wrote in message
oups.com...

Dan J.S. wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Regular grade gasoline was $3.05 a gallon yesterday at several docks in
Annapolis. Diesel was $2.61 to $2.65.

Thanks, Dubya.

If you really believe it's Bush's fault, you lost all credibility you
had.

Bad Policy Fuels High Prices

As millions of Americans hop in their cars for vacation, the average
price for a gallon of gas has spiked to $2.60 -- and many people are
paying more than $3.00 per gallon to fill their tank. While most
everyone is feeling the pinch, "for many lower-income people -- often
those who work in service jobs or are looking for work -- each new bump
up in price means altering daily routines, spending less on clothes and
food, and keeping the kids at home instead of driving them to the pool
or friends' houses." A big part of the problem is that, despite huge
advances in technology, "America's cars and trucks are significantly
less efficient, on average, than they were in the late 1980's," driving
up demand, and the price, for fuel. Meanwhile, the Bush administration
has staunchly resisted efforts to help solve the problem by improving
fuel efficiency standards. Now, all Americans are paying the price.

BUSH ADMINISTRATION CONCEALS FUEL ECONOMY REPORT: In late July, "the
Environmental Protection Agency made an 11th-hour decision...to delay
the planned release of an annual report on fuel economy." The decision
to block the release of the report was made "because it would have come
on the eve of a final vote in Congress on energy legislation." The
study showed that "the average 2004 model car or truck got 20.8 miles
per gallon, about 6 percent less than the 22.1 m.p.g. of the average
new vehicle sold in the late 1980's." Specifically, "the average 2004
model sold by Nissan, Hyundai and Volkswagen was at least a half-mile a
gallon less fuel-efficient than in the previous model year, a sharp
drop." (A report by Environmental Defense provides details for all
major manufacturers.) That wasn't news the Bush administration wanted
public to hear because the bill "largely ignore[d] auto mileage
regulations." Several Senators offered amendments "to strengthen fuel
economy standards for S.U.V.'s, minivans and pickups" but they were all
rejected. Bush signed the energy bill, which gave away billions to the
energy industry, on August 8. Even the administration acknowledges the
bill will do nothing to reduce gas prices.

FAST, FURIOUS AND GAS-GUZZLING: The failure to mandate the production
of more fuel efficient vehicles is a giant missed opportunity. There
have been "leaps in engine technology over the last couple of decades"
that could make cars much more efficient. But in the absence of
stricter efficiency standards, these gains "have been mostly used to
make cars faster." Also, since the early 1980s, "average new vehicle
weight has risen to about 4,000 pounds today, from about 3,200." During
that time "the horsepower of an average engine has roughly doubled over
two decades, trimming four seconds from the time it takes for the
average vehicle to accelerate from zero to 60."

KEEP ON TRUCKING: The key to avoiding fuel efficiency standards is to
classify every new and trendy "crossover" vehicle as a truck. Light
trucks "are held to a lower [average fuel efficiency] standard-20.7
mpg as of model year 2003, compared to 27.5 mpg for cars."
Manufacturers are also moving vehicles that were once classified as
cars to the truck class "to sell more of the large trucks on which
profit margins have been so high." Today "S.U.V.'s and other light-duty
vehicles account for 40 percent of the nation's oil use." With only the
smallest cars remaining in the "car class" there is no pressure to
improve the efficiency of those vehicles either. President Bush and the
Congress had the opportunity to close these loopholes and improve
overall efficiency in the energy bill, but didn't do it. New
regulations set to be released later this month will create up to five
classes of vehicles based on height and width. Dan Becker of the Sierra
Club says the upcoming proposal is "an invitation to game the system."

BUSH PROTECTS MASSIVE LOOPHOLE FOR HUMMERS: In 2003, President Bush
proposed extending "fuel economy regulations to include Hummer H2's and
other huge sport utility vehicles," which are now completely exempt. As
gas prices soar to record levels, the administration has abandoned the
proposal. The exemption applies to vehicles weighing over 8,500 pounds.
When it was created, "vehicles of that weight were generally used for
commercial purposes, but now hundreds of thousands sold each year are
intended for family use." The exemption, along with potential tax
breaks for consumers who purchase them, create "powerful incentives to
produce such vehicles."


