What I've been trying to tell you.

[Justin5 20]

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/...00.html?cnn=yes

Will More Drilling Mean Cheaper Gas?

Wednesday, Jun. 18, 2008 By BRYAN WALSH

On Wednesday morning President George W. Bush urged Congress to overturn a 26-year ban on offshore oil drilling in the U.S., and open a part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) for petroleum exploration. Flanked by the secretaries of Energy and the Interior, Bush also proposed streamlining the construction process for new oil refineries, and explained that these moves would "take pressure off gas prices over time by expanding the amount of American-made oil and gasoline." Coming a day after Republican presumptive presidential nominee John McCain made a similar appeal to enhance domestic oil exploration, Bush was sending an unsubtle election year message to the American public: I care about the economic toll of $4 a gallon gas, and Democrats in Congress, who have opposed such an expansion, don't.

But there's a flaw in that logic: even if tomorrow we opened up every square mile of the outer Continental Shelf to offshore rigs, even if we drilled the entire state of Alaska and pulled new refineries out of thin air, the impact on gas prices would be minimal and delayed at best. A 2004 study by the government's Energy Information Administration (EIA) found that drilling in ANWR would trim the price of gas by 3.5 cents a gallon by 2027. (If oil prices continue to skyrocket, the savings would be greater, but not by much.) Opening up offshore areas to oil exploration — currently all coastal areas save a section of the Gulf of Mexico are off-limits, thanks to a Congressional ban enacted in 1982 and supplemented by an executive order from the first President Bush — might cut the price of gas by 3 to 4 cents a gallon at most, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council. And the relief at the pump, such as it is, wouldn't be immediate — it would take several years, at least, for the oil to begin to flow, which is time enough for increased demand from China, India and the rest of the world to outpace those relatively meager savings. "Right now the price of oil is set on the global market," says Kevin Lindemer, executive managing director of the energy markets group for the research firm Global Insight. President Bush's move "would not have an impact."

The reason is simple: the U.S. has an estimated 3% of global petroleum reserves, but consumes 24% of the world's oil. Offshore territories and public lands like ANWR that don't allow drilling may contain up to 75 billion barrels of oil, according to the EIA. That may sound like a lot, but it's not enough to make a significant difference in a world where global oil demand is expected to rise 30% by 2030, to nearly 120 million barrels a day. At best, greatly expanding domestic drilling might eventually lower the proportion of oil the U.S. imports — currently about 60% of its total supply — but petroleum is a global commodity, and the world market would soak up any additional American production. "This is a drop in the bucket," says Gernot Wagner, an economist with the Environmental Defense Fund.

Still, with Americans hurting at the pump, it may be difficult for environmentalists and other opponents of increased domestic drilling to resist the push for more oil, whatever the cost. As recently as his 2000 Presidential run, McCain had been against offshore drilling, but he changed that position Tuesday, arguing that individual states should decide for themselves. (He remains against drilling ANWR, however, pointing out that "we called it a 'refuge' for a reason.'") The Republican Governor of Florida, Charlie Crist — considered a possible vice-presidential candidate — also flip-flopped, backing McCain's position. Though Democratic Senator Barack Obama and most of his party are against the proposed expansion, McCain and his supporters may have the public on their side: a recent Gallup poll found that 57% of Americans believe we should open up new territories to drilling. "It could help in the long term," says Bruce Bullock, director of the Maguire Energy Institute at Southern Methodist University. Still, he acknowledges that even expanded drilling is unlikely to bring prices down much.

Though offshore drilling conjures up fears of catastrophic spills, the petroleum industry rightly argues that safety measures have improved considerably in recent years. A 2003 report by the National Research Council found that only 1% of the oil that entered U.S. waters came from petroleum operations, like the offshore drilling platforms that run in the Gulf of Mexico — which also weathered Hurricane Katrina without massive spills. If it can be done in an environmentally friendly fashion — and with oil companies themselves footing the bill — opening up some new territory to drilling might be worth it. The reality is that our economy will run on petroleum for the foreseeable future, and that while investing in alternatives is the only way to secure truly low-cost energy over the long-term, we'll still need oil for decades more. But any attempt to increase supply must be coupled with even heavier investment in energy efficiency and other methods to decrease oil demand — an approach that, to his credit, McCain has said will be a key part of his energy policy (although in the Senate he has skipped or voted against every fuel efficiency bill since 1990, according to the League of Conservation Voters). In any case, Bush's plan is unlikely to be realized — the Democratic-controlled Congress remains against it, and Bush can't open up the new territory on his own.

Even as Democrats and Republicans squabble over a relatively small amount of petroleum, we're missing out on the opportunity to truly break our addiction to crude. This week the Senate again failed to renew the tax credit for renewable energies like solar and wind; the credit, which expires at the end of the year, is key to the healthy growth of low-carbon alternatives. Without it, "the industry will simply stop," says Santiago Seage, CEO of the Spanish company Abengoa Solar. With energy demand skyrocketing, we'll need more oil, and alternatives like solar, and demand-side measures like toughened auto fuel efficiency standards, or tax incentives for Americans to purchase less wasteful cars. We'll have to include action on global warming, like the recently defeated Warner-Lieberman carbon cap and trade bill. A study by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that under the bill, U.S. petroleum consumption would drop by nearly half by 2030 — savings far in excess of the amount of oil we could ever pull from Alaska or the coasts. "We can't drill our way out of this and we can't conserve our way out either," says Bullock. "We need both." Fair enough. But the sad truth is that neither drilling nor conservation will have an immediate effect on rising gas prices, even if they do have an immediate impact on the presidential race.

[DKW 86 7,438]

You just quoted the NRDC....

Wow, whatever cred you had just vanished.

[Justin5 20]

You just quoted the NRDC....

Wow, whatever cred you had just vanished.

Fair enough, go ahead and ignore that part. But what about this?

The reason is simple: the U.S. has an estimated 3% of global petroleum reserves, but consumes 24% of the world's oil. Offshore territories and public lands like ANWR that don't allow drilling may contain up to 75 billion barrels of oil, according to the EIA. That may sound like a lot, but it's not enough to make a significant difference in a world where global oil demand is expected to rise 30% by 2030, to nearly 120 million barrels a day. At best, greatly expanding domestic drilling might eventually lower the proportion of oil the U.S. imports — currently about 60% of its total supply — but petroleum is a global commodity, and the world market would soak up any additional American production. "This is a drop in the bucket," says Gernot Wagner, an economist with the Environmental Defense Fund.

Remember, if we open up more areas to drill, and they are drilled - that oil is still a part of the global market and will be sold to whomever wishes to pay the most for it. You people act like just because it is drilled here they HAVE to sell it to us. THEY DONT. ITS A GLOBAL MARKET. THAT IS WHY WE ARE PAYING $4.30 TODAY.

[DKW 86 7,438]

If we open MORE oil than we have NOW then the supply increases and the price goes down, The article talks about an extremely conservative estimate of our reserves WITHOUT anymore exploration. It is based on NOW, not what we have AFTER we start to drill.

Why is it that people refuse to allow or even consider even for a second that we should drill? We will drill and do it cleaner than anyone else in the world. But some of us prefer that we keep importing oil from dirty drillers elsewhere. We are so racist we just want to shove OUR pollution onto other people.

[Justin5 20]

The fact remains, we have 3% of the global supply of oil. Say we introduce every single bit of remaining oil we have - the global price will hardly be effected.

Oil in Alaska and off the coast IS our National Strategic Reserve.

[DKW 86 7,438]

The fact remains, we have 3% of the global supply of oil. Say we introduce every single bit of remaining oil we have - the global price will hardly be effected.

Oil in Alaska and off the coast IS our National Strategic Reserve.

Keep up the party line and keep up polluting those who cannot defend their families. Like you give a damn about poor people in the world. You are just a Left-bot spewing the whacko environmentalist crap.

