PDA

View Full Version : Proposition 87 in CA



scooooter7
10-09-2006, 04:59 PM
What do you guys think of this proposition?? Good Or Bad??
I think it is directly responsible for the gas prices falling at the moment. And after it is voted on, either for or against, the prices will escalate back up. The oil companies will blame it on the extra taxes if it passes, OR, they will just increase the prices knowing they won at the polls again. :cry: They got us by the tail pipes.

YeLLowBoaT
10-09-2006, 05:04 PM
I think its Very bad Idea. The tax itself is not a very good idea, but the rest of the crap that bill adds is just Fooking wrong. Just like 90% of the crap they pass... the "core" of the bill is good, but all the rest of the crap they add to it makes it a joke. Only way we are going to stop it is to vote them all out. Since most voters in CA only see party lines I don't see that happening anytime soon... that is unless some one starts up a 3rd part thats worth something.
I know one thing if the bill passes into law gas price will go up.

burtandnancy
10-09-2006, 05:09 PM
Al Gore just jumped in on the Yes side. I'll go No...

little rowe boat
10-09-2006, 06:12 PM
IAFF and CPF. say vote no. But I think Iam voting yes. The oil companies ahave such huge profits and get to constantly gough us. If the oil companies are against it, I am for it.

cdog
10-09-2006, 06:19 PM
When was the last time a tax fixed anything?

QuickJet
10-09-2006, 07:59 PM
IAFF and CPF. say vote no. But I think Iam voting yes. The oil companies ahave such huge profits and get to constantly gough us. If the oil companies are against it, I am for it.
Then by that way of thinking we should impose unfair taxes on McDonalds and Disneyland as well....which of course would undoubtingly pave the way to cheap burgers and lower admission to the park.
When in history has a tax increase on a product ever lowered the price that a consumer pays for it??...............NEVER!!!!!

wsuwrhr
10-09-2006, 08:14 PM
In my humble opinion.....
Gas prices are lowered because of the election. Simple tactic.
Don't let anyone fool you into thinking anything else.
There will be some kind of "disaster", supply disruption, or otherwise that will "justify" prices going back through the roof.
Brian

CBadDad
10-10-2006, 11:15 AM
I think it is directly responsible for the gas prices falling at the moment. And after it is voted on, either for or against, the prices will escalate back up. The oil companies will blame it on the extra taxes if it passes, OR, they will just increase the prices knowing they won at the polls again. :cry: They got us by the tail pipes.
I agree 100%
IAFF and CPF. say vote no. But I think Iam voting yes. The oil companies ahave such huge profits and get to constantly gough us. If the oil companies are against it, I am for it.
Me too.

seanv
10-10-2006, 11:46 AM
what if there was a tax on any fuel priced over 1.99 a gallon :p

Desert Rat
10-10-2006, 11:50 AM
Tax wise on this issue I don't think California is looking for anything more then some states like Alaska and Texas are already collecting, the oil lease money anyway

Dave C
10-10-2006, 12:53 PM
vote No. As much as I hate the oil companies too. BUT the cost of the tax WILL be passed onto the consumers in the form of higher prices.
its almost laughable to think the oil companies will absorb the tax and not pass it on.

Dribble
10-10-2006, 01:10 PM
What do you guys think of this proposition?? Good Or Bad??
I think it is directly responsible for the gas prices falling at the moment. And after it is voted on, either for or against, the prices will escalate back up. The oil companies will blame it on the extra taxes if it passes, OR, they will just increase the prices knowing they won at the polls again. :cry: They got us by the tail pipes.
Prop 87 didn't cause the price of crude oil to fall $15.00 a barrel on the international market. An increase in crude oil revserves did. That's why gas prices are lower throughout the country. Prop 87 has nothing to with that.
That said, the propositon sucks.

ULTRA26 # 1
10-10-2006, 02:01 PM
I, like most, am not a fan of taxes. However, for some reason I don't believe that it is OK for oil companies to rake in many billions in profit each quarter at the expense of the American people. When the oil companies want more profit, they simply raise the price at the pump. The people have no say in when or how much prices are increased. We are at their mercy. It should be obvious that something needs to be done, but I am not sure that prop 87 is the answer. At least if the oil companies are taxed, there is a posibility of benefit to the American people. There is no posibility that the people will ever benefit from the billions and billions that the oil companies bank each quarter.

MBlaster
10-10-2006, 03:03 PM
It's a BS prop.
I'm voting no.

framer1
10-10-2006, 04:19 PM
It is probably true prices won't go up because of 87. We will just be waiting in line to get the small amount of gas that the oil companys sent to cali. Why would send your gas to a place where they tax the hell out of you. I'm voting no. I waited in line in the 70's and it sucked. I rather pay high prices.

SoCalOffshore
10-10-2006, 04:59 PM
typical left wing solution, lets tax the sh*t out of it. between the oil tax, cigarette tax and all the agelides taxes, who will be left in this state to pay all the taxes? certainly not the undocumented workers. :220v:

scooooter7
10-10-2006, 07:28 PM
Just for more info...the purpose of this proposition is to promote "alternative" fuels through the $$ from the tax. Not a bad idea, but will it work??
Food for thought...Valenzuela only pays about $.12 a gallon. They fill up their SUV's for as little as 3 bucks a tank. That is less than even Iran, Iraq, etc.