By your logic then, all of Europe must have two or three times the bad
leadership that we have. And countries like Venezuela, where gas is 13 cents
a gallon must have the best leadership ever!

Dan J.S. wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Dan J.S. wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Regular grade gasoline was $3.05 a gallon yesterday at several docks in
Annapolis. Diesel was $2.61 to $2.65.

Thanks, Dubya.

If you really believe it's Bush's fault, you lost all credibility you
had.

Bad Policy Fuels High Prices

As millions of Americans hop in their cars for vacation, the average
price for a gallon of gas has spiked to $2.60 -- and many people are
paying more than $3.00 per gallon to fill their tank. While most
everyone is feeling the pinch, "for many lower-income people -- often
those who work in service jobs or are looking for work -- each new bump
up in price means altering daily routines, spending less on clothes and
food, and keeping the kids at home instead of driving them to the pool
or friends' houses." A big part of the problem is that, despite huge
advances in technology, "America's cars and trucks are significantly
less efficient, on average, than they were in the late 1980's," driving
up demand, and the price, for fuel. Meanwhile, the Bush administration
has staunchly resisted efforts to help solve the problem by improving
fuel efficiency standards. Now, all Americans are paying the price.

BUSH ADMINISTRATION CONCEALS FUEL ECONOMY REPORT: In late July, "the
Environmental Protection Agency made an 11th-hour decision...to delay
the planned release of an annual report on fuel economy." The decision
to block the release of the report was made "because it would have come
on the eve of a final vote in Congress on energy legislation." The
study showed that "the average 2004 model car or truck got 20.8 miles
per gallon, about 6 percent less than the 22.1 m.p.g. of the average
new vehicle sold in the late 1980's." Specifically, "the average 2004
model sold by Nissan, Hyundai and Volkswagen was at least a half-mile a
gallon less fuel-efficient than in the previous model year, a sharp
drop." (A report by Environmental Defense provides details for all
major manufacturers.) That wasn't news the Bush administration wanted
public to hear because the bill "largely ignore[d] auto mileage
regulations." Several Senators offered amendments "to strengthen fuel
economy standards for S.U.V.'s, minivans and pickups" but they were all
rejected. Bush signed the energy bill, which gave away billions to the
energy industry, on August 8. Even the administration acknowledges the
bill will do nothing to reduce gas prices.

FAST, FURIOUS AND GAS-GUZZLING: The failure to mandate the production
of more fuel efficient vehicles is a giant missed opportunity. There
have been "leaps in engine technology over the last couple of decades"
that could make cars much more efficient. But in the absence of
stricter efficiency standards, these gains "have been mostly used to
make cars faster." Also, since the early 1980s, "average new vehicle
weight has risen to about 4,000 pounds today, from about 3,200." During
that time "the horsepower of an average engine has roughly doubled over
two decades, trimming four seconds from the time it takes for the
average vehicle to accelerate from zero to 60."

KEEP ON TRUCKING: The key to avoiding fuel efficiency standards is to
classify every new and trendy "crossover" vehicle as a truck. Light
trucks "are held to a lower [average fuel efficiency] standard-20.7
mpg as of model year 2003, compared to 27.5 mpg for cars."
Manufacturers are also moving vehicles that were once classified as
cars to the truck class "to sell more of the large trucks on which
profit margins have been so high." Today "S.U.V.'s and other light-duty
vehicles account for 40 percent of the nation's oil use." With only the
smallest cars remaining in the "car class" there is no pressure to
improve the efficiency of those vehicles either. President Bush and the
Congress had the opportunity to close these loopholes and improve
overall efficiency in the energy bill, but didn't do it. New
regulations set to be released later this month will create up to five
classes of vehicles based on height and width. Dan Becker of the Sierra
Club says the upcoming proposal is "an invitation to game the system."