More oil means less price. If we dont have any oil on the shelf, and many say we have much more than this distorted article, why is Cuba leasing offshore drilling now?

[Justin5 20]

The fact remains, we have 3% of the global supply of oil. Say we introduce every single bit of remaining oil we have - the global price will hardly be effected.

Oil in Alaska and off the coast IS our National Strategic Reserve.

Keep up the party line and keep up polluting those who cannot defend their families. Like you give a damn about poor people in the world. You are just a Left-bot spewing the whacko environmentalist crap.

More oil means less price. If we dont have any oil on the shelf, and many say we have much more than this distorted article, why is Cuba leasing offshore drilling now?

Wow, I guess I hit a nerve. Oil is on the way out - the sooner we accept this the better off we will be. We will eventually use every bit of the oil we have here. Now is not the time.

We need to recognize that reforming an entire energy infrastructure will take decades, and tons and tons and tons of energy. If we blow through resources, it’s conceivable that we wouldn’t have enough energy to convert the orientation of our infrastructure into one that could produce & deliver the same amount of energy.

We need to look at the big picture here. Saving 20c on gas is extremely short sighted.

The current 'strain' we are in is forcing us to adapt our lifestyles. We are now buying cars that make sense, carpooling, intelligent living that we should have done years ago.

[Justin5 20]

Its amazing. Every time I try to have an intelligent discuss and present facts, I am greeted with name-calling and off topic defenses. I honestly want to hear actual defenses. I am not a drone, if you make a valid point I will recognize it.

[RunInRed 16,454]

Justin - you are right. All these "drill heads" have been sold a bill of a goods by politicians who have been focused on the wrong side of the economic equation for far too long.

Don't sit in the White House 8 years and then come to me as the clock is about to strike midnight and tell me drilling will solve all our energy problems. I mean, come on, how stupid do they think we are? What amazes me, is how many have been duped and are along for the ride.

[Tigermike 3,046]

Justin - you are right. All these "drill heads" have been sold a bill of a goods by politicians who have been focused on the wrong side of the economic equation for far too long.

Don't sit in the White House 8 years and then come to me as the clock is about to strike midnight and tell me drilling will solve all our energy problems. I mean, come on, how stupid do they think we are? What amazes me, is how many have been duped and are along for the ride.

So after the dims nationalize the oil industry you plan on sending us all to reeducation centers?

No one has said drilling will solve all the problems. How stupid do we think you are? Dumb as dirt.

Duped and all you can do is spout off the party line.

Sanctimonious. Hypocritical. Far left wing. Socialist.

They all fit for you.

[RunInRed 16,454]

Justin - you are right. All these "drill heads" have been sold a bill of a goods by politicians who have been focused on the wrong side of the economic equation for far too long.

Don't sit in the White House 8 years and then come to me as the clock is about to strike midnight and tell me drilling will solve all our energy problems. I mean, come on, how stupid do they think we are? What amazes me, is how many have been duped and are along for the ride.

So after the dims nationalize the oil industry you plan on sending us all to reeducation centers?

No one has said drilling will solve all the problems. How stupid do we think you are? Dumb as dirt.

Duped and all you can do is spout off the party line.

Sanctimonious. Hypocritical. Far left wing. Socialist.

They all fit for you.

Was there a substantive point any where in that diatribe?

[Justin5 20]

Justin - you are right. All these "drill heads" have been sold a bill of a goods by politicians who have been focused on the wrong side of the economic equation for far too long.

Don't sit in the White House 8 years and then come to me as the clock is about to strike midnight and tell me drilling will solve all our energy problems. I mean, come on, how stupid do they think we are? What amazes me, is how many have been duped and are along for the ride.

So after the dims nationalize the oil industry you plan on sending us all to reeducation centers?

No one has said drilling will solve all the problems. How stupid do we think you are? Dumb as dirt.

Duped and all you can do is spout off the party line.

Sanctimonious. Hypocritical. Far left wing. Socialist.

They all fit for you.

