Chevy Volt Halted. Who did not see this coming?

[deezler]

You work for the auto industry? Of course you do, clear from the start.


And don't you know, most on the right are just too stupid to understand and those dastardly conservative talk shows are dumbing us down even more......I guess we should watch MSNBC?

Uhmm, no...? Don't watch any of that bullsh*t talking heads spewing talking points cable news garbage. The internet is probably the best place to find real news these days, provided one has the patience and intellect to sort through the cr@p.

As for TV, I think the PBS newshour is about the only unbiased reporting left. "All Things Considered" on NPR is probably the best news organization out there. The only people who say it has a bias are those who stand to lose when the truth is actually reported.

 

[deezler]

Eddie,

All of the statistics in this article are linked to sources.
Big Oil's Banner Year

But I suppose you wouldn't agree with most of the logic in this article anyway?

The subsidies are not specific incentives to innovate. They are tax breaks! Simple giveaways. If you have evidence to the contrary, please provide. To say that an industry needs 4 billion in incentives or else they will simply pass the cost along to us, when they made over 130 billion in profits last year alone, is ludicrous.

Big oil is concentrating wealth into their own hands, at the expense of all of us, and the continuing decline of our middle class in this country. How can anyone be on their side? It boggles the mind.

 

[deezler]

While I'm at it, please read this also to understand the specific tax breaks.

Big Oil?s Misbegotten Tax Gusher: Why They Don?t Need $70 Billion from Taxpayers Amid Record Profits

 

[EddieWalker]

Eddie,

All of the statistics in this article are linked to sources.
Big Oil's Banner Year

But I suppose you wouldn't agree with most of the logic in this article anyway?

The subsidies are not specific incentives to innovate. They are tax breaks! Simple giveaways. If you have evidence to the contrary, please provide. To say that an industry needs 4 billion in incentives or else they will simply pass the cost along to us, when they made over 130 billion in profits last year alone, is ludicrous.

Big oil is concentrating wealth into their own hands, at the expense of all of us, and the continuing decline of our middle class in this country. How can anyone be on their side? It boggles the mind.

Your links are to Center For American Progress and right next to the title it says it's a Progressive site. Do we agree that Progressive is another word for Liberal?

Center for American Progress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

While short of facts, it is very accusitory of the oil industry making too much money. I've asked this before, what amount should they be allowed to make?

It also likes to forget the huge losses that they had in 2009.

Did you really not know that insentives and tax breaks are the same thing? All the so called subsidies to the oil industry are them just taking advantage of the tax laws and doing what every business does. Would you like to get rid of tax breaks? Or corporate tax breaks? What are your views on GE and GM getting tax breaks? Or should we call them subisidies? Either way, they get them too. How about subsidies to all of us?

I'm sure you're not like the evil oil companies and getting government subsidies are you? I hope you're not being hypocrytical by saying that subsidies are bad for everyone else, but then claiming tax deductions for yourself? Maybe the problem isn't the oil companies, but everyone who takes government subsidies? :laughing::laughing::laughing:

Obviously I'm joking, but where do you draw the line? Why would it be bad for one, but ok for another?

As for what the oil industry needs and doesn't need. I'm not qualified to say. Are you? If we decide to target one industry, are we prepared to live with the outcome? In every case that I'm aware of, when it becomes too expensive and difficult to run a business in this country, they go to another country. Same with states, counties and cities. Maybe you've heard of this?

What I fail to comprehend is why do you want to drive the price of oil up? What proof do you have that a replacement for oil will come along when gas costs ten dollars a gallon? Can you name an instance when this has happened before?

Eddie

 

[GolfAddict]

Don't watch any of that bullsh*t talking heads spewing talking points cable news garbage.

If you don't watch any of it, how would you know? Are you just believing something that someone has told you?

As for TV, I think the PBS newshour is about the only unbiased reporting left. "All Things Considered" on NPR is probably the best news organization out there. The only people who say it has a bias are those who stand to lose when the truth is actually reported.

Well, that says it all. Very fair and balanced. Sheesh!

Fox News is biased, but PBS is unbiased.... not at all surprising to see you using very liberal leaning internet sources for your quotes.

 

[deezler]

short on facts? I see a lot of numbers with a couple dozen citations.

I have no proof that a replacement for oil will come along. I can tell you this - reduction in personal energy consumption is going to be paramount. Cheap oil is one big party, and regardless of how we bicker about it now, or how corporations and government shape the industry over the coming decades - it ain't gonna last forever.

I would be happier to see us all run out of energy and have to live off the land and return to our roots, than for human induced climate change to raise the oceans, warm the air, and change the precipitation patterns worldwide. In my opinion a future with no cheap energy and a stable climate, is preferable to a smog-filled, dangerous weather-pattern world where we still crank out carbon emmissions. Except! That oil can't last forever, so we have to quit it anyway. It's just a question of doing it now before we ruin our climate, or doing it later once it's already too late and we have no choice.

 

[deezler]

If you don't watch any of it, how would you know? Are you just believing something that someone has told you?

Dude, one only has to watch a few minutes of any of them to immediately see that they all have their own, well crafted agenda and are happy to use cheap talking points and incendiary statements to draw ratings. They are (all) less news programs than they are ratings generators to attract advertisers. Their entire model of news dissemination is royally screwed up.

Actually probably the best way to get help analyzing these ridiculous news programs is to watch the daily show and the colbert report on comedy central, and just try to disagree with Jon Stewart or Steven Colbert's scathing commentary of how worthless they are. The Jon Stewart debates with bill Orieley (youtube them) are also very telling.

Well, that says it all. Very fair and balanced. Sheesh!

Fox News is biased, but PBS is unbiased.... not at all surprising to see you using very liberal leaning internet sources for your quotes.

Fox news is regularly called to task for their blatant misrepresentation of facts and failure to cover other important news stories that don't fit their agenda.

For one easy example (but non-scientific, I admit) of the clear disparity, try searching snopes.com or factcheck.org for the keywords "fow news". Then try it again with "pbs" and see how many respective hits you get. Fox news is much more controversial because of their rather aggressive agenda.

PBS and NPR are the only quality news outlets, in my opinion, because they don't rely upon advertising dollars to sustain their operations, and are thus not beholden in the same way. Nor are they owned by Rupert Murdoch... we don't have to talk about his motives, but they are pretty clear.
PBS and NPR actually are sustained in a large part due to (non-partisan) federal grants, and mostly in balance from individuals small donations. I like that funding model a LOT better than frequent interruptions for prescription drugs, oil and energy companies, and political ads.

 

[jonyyuma]

Could be some of this is correct?? I did read that the oil fields in saudia arabia Are in trouble . The Solution was to Pump seawater into the well for continued production...Will they Own the US, by the time the last gallon dribles out? Food for Thought?

 

[GolfAddict]

I'll readily admit Fox News leans right in their editorializing. In my view, the rest of TV news leans left in theirs.

(Tell me you don't believe that Stewart and Colbert are fair and balanced???)

PBS and NPR actually are sustained in a large part due to (non-partisan) federal grants, and mostly in balance from individuals small donations. I like that funding model a LOT better than frequent interruptions for prescription drugs, oil and energy companies, and political ads.

You prefer news funded by the state. And you think that is a better model for ensuring unbiased news. OK....

 

[aczlan]

Remember that the first cars were electric. It is easier to make money from oil and no oil executive is going to allow the government to provide money for the competition. They have millions if not billions of dollars to launch a counter attack to protect their profits.

Well, there is this little factoid about fossil fuels beating the tar out of other fuels in the kw per cubic foot department, but lets just ignore that inconvenient truth...

Aaron Z