BUSH PROTECTS MASSIVE LOOPHOLE FOR HUMMERS: In 2003, President Bush
proposed extending "fuel economy regulations to include Hummer H2's and
other huge sport utility vehicles," which are now completely exempt. As
gas prices soar to record levels, the administration has abandoned the
proposal. The exemption applies to vehicles weighing over 8,500 pounds.
When it was created, "vehicles of that weight were generally used for
commercial purposes, but now hundreds of thousands sold each year are
intended for family use." The exemption, along with potential tax
breaks for consumers who purchase them, create "powerful incentives to
produce such vehicles."


By your logic then, all of Europe must have two or three times the bad
leadership that we have. And countries like Venezuela, where gas is 13 cents
a gallon must have the best leadership ever!

How about sticking to the facts of the article?

On 23 Aug 2005 10:55:55 -0700, wrote:


How about sticking to the facts of the article?

Since when have 'facts' become important? Have you found any 'facts' to support
your 'ownership' of the Moto Guzzi 'Desmo'?

--
John H.
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

Kevin,
The fact is consumers were making the decisions to buy larger less fuel
efficient cars and autos. This is a long term trend that started in the
early 90's. Were you willing to accept a sur tax on less efficient cars and
trucks?


wrote in message
ups.com...

Dan J.S. wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Dan J.S. wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Regular grade gasoline was $3.05 a gallon yesterday at several docks
in
Annapolis. Diesel was $2.61 to $2.65.

Thanks, Dubya.

If you really believe it's Bush's fault, you lost all credibility you
had.

Bad Policy Fuels High Prices

As millions of Americans hop in their cars for vacation, the average
price for a gallon of gas has spiked to $2.60 -- and many people are
paying more than $3.00 per gallon to fill their tank. While most
everyone is feeling the pinch, "for many lower-income people -- often
those who work in service jobs or are looking for work -- each new bump
up in price means altering daily routines, spending less on clothes and
food, and keeping the kids at home instead of driving them to the pool
or friends' houses." A big part of the problem is that, despite huge
advances in technology, "America's cars and trucks are significantly
less efficient, on average, than they were in the late 1980's," driving
up demand, and the price, for fuel. Meanwhile, the Bush administration
has staunchly resisted efforts to help solve the problem by improving
fuel efficiency standards. Now, all Americans are paying the price.

BUSH ADMINISTRATION CONCEALS FUEL ECONOMY REPORT: In late July, "the
Environmental Protection Agency made an 11th-hour decision...to delay
the planned release of an annual report on fuel economy." The decision
to block the release of the report was made "because it would have come
on the eve of a final vote in Congress on energy legislation." The
study showed that "the average 2004 model car or truck got 20.8 miles
per gallon, about 6 percent less than the 22.1 m.p.g. of the average
new vehicle sold in the late 1980's." Specifically, "the average 2004
model sold by Nissan, Hyundai and Volkswagen was at least a half-mile a
gallon less fuel-efficient than in the previous model year, a sharp
drop." (A report by Environmental Defense provides details for all
major manufacturers.) That wasn't news the Bush administration wanted
public to hear because the bill "largely ignore[d] auto mileage
regulations." Several Senators offered amendments "to strengthen fuel
economy standards for S.U.V.'s, minivans and pickups" but they were all
rejected. Bush signed the energy bill, which gave away billions to the
energy industry, on August 8. Even the administration acknowledges the
bill will do nothing to reduce gas prices.

FAST, FURIOUS AND GAS-GUZZLING: The failure to mandate the production
of more fuel efficient vehicles is a giant missed opportunity. There
have been "leaps in engine technology over the last couple of decades"
that could make cars much more efficient. But in the absence of
stricter efficiency standards, these gains "have been mostly used to
make cars faster." Also, since the early 1980s, "average new vehicle
weight has risen to about 4,000 pounds today, from about 3,200." During
that time "the horsepower of an average engine has roughly doubled over
two decades, trimming four seconds from the time it takes for the
average vehicle to accelerate from zero to 60."