QuickJet
10-10-2006, 10:19 PM
I, like most, am not a fan of taxes. However, for some reason I don't believe that it is OK for oil companies to rake in many billions in profit each quarter at the expense of the American people. .
It's called a free market. Why is it wrong for a company to make a profit? They sell a product and we as consumers purchase it. Would you want someone to regulate YOUR profits?
When the oil companies want more profit, they simply raise the price at the pump. The people have no say in when or how much prices are increased. We are at their mercy. It should be obvious that something needs to be done, but I am not sure that prop 87 is the answer. At least if the oil companies are taxed, there is a posibility of benefit to the American people. There is no posibility that the people will ever benefit from the billions and billions that the oil companies bank each quarter.
How is higher gas prices a benefit to the American people? Do you really think that the money in the hands of the Government will be of any benefit to us.
And why is it the you think it's obvious that "something needs to be done" Why??? If you don't like the price of gas, buy and electric car and tell the rest of the oil dependant world to F-off. The electric car by the way is the great donation that the "alternative fuel" world has given us. Yeah, that worked out well :rolleyes:
It's a blatant 'redistribution of wealth" and nothing more. Take from the rich and give to the.......Government!!!

Makinitdrip
10-10-2006, 10:38 PM
No No No

Rexone
10-11-2006, 12:25 AM
I don't quite understand why so many hate the oil companies because they make a profit. Because of the huge volume they do the profit amount is huge too, but not the percentage (margin).
They also spend billions (reinvesting) in exploration to insure their survival and the availability of oil (gas etc) in future years should the middle east explode and become non-available.
While I don't agree with the exhorbant salaries the top guys get paid, that's not exclusive to oil companies. Further, anyone can take advantage of these huge profits simply by buying oil co stocks. And further yet, even at the 3$ plus we saw this summer, gasoline has increased in % over the last 25 years at a much lesser % than most other common items we buy (Food, cars, real estate... most things).
If the oil co's weren't making big money, the price and availability of gas and heating oil, etc would be much much worse imo. I only wish I could make big money on boat parts. :) I don't hate the oil companies though just because they do.
I have to read the prop in detail before I make any decision. My guess it's a good idea packaged in a bad bill. But that being said anyone who votes on this stuff based on TV commercials (way slanted) has their head in the sand.
Unfortunately I think the majority votes based on commercials without really studying the issues.

RitcheyRch
10-11-2006, 04:19 AM
I'm voting NO. Higher taxes for the oil companies will mean higher prices at the pump and less money in my pocket.

scooooter7
11-04-2006, 06:37 PM
This proposition is basically this.
"A royalty levied on the oil that is pumped from beneath California's soil. Example: Every Alaskan gets a yearly stipend, often amounting to as much as $1000, from royalties charged for oil drilling there. Taxes are low in Texas and Oklahoma because of oil royalties. California gets not a nickel in similar revenue.
Oil companies say a royalty would increase prices. Maybe it would, despite a Proposition 87 provision banning any pass-through of the new levy. But even if the charge were passed through, gasoline prices are usuallly based on overall world-wide costs of oil, not by local charges. Any California levy would be devided among gasoline users the world over, meaning that even if prices rose here, it would be only a fraction of a penny per gallon."
This was taken from the San Gabriel Valley Newspaprer this morning.
The author was slamming "big money" that has been spending mucho $$$ so this won't get passed. He goes on to say.
"Would it be worth this to fund research aiming to reduce oil use and make alternative energy vehicles cheaper and more available to all drivers? If so, this measure is in the self-interest of most voters, no matter what the opponents say."
Are you guys still against this proposition?? I still say "Watch the price of gas go up after this election" Just my opinion.

Hal
11-04-2006, 06:47 PM
No for me. We know Clinton doesn't lie. :rolleyes:

Moneypitt
11-04-2006, 06:48 PM
Gee, 4 billion dollars sounds like an awful lot, but, it is only about 43 cents per barrel, and when the 4 billion figure is reached the tax is done, no more, finito......I read an article that was straight poop, not for or against, just the facts. The BAD part is where the money will be spent and who is going to monitor the spending. Really, 43 cents per barrel at the current price......a spit in the bucket for the oil companies profits...........I think the oil companies are afraid SOMEONE will actually use the money to LOOK for an alternative source of energy...........MP

angry dad
11-04-2006, 06:57 PM
When was the last time a tax fixed anything?
Thank you!! Nuff said!!

4-B
11-04-2006, 07:12 PM
Just say NO. Can you say special interest.

angry dad
11-04-2006, 07:48 PM
Just say NO. Can you say special interest.
Correct!! Vote NO!!!!

boater72
11-04-2006, 08:23 PM
When was the last time a tax fixed anything?
Second that !!

totenhosen
11-04-2006, 09:27 PM
Really, 43 cents per barrel at the current price......a spit in the bucket for the oil companies profits...........I think the oil companies are afraid SOMEONE will actually use the money to LOOK for an alternative source of energy...........MP
Necessity is the mother of all inventions. When the time comes and if we trully wanted to we could/would find alternative sources

MBlaster
11-04-2006, 09:27 PM
The number 1 financier of the prop is developing a methanol plant in the central valley. Think he wants to make some money?
Alternatives will happen without a tax.
Plus all the left wingers are for it.
No vote here.

scooooter7
11-05-2006, 06:07 PM
I cannot disagree with everyone's comments. They all have merit.
I think if we had royalties here in CA like the other oil states, then maybe we could get more out of the ground and in our tanks. And prices would go down.
All the special interests who thought this one up though, who's to say?? I know I don't like special interests.

ULTRA26 # 1
11-05-2006, 07:45 PM
Necessity is the mother of all inventions. When the time comes and if we trully wanted to we could/would find alternative sources
When the time comes??? Forget politics. The time is here. How could anyone not want to find a different primary source of energy especially if you have children????
Also, the majority of posts that I've read on this board that involve anything political, are written by the extreme right or left sides, Reality is that neither side wants to pay more taxes. Something to ponder.[SP] Is there a difference between the government putting a new batch of money into circulation and raising taxes? The result of both = less buying power. One of the differences is that people get to vote for most tax issues.
VOTE THIS TUESDAY
John M