English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

he claims to be about the price of gas,that at the very least he could ENCORAGE scientists to find another solution. Every once in a wihle you hear of someone smart enough to make their own cars run on something besides gas, but not many of us can do that. So is the government getting something from this? Can't Bush at least ENCOURAGE science to come up with something? I know next to nothing about politics but something just doesn't sit right. I had read in a Readers Digest magazine that someone had invented a new carberator that would run on something besides gas, but the gas comapines bought the pattent. Other countries are finding soluitnos- why can't we?

2006-07-11 02:28:44 · 14 answers · asked by helpme1 5 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

14 answers

He has no reason to care what we pay at the pump. This is his last term so there's no re-election pressure, WE pay for all his living expenses (salary, house, gas, travel) out of our taxes, and he's got his largest contributors in the oil industry where he used to "work." Wouldn't want to upset his buddies down in big ol' Texas, now would he... Sad part is, as a nation we continue to buy the gas-guzzling SUV's, V8 luxury cars, mini-vans and trucks. The notion of taking the train or a bus is almost insulting to some. We could boycott gas sales and paralyze the market if we don't buy the product, but then our stocks would crash in Wall Street, we would have to walk to work, carpool or use public transportation! THE HORROR!!! So I guess we'll continue to pay over $3 per gallon...

2006-07-11 03:05:17 · answer #1 · answered by Susan P 2 · 1 1

Sure government is getting a kickback. It's called taxes.

As far as finding an alternative to gas goes the US government has been funding projects for decades. Bush can't blink like Jeannie or twich his nose like Samantha something happen.

IF there is a major change it will be done by private industry not the government. Even if a vehicle could be made to run on an alternative source like hydrogen(which it can already), where would you fill the tank? And how much would it cost?

Those are the two most important questions. First the fuel would have to be competativly priced. And second there has to be infrastructure for distribution.

And then there's that other thing. Environmental impact. Nuclear power is by far the cheapest way to go when it comes to replacing petroleum power. But environmentalists have effectivly killed any expansion if that.

There have been rumors about a lot of things like miracle carburators, but none of them have ever been proven as fact. Anyone can look at patents and even duplicate what is patented but for personal use only.

2006-07-11 10:08:18 · answer #2 · answered by namsaev 6 · 0 0

There comes a time when Government intervention is imperative in our 'free' market.
This should be one of those times. We would be much better off with cars that do not produce pollution and from a renewable energy source where we are not dependent on foreign countries or wealthy powerful individual and corporations.
I read an artical about 'What happened to the electric car'.
The electric car was developed years ago but was stopped by the big gas companies. I read this on the Michael Moore website.
Don't know if the link is still there or not.

2006-07-11 09:51:19 · answer #3 · answered by Lou 6 · 0 0

The government is collecting taxes on oil and each gallon of gasoline, but I wouldn't refer to it as a kick back. They are encourage scientists to come up with new solutions. There are 300 millions people in this country and probably twice that many cars. How many people do you know that are willing to take a financial bloodbath on the brand new shiny car they just bought? This is not going to be an easy quick solution no matter how you look at it. I'm not going to change anytime soon, I want to get a return on my investment and I suspect there are millions and millions that think just as I do. If someone comes up with a solution that would require a simple conversion and the government pays for it, then I would certainly be open to change. You may as well put your patience cap on, because you are going to need it.

2006-07-11 09:58:00 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

its not a "kickback" but yes, the feds make MUCH more off a gallon of gas than the oil co.s do. do just a little research and you'll find our gov really has no way to control the oil or any other industry.{thank goodness} I heard W speak the other night and addressed this, what should have been done to kept this from happening should have been done 25-30 years ago. I have to laugh when I see W mentioned with big oil, he's not, BUT if you want to see a big oil man, take a look at ted kennedy's holdings!

2006-07-11 09:51:49 · answer #5 · answered by sealss3006 4 · 0 0

By kick back I think you mean taxes. There are cars that run on other things. I've even heard you can use filtered used vegetable oil in a diesel without making any changes to the car! I don't know why Bush doesn't encourge the use of more diverse car fuel but he is from Texas, I'm sure he has plenty of money in oil.

2006-07-11 09:35:46 · answer #6 · answered by zara01 4 · 0 0

this question is a joke, right?

First, you assume Bush cares about gas prices. He doesn't pay for gas. We pay for his gas.

Second, he used to work (run?) Arbusto, an oil company. With whom do you think he'll side with, his old friends making huge profits, or the dumb masses?

The oil and auto industries are too powerful -- they lobbied to kill the electric car, and now to use alternative sources of fuel.

2006-07-11 09:31:46 · answer #7 · answered by truthyness 7 · 0 0

i first heard the carburetor tale in the 50's.same story.
sure the govt is getting a kick back.only they call it tax.
place the blame at the feet of the congress.they are the one's being bought off by the oil companies and their lobbyists.
this answer comes from a lifelong republican but i'm getting pissed at both parties.

2006-07-11 09:36:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

what country do you live in. In the U.S. we have a free market that allows company's to charge and make a reasonable profit.There is no government control in a free market . So some how you got some bad information

2006-07-11 09:31:27 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

He was a crook from the beging why would you expect him to change now when he has nothing personally to lose no young sons to send to war,no martegaes to pay no grocieres to buy,etc.Why would you expext this crook and his cronies to change now.

2006-07-11 09:34:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers