For those following current events, you might have heard that representive Mark Foley resigned his spot in Congress due to some sexually explicit e-mails to underage interns.
There's a lot of finger pointing nowadays about who knew what and when, blah, blah, blah. The usual stuff you'd expect from Congress. Frankly, I think anyone who'd cover up such dispicable things are as criminal as Mr. Foley himself, but the investigations are ongoing and I'm sure we'll be learning a lot more information over the days and weeks to come.
But you know--none of this surprises me. Scandals in Congress? Not like it hasn't happened before. Granted, even Clinton at least wasn't trying to fool around with underage people, but there are a lot of perverts out there, and it's not exactly shocking that some of them snuck into Congress over the years.
No, the thing that surprises me is Foley admitting to being gay. He is a Republican, after all. Is it just me, or doesn't that seem a lot like a Jewish person joining the Nazis? I mean, yeah, I guess he has the right to be a Republican if he wants to, but it seems a bit hypocritical. Why? I just don't get it. *shrug*
Thursday, October 05, 2006
Prop 87 blowing smoke up your you-know-what....
There's a commercial on television asking you to support prop 87 here in California. It claims to reduce dependence on foreign imports, reduce energy prices, and help prevent global warming. In a nutshell, Proposition 87 would impose a tax on oil produced in California.
Think about that. Do you think adding a tax to anything actually reduces energy prices? How exactly does imposing a tax on locally produced oil reduce dependence on foreign imports? If anything, it makes foreign imports even more desirable since they don't get the extra tax. Prevent global warming--well, that's probably true. High oil prices do tend to cause people to carpool more, use public transit more, and buy less oil products thereby reducing the pollution going into the air. Long term, the extra money generated from taxes would go towards funding alternative fuel sources which is also a good thing.
I'm not dissing prop 87. I haven't really read enough to make a truly informed opinion on the subject, claiming that adding a tax to locally produced oil will reduce foreign imports and reduce energy prices is absurd. All-in-all, it probably is good for the environment in the long haul, but I wonder if the people of California are willing to pay higher energy prices and increased foreign imports for the healthier environment. There's no right answer here--it's a pretty simple case of environment vs. extra costs. Is the cost worth it? I don't know. But I tell you, I'd be inclined to vote for the side that actually told the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Unfortunately, there seems to be a lot of lies coming out of both camps, so I guess it comes down to those who think the expense is worth it and those who don't. *shrug*
Think about that. Do you think adding a tax to anything actually reduces energy prices? How exactly does imposing a tax on locally produced oil reduce dependence on foreign imports? If anything, it makes foreign imports even more desirable since they don't get the extra tax. Prevent global warming--well, that's probably true. High oil prices do tend to cause people to carpool more, use public transit more, and buy less oil products thereby reducing the pollution going into the air. Long term, the extra money generated from taxes would go towards funding alternative fuel sources which is also a good thing.
I'm not dissing prop 87. I haven't really read enough to make a truly informed opinion on the subject, claiming that adding a tax to locally produced oil will reduce foreign imports and reduce energy prices is absurd. All-in-all, it probably is good for the environment in the long haul, but I wonder if the people of California are willing to pay higher energy prices and increased foreign imports for the healthier environment. There's no right answer here--it's a pretty simple case of environment vs. extra costs. Is the cost worth it? I don't know. But I tell you, I'd be inclined to vote for the side that actually told the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Unfortunately, there seems to be a lot of lies coming out of both camps, so I guess it comes down to those who think the expense is worth it and those who don't. *shrug*
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