KEEP ON TRUCKING: The key to avoiding fuel efficiency standards is to
classify every new and trendy "crossover" vehicle as a truck. Light
trucks "are held to a lower [average fuel efficiency] standard-20.7
mpg as of model year 2003, compared to 27.5 mpg for cars."
Manufacturers are also moving vehicles that were once classified as
cars to the truck class "to sell more of the large trucks on which
profit margins have been so high." Today "S.U.V.'s and other light-duty
vehicles account for 40 percent of the nation's oil use." With only the
smallest cars remaining in the "car class" there is no pressure to
improve the efficiency of those vehicles either. President Bush and the
Congress had the opportunity to close these loopholes and improve
overall efficiency in the energy bill, but didn't do it. New
regulations set to be released later this month will create up to five
classes of vehicles based on height and width. Dan Becker of the Sierra
Club says the upcoming proposal is "an invitation to game the system."

BUSH PROTECTS MASSIVE LOOPHOLE FOR HUMMERS: In 2003, President Bush
proposed extending "fuel economy regulations to include Hummer H2's and
other huge sport utility vehicles," which are now completely exempt. As
gas prices soar to record levels, the administration has abandoned the
proposal. The exemption applies to vehicles weighing over 8,500 pounds.
When it was created, "vehicles of that weight were generally used for
commercial purposes, but now hundreds of thousands sold each year are
intended for family use." The exemption, along with potential tax
breaks for consumers who purchase them, create "powerful incentives to
produce such vehicles."


By your logic then, all of Europe must have two or three times the bad
leadership that we have. And countries like Venezuela, where gas is 13
cents
a gallon must have the best leadership ever!

How about sticking to the facts of the article?

wrote:


It's a real stretch to try to blame George Bush for five decades of
over consumption, five decades of refusal to seriously pursue
alternative energy sources, five decades of ass-kissing BIG OIL and THE
BIG THREE automakers. He can be held accountable for the things like
the gutting of CAFE standards during his administration. He can be
criticized for developing a national "energy policy" that concentrates
primarily on squeezing the last few drops of oil out of the ground and
excusing his family's (and other) oil companies from taxes in the
process. He can be resented, a bit, because he and his family are
getting filthy rich(er) every time the price of a bbl of oil goes up a
buck. He clearly has no personal incentive to wish for lower oil
prices, but it isn't fair to lay the blame for the current pricing on
Bush.

The SUV aspect of this whole thing is amusing. Not that SUV's are
primarily responsible for the high prices of oil- but if you remember
the last few years every time some environmentalist suggested that it
might not be in the national interest to offer vehicles that got less
than 10 mpg the right wing radio shows all began to squeal, (on cue),
"we need to let the free market decide what people will buy and drive".
I hope those same apologists have the same "free market" attitude
toward the price of oil. You're seeing $3 at the marina- on the west
coast we're seeing $3 at a lot of regular gas stations (for high
octane).

Like I've always said...rationing might be the answer.
Sell the first 50 gallons a month at a reasonable price, and what ever
after at a double taxed rate. It might make people think twice before
buying large SUVs or high powered sports cars.

LOL Harry!

And to think, for ol' "Bushie" it was at least 80% clear profit!

you should have bought into Haliburton stock 4yrs ago when you had the
chance!

$3.28 per gallon here.


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Regular grade gasoline was $3.05 a gallon yesterday at several docks in
Annapolis. Diesel was $2.61 to $2.65.

Thanks, Dubya.

wrote in message
ups.com...

Harry Krause wrote:
Regular grade gasoline was $3.05 a gallon yesterday at several docks in
Annapolis. Diesel was $2.61 to $2.65.

Thanks, Dubya.


It's a real stretch to try to blame George Bush for five decades of
over consumption, five decades of refusal to seriously pursue
alternative energy sources, five decades of ass-kissing BIG OIL and THE
BIG THREE automakers. He can be held accountable for the things like
the gutting of CAFE standards during his administration. He can be
criticized for developing a national "energy policy" that concentrates
primarily on squeezing the last few drops of oil out of the ground and
excusing his family's (and other) oil companies from taxes in the
process. He can be resented, a bit, because he and his family are
getting filthy rich(er) every time the price of a bbl of oil goes up a
buck. He clearly has no personal incentive to wish for lower oil
prices, but it isn't fair to lay the blame for the current pricing on
Bush.

The SUV aspect of this whole thing is amusing. Not that SUV's are
primarily responsible for the high prices of oil- but if you remember
the last few years every time some environmentalist suggested that it
might not be in the national interest to offer vehicles that got less
than 10 mpg the right wing radio shows all began to squeal, (on cue),
"we need to let the free market decide what people will buy and drive".
I hope those same apologists have the same "free market" attitude
toward the price of oil. You're seeing $3 at the marina- on the west
coast we're seeing $3 at a lot of regular gas stations (for high
octane).


I had an interesting thought this morning when I glanced at the copy of
"Unrestricted Warfa China's Master Plan to Destroy America " sitting on
my nightstand.

China has pegged its currency to the dollar, causing it to be artificially
deflated. If they allowed it to float, several things would happen...one of
which would be that our trade deficit with China would likely fall. The
other thing that would happen would be that gas would be cheaper in China.
Even with a drop in the cost of gas in China, the general consensus is that
a rise in the value of the yuan would be disastrous for China's export
economy...particularly in the short-term.

What if the price of gas was being intentionally inflated so that the
Chinese response would be the unpegging of the yuan to the dollar? As much
as our economy depends on low fuel costs, the Chinese economy is even more
dependent on it. Why? Because fuel costs make up a larger percentage of
the overall expense of doing business over there. Employee costs are
extremely high over here, and low over there. But fuel costs are the same.
The easiest way to diminish China's competitive advantage is to raise the
expenses that have a larger effect on their economy than ours.

wrote in message
ups.com...

Harry Krause wrote:
Regular grade gasoline was $3.05 a gallon yesterday at several docks in
Annapolis. Diesel was $2.61 to $2.65.

Thanks, Dubya.


It's a real stretch to try to blame George Bush for five decades of
over consumption, five decades of refusal to seriously pursue
alternative energy sources, five decades of ass-kissing BIG OIL and THE
BIG THREE automakers.

Amen Chuck. I am so tired of hearing the left blaming Bush for this.

If you let the free market decide, and they were actually given a choice,
they might make the right one - but when the govt and the large monopolies
block the alternatives - like the fourTwo smart car for example !!! - then
how are the people to decide ? They take what they are led to believe they
need..
the sad part is, with all these big SUV's , we actually have a platform that
could support some of the alternative energy sources (fuel cell, etc), which
simply dont fit into the compact cars....

The govt could be doing a lot more for incentives to both consumers and
manufacturers to get people moving in the right direction...

wrote in message
ups.com...

Harry Krause wrote:
Regular grade gasoline was $3.05 a gallon yesterday at several docks in
Annapolis. Diesel was $2.61 to $2.65.

Thanks, Dubya.


It's a real stretch to try to blame George Bush for five decades of
over consumption, five decades of refusal to seriously pursue
alternative energy sources, five decades of ass-kissing BIG OIL and THE
BIG THREE automakers. He can be held accountable for the things like
the gutting of CAFE standards during his administration. He can be
criticized for developing a national "energy policy" that concentrates
primarily on squeezing the last few drops of oil out of the ground and
excusing his family's (and other) oil companies from taxes in the
process. He can be resented, a bit, because he and his family are
getting filthy rich(er) every time the price of a bbl of oil goes up a
buck. He clearly has no personal incentive to wish for lower oil
prices, but it isn't fair to lay the blame for the current pricing on
Bush.

The SUV aspect of this whole thing is amusing. Not that SUV's are
primarily responsible for the high prices of oil- but if you remember
the last few years every time some environmentalist suggested that it
might not be in the national interest to offer vehicles that got less
than 10 mpg the right wing radio shows all began to squeal, (on cue),
"we need to let the free market decide what people will buy and drive".
I hope those same apologists have the same "free market" attitude
toward the price of oil. You're seeing $3 at the marina- on the west
coast we're seeing $3 at a lot of regular gas stations (for high
octane).