Yeah, because the economy is running so smooth right now. What about when the oil runs out? No problem, because that's when technology will save us! Even though we've been saying that for 30 years and haven't done **** all about it. Imagine how far along electric car and renewable energy technology would be right now if we'd made a serious commitment to them back in the 70s. Or the 80s. Or the 90s. Now I think I understand why Republicans are in favor of climate change. Maybe they're hoping developing world economies will get wiped out by drought and flood so that we can more oil to ourselves.
You serious Clark? If we burn oil produced here versus oil produced elsewhere, why would it increase pollution? And yes, more supply equals lower prices.
Less oil produced=less oil consumed=HELLO horse and buggy, and manure in the streets. You lefties are puzzling, indeed.
We need to be spewing less CO2, not just maintaining the status quo. And increased demand followed by higher prices and round and round we go. But let's get specific. How much lower prices would prices get and for how long? Is it worth all the indirect costs of oil?
Many years ago the USA stopped making the effort at getting dinosaur leftovers out of its own soil. It did it for two reasons. The first being that it had become uncouth to start up yet another refinery, cause more pollution, impact more of our coastlines (where they typically do best) and do overall bad things to the environment. The second was that it was simply cheaper overall to buy it from the brown man in the sand and ship it over here than it would be to build said earth killing refinery. So both sides got what they wanted. The left prevented more refineries from getting built and the right kept their powerful oil lobbyists happy (and rich). Everyone was pretty happy about it, until the brown man got angry about whitey stomping on his turf, taking his resources, not paying enough for oil and looking luridly at his women. So now, after 30 years of half hearted efforts at developing an alternative fuel source we're faced with gas prices that make us uncomfortable. And we don't have any sort of short term solution to this problem. Welcome my friends to the systemic failure that is Big Oil. One side will point at the other and say, "it's his fault", when in reality we collectively sold out a long, long time ago and neither side wants to admit their error.
So, Obama wants to take away my guns, car, and bible? Did I miss anything? The list grows longer and longer each day.
Well that's a given. Stupid liberals and their crazy ideas about expecting us to pay for our own government.
True enough. Now, let's continue with the domestic production and refining we let slide back in the '70's, and let them desert folks send their oil to india and China.(while we "seriously" go after the new mystery fuel, that is abundant and economical)
Certainly I don't have to explain THE SUN to an AGW-denying Rush disciple do I? And I don't what it's like in Arizona, but in Oklahoma and throughout the plains we have this thing called WIND. Other places have a lot of FLOWING WATER. There's also the most abundant element in the universe, HYDROGEN. Not very new, and not much of a mystery. Even natural gas is better than oil, although I have no idea how long it's going to be before that runs out. But by all means, lets do everything we can to forestall development of new technologies and perpetuate the oil industry's monopoly.
I'm all for exploring new technologies, but if you think this congress is going to allow new development for hydroelectric or Nuclear power you've got another thing coming. Just ask all the lefties who drink water stored in the Hoover and Glen Canyon Dams how they feel about those reservoirs.
I don't see either side jumping up to reduce spending, so I assume you mean "balancing the budget" when you say overpaying. tax and spend > tax and sell ourselves to China