbon intensive for fuel and fertilizer, so the energy gain (unit of ethanol energy prodcuced to unit of hydrocarbon consumed) is not significantly greater than 1.

Third, of course is the very noticceable derivative impact of food costs.

[bestintxas]

The truly chilling thing is that they really do understand it - and choose to pull the wool over America’s eyes.

You can bet that they would never agree to this on a personal basis - just for the good of the country we need this sacrifice.

Remember Obama saying WE need to stop driving big cars? Of course he and his lib buddies keep on driving them...

[The Great RJ]

Since the majority of oil company stocks are held by pension funds, senior citizens will take a hit when the oil companies are taxed and of course the taxes on the oil companies will just be passed on to consumers as higher prices.