Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

President Obama Calls for End To Oil and Gas Subsidies

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
ABCNews - Politics

Agree with him or not, it takes some sort of bravery to double-down like this. When your opponents are picking on the price of gas, you call for an end to subsidies:

Excerpt:

Facing attacks from the campaign trail over the soaring price of gas, President Obama today called for Congress to eliminate $4 billion in subsidies for oil and gas companies, calling them “outrageous” and “inexcusable.”

“I’m asking Congress: Eliminate this oil industry giveaway right away. I want them to vote on this in the next few weeks. Let’s put every single member of Congress on record: You can — you can stand with the oil companies, or you can stand up for the American people,” the president said at a speech in Nashua, N.H.

The president’s proposal isn’t likely to get far in Congress, where Republicans claim the idea amounts to a tax increase on energy production and would not lower gas prices.

“Right now 4 billion of your tax dollars — 4 billion — subsidizes the oil industry every year,” the president said to boos from the crowd at Nashua Community College. “These companies are making record profits right now, tens of billions of dollars a year. Every time you … fill up your gas tank, they’re making money, every time.
 
Last edited:
Wow, that took a pretty large pair of them -- especially in an election year. If it were to pass, gas prices would soar wouldn't they?

Well, I think it is interesting strategy from Obama.
If the republican vote against that, Obama will just say they are against the people, and prefer to maintain a subsidy to companies that makes insane profits. Which is true.
And the truth is that, compared to the amount of profit Oil companies make, 4 billion is nothing. So in theory the gas price shouldn't change, but it will increase anyway for other reasons (increased consumption from emerging countries), and the Big Oil will have an excuse ready : "It's Obama fault, he cut the subsidies..."

I remember a quote I saw on a T-Shirt with a George Bush pointing at you (uncle sam way) and saying " I screwed you, but thanks for blaming it on the black guy !"
 
The GOP will fall all over themselves in a hypocritical fit to defend massive government payouts to these corporations then turn around in the next breath and do something like try to kill NASA's funding.
 
Last edited:
I am as conservative as they come, and believe the government should end all subsidies, and seriously look at each of the huge payouts that we give to other countries each year. It mostly seems to go unappreciated by the rest of the world!
 
I am as conservative as they come, and believe the government should end all subsidies, and seriously look at each of the huge payouts that we give to other countries each year. It mostly seems to go unappreciated by the rest of the world!

The entire foreign aid budget this year (and in most previous years) is a whopping 1% of the overall budget. A majority of Americans think we spend 25% of our budget on foreign aid, and most say that 10% would be an appropriate level, or 10x what we currently are spending on foreign aid.

Five myths about foreign aid - The Washington Post

And while I'm generally in favor of avoiding social engineering by monkeying with tax laws, I'd like to wait until after this summer when I get my $7500 tax credit for buying a Tesla! :wink:
 
Good article!

But we can get more for our dollars spent with a little scrutiny. Each country should not expect dollars to keep flowing each year, and the reciepents need to know that it was the American taxpayer that was lending the helping hand. Military aid is another story. This should expire every year and have to be re-approved.

Example: in 1977 I was helping in Honduras. Aid comming in the form of foodstuffs had to be repackaged so the American Flag did not show, and possibly offend some recieving aid, or give the present local government the credit.
 
But we can get more for our dollars spent with a little scrutiny. Each country should not expect dollars to keep flowing each year, and the reciepents need to know that it was the American taxpayer that was lending the helping hand.

Example: in 1977 I was helping in Honduras. Aid comming in the form of foodstuffs had to be repackaged so the American Flag did not show, and possibly offend some recieving aid, or give the present local government the credit.

This probably depends on whether the goal of the foreign aid is to get in the good graces of the people or the government. As noted in point 3 of the article, the purpose of foreign aid isn't necessarily to get the US in the good graces of the recipient country (its people or its government), but rather to foster stable democracies.

Even if most of the foreign aid money is wasted, it's still spit in the ocean of our budget deficit, which was point 2 in the article. I'm not sure it would matter one way or another if it went away, although I suspect that the relatively paltry sum of money for us means a ton to those countries that receive it.
 
I am as conservative as they come, and believe the government should end all subsidies, and seriously look at each of the huge payouts that we give to other countries each year. It mostly seems to go unappreciated by the rest of the world!

I agree completely. Much like it's healthy for one's cat to fast one day a week, we should wean our dependent countries by taking a break from funding them every once in a while so they appreciate us a bit more.

I'm very liberal, and as a result I'm very curious who you'd vote for out of the lineup you have available right now. I personally don't get it, but I'm very curious to know who an EV-loving conservative would want in as our president.
 
I think subsidies can make sense at times if they are directed at pushing or accelerating something that benefits society, not just one company or a particular industry. Problem is once a subsidy is in place, it doesn't seem to go away easily. Look at the oil industry.
 
I think subsidies can make sense at times if they are directed at pushing or accelerating something that benefits society, not just one company or a particular industry. Problem is once a subsidy is in place, it doesn't seem to go away easily. Look at the oil industry.

Exactly, same with government agencies, and other funding and regulations.
 
I agree completely. Much like it's healthy for one's cat to fast one day a week, we should wean our dependent countries by taking a break from funding them every once in a while so they appreciate us a bit more.

I'm very liberal, and as a result I'm very curious who you'd vote for out of the lineup you have available right now. I personally don't get it, but I'm very curious to know who an EV-loving conservative would want in as our president.

Zack,

I typed a really lengthy reply and went to post it and my login had timed out and it went away when I went to post it. Anyway here is the short version: Moderators is there a way to pull the auto-saved text?

I don't really care for the palate that has been presented to us. What I like: Paul is the most fiscally conservative. Gingrich is the best debater. Romney is the GOP pick (not really a positive), Santorum I relate to. Dislikes: Paul's foreign policy is a little off, Gingrich has baggage, and his reprimand, Romney cant think on his feet and answer a question straight, Santorum is inexperienced. All of them have not voted to my liking on several issues. I previously voted for Huckabee.

EV,s and conservatives should not be mutually exclusive. I believe that we need to protect environmentally what we have. My undergraduate degree is in Marine Biology. I am drawn by the technology, and the disire be make our country stronger in indepentent for energy usage. Not relying on petroleum makes my family more secure. I believe Elon in his promise to build not just a great electric car, but the best car overall.
 
Last edited:
This is remarkable. Putting the electorate against the oil companies as gasoline prices climb. It's a win because it would likely happen after the election so he comes across as "for the people" during the run up to the election.

Not so good if subsides were miraculiuosly ended by our divisive congress before Nov. Prices would skyrocket by the usual market manipulation and an opponent would get elected then quietly give the subsidies back.

Lets send that 4 Billion to local renewable energy and EVs!
 
I personally never did understand how some people could claim to want small government, smaller debt and free markets yet defend subsidies to certain industries in the amount of billions of dollars a year.
Imagine what $4 billion in EV chargers along the highway system could do (400,000 $10,000 DC fast chargers but that doesn't include installation) or $4 billion a year in grid upgrades. I think 100 years of supporting the oil industry through various means is probably enough. Time to move on.
 
It's crazy that we subsidize profitable companies to provide a limited resource that has led to invasions and wars which we in turn pay for. Let's cut the subsidies and bite the bullet on gas price increases which will push the market for renewable energy which will reduce our oil dependency in turn reducing national security risks bringing the troops home and cutting the spending on foreign military excursions.
 
Last edited: