It's not as if price controls have not be used, in the past, as a means to control inflation.

However, I'm just referring to the possibility of price ceilings being imposed on the price of gasoline. Seems to me, the energy crisis in the 1970s was the fault of OPEC, not price controls instituted from within our own country. Nowadays, we have the big oil companies, arguably, colluding to fix the price of fuel. What's wrong with the possibility of a price ceiling to offset any potential collusion?

And the population suffered the negative consequences because of them. Some people never learn.


If global warming is as serious as you say it is, why would you want a ceiling on gas prices? Let’s say gasoline cost $8.50 a gallon, wouldn’t you drive less? Hence you would be polluting less? Wouldn’t everyone?

__________________
"If capitalism had never existed, any honest humanitarian should have been struggling to invent it. But when you see men struggling to evade its existence, to misrepresent its nature, and to destroy its last remnants - you may be sure that whatever their motives, love for man is not one of them." - Ayn Rand, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal

Coyote Blog


New Law Trashes Genetic Science

Not to worry, big oil will never allow prices to reach a point where it would significantly impact demand.

Al Gore Challenged to Climate Debate

Al Gore has been challenged to an internationally televised debate on "climate change" by Lord Christopher Monckton, a policy adviser to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher during her leadership of the United Kingdom.

In a formal press release from the Center for Science and Public Policy, Lord Monckton has thrown down the gauntlet to challenge Gore to what he terms "the Second Great Debate," an internationally televised, head-to-head, nation-unto-nation confrontation on the question, "That our effect on climate is not dangerous

Monckton said, "A careful study of the substantial corpus of peer-reviewed science reveals that Mr. Gore's film, "An Inconvenient Truth," is a foofaraw of pseudo-science, exaggerations, and errors, now being peddled to innocent schoolchildren worldwide."

Monckton and Gore have once before clashed head-to-head on the science, politics, and religion of global warming in pages of the London Sunday Telegraph last November.

As reported by NewsMax in November 2006, Monckton challenged a U.N. report on climate change as "hysteria" over manmade global warming that distorts the truth.

A U.N. report in 1996 "showed a 1,000-year graph demonstrating that temperature in the Middle Ages was warmer than today," Monckton writes in the Sunday Telegraph.

"But the 2001 report contained a new graph showing no medieval warm period. It wrongly concluded that the 20th century was the warmest for 1,000 years . . .

"Scores of scientific papers show that the medieval warm period was real, global and up to [5 degrees Fahrenheit] warmer than now.

"Then, there were no glaciers in the tropical Andes; today they're there. There were Viking farms in Greenland; now they're under permafrost. There was little ice at the North Pole — a Chinese naval squadron sailed right around the Arctic in 1421 and found none."

Monckton also writes that Antarctica has cooled and gained ice-mass in the past 30 years, and the oceans have cooled sharply in the past two years.

In his most recent challenge to Gore, Monckton calls on the former vice president to "step up to the plate and defend his advocacy of policies that could do grave harm to the welfare of the world's poor.

"If Mr. Gore really believes global warming is the defining issue of our time, the greatest threat human civilization has ever faced, then he should welcome the opportunity to raise the profile of the issue before a worldwide audience of billions by defining and defending his claims against a serious, science-based challenge."

© NewsMax 2007. All rights reserved.

When Gore will meet to debate it will continue

__________________
An informed voter scares the Goverment lackeys.

An American first and always a Conservative.

Go Sooners

Now you’re contradicting yourself, why would you be advocating a “ceiling” cap on gasoline prices if there is no chance oil companies will allow for high prices to impact demand?

__________________
"If capitalism had never existed, any honest humanitarian should have been struggling to invent it. But when you see men struggling to evade its existence, to misrepresent its nature, and to destroy its last remnants - you may be sure that whatever their motives, love for man is not one of them." - Ayn Rand, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal

Coyote Blog


New Law Trashes Genetic Science

Realistically, they won't, but I'm saying the idea of a price ceiling for gas should remain on the table. You never know, the excessive greed of big oil may trump good business sense in the future. Just threatening the oil companies with price controls might have a beneficial effect for consumers as well.

You’re still contradicting yourself. If you are really concerned about global warming wouldn’t it be more logical to but a price floor cap at say $5.50 a gallon which would force people to pay more for gasoline and pollute less?

__________________
"If capitalism had never existed, any honest humanitarian should have been struggling to invent it. But when you see men struggling to evade its existence, to misrepresent its nature, and to destroy its last remnants - you may be sure that whatever their motives, love for man is not one of them." - Ayn Rand, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal

Coyote Blog


New Law Trashes Genetic Science

The solution is to develop alternatives to oil...they do exist.

Global warming also exists....

Colonies on the moon do not exist.....

Debate over? Yes.

Can you name me an alternative to oil that is cleaner, cheaper, and more efficient? You cant? They don't exist!!

True, but there isn't anything we can do about it now.

irrelevant

hardly

__________________
"If capitalism had never existed, any honest humanitarian should have been struggling to invent it. But when you see men struggling to evade its existence, to misrepresent its nature, and to destroy its last remnants - you may be sure that whatever their motives, love for man is not one of them." - Ayn Rand, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal

Coyote Blog


New Law Trashes Genetic Science

Just remembering the good ol' days....

Yep, dead horse....