Replies

Assume for a moment that boosting gas prices to $7.00/gallon gas were a useful policy goal. That still leaves the question, of how to achieve that goal.

BHO is restricting domestic supply (no drilling), in order to increase prices, and (he says) encourage people to reduce demand. That might actually make sense (to the extent that the goal makes sense), if the U.S. weren't importing so much crude, with borrowed money. And, if you weren't buying so much of your crude from hostile regimes.

Another way to get gas to $7.00/gallon would be to add about $3.00/gallon in taxes. (I know, I know — taxes!) The resulting reduction in demand might actually help lower the world price of crude — not that consumers would notice. The U.S. government could use the new gas tax revenue to reduce other taxes (well, they could — with a Democrat government there would probably just be more spending. Meanwhile, less money is being borrowed to buy foreign oil & the tax revenue stays within the borders of the U.S.A (for a few moments, at least).

The tax increase option (vile as taxes are) would do the least harm to the U.S. economy — while reducing (rather than drastically increasing) the amount of money sent overseas to (often) hostile regimes. Money that you have to borrow from other hostile regimes.

Of course, if BHO persists in policies designed to skyrocket the price of crude; you won't hear much complaining from these quarters (Canada). Thanks very much for the windfall, folks. Despite the possibility of a short-term windfall; many of us Canadians would rather see a strong, healthy U.S. economy. Boosting local oil supplies is more likely to get you there (in the near term at least) than shutting down the oil industry, and subsidizing “green” energy.