I couldnt have asked for a better example. Thanks Tigermike!

[AUTiger1 0]

Ok Justin5, here is a question that I will propose for you. What do the poor do under the current conditions, how do we relieve the price for them immediately? Remember that they are poor and can't afford to buy a new Hybrid nor can they afford to move to a location that is more convenient.

Real World Example for you: An elderly couple (73 yrs old) that attends the same Church that my wife and myself attend are struggling bad. He is a retired carpenter, she was a homemaker (PC way of saying housewife) he has no real retirement other than what little he managed to save while raising 3 children and Social Security. He has to go to Dialysis several times each week. Since his kidneys are failing this also leads to other medical problems and he has several doctor visits a month. His Dialysis is about a 40 minute drive from where he lives. They have two vehicles between them, one old Ford Crown Vic and one old Pickup Truck. Not exactly fuel efficient vehicles, and to go out and pay a couple of K for a dependable gas sipper is not an option, and the price of used gas sippers is rising everyday, trust me, I have been looking for one myself. Older vehicles have to be serviced more often correct? He and his wife are struggling and they are too proud to ask for help. For the past several months the wife and I have been placing an envelope with cash in their mailbox to help them out. We do this to keep them from knowing, b/c it would embarrass them. Now on my sys admin salary and my wife's teacher salary we aren't doing bad, but we aren't knocking down $100K either. Not only that, I have drove him to the doctor a few times on my off days before. So what do you propose to help people like that other than having them take charity? It's not just the cost of fuel that is hurting them, it the rising cost of food and other necessities that are taking its toll on them also.

[Tigermike 3,046]

Justin - you are right. All these "drill heads" have been sold a bill of a goods by politicians who have been focused on the wrong side of the economic equation for far too long.

Don't sit in the White House 8 years and then come to me as the clock is about to strike midnight and tell me drilling will solve all our energy problems. I mean, come on, how stupid do they think we are? What amazes me, is how many have been duped and are along for the ride.

So after the dims nationalize the oil industry you plan on sending us all to reeducation centers?

No one has said drilling will solve all the problems. How stupid do we think you are? Dumb as dirt.

Duped and all you can do is spout off the party line.

Sanctimonious. Hypocritical. Far left wing. Socialist.

They all fit for you.

I couldnt have asked for a better example. Thanks Tigermike!

An example of someone that sees the entire picture.

Thanks for playing ObamaBot.

[CCTAU 3,336]

We will eventually use every bit of the oil we have here. Now is not the time.

You keep saying this but it cannot be substantiated. The peak oil theory is just that, a theory. You will not see the end of oil in your lifetime, yet you keep calling it a finite source as though it will be gone tomorrow. Hogwash. There are oil fields out there that are replentishing themselves. But yet you still claim we are running out. The only people screaming this are the greenies and the oil producing nations. But we have yet to see mass drying up of oil wells.

The current price of oil is not tied to supply and demand. It is controlled by speculation. If we anounce tomorrow that we are gonna drill and drill hard, the price will drop. That's what happens to a commodity based on speculation. If you guys didn't have your head so far up achmed's ass, you could see the big picture.

[Shire5k 19]

We will eventually use every bit of the oil we have here. Now is not the time.

You keep saying this but it cannot be substantiated. The peak oil theory is just that, a theory. You will not see the end of oil in your lifetime, yet you keep calling it a finite source as though it will be gone tomorrow. Hogwash. There are oil fields out there that are replentishing themselves. But yet you still claim we are running out. The only people screaming this are the greenies and the oil producing nations. But we have yet to see mass drying up of oil wells.

Are you claiming that those fields that are replenishing themselves (I'd like to see evidence of that) are doing so at a rate that Earth will never run out? If so, maybe you should run for president and get gas prices lowered. You evidently know things noone else does.

[JustaFan 0]

AUTiger1, now you have made me feel real guilty. I was kinda hoping the prices would stay high til after the wildcatters drilled for gas and/or oil on my property. The money we got for the mineral rights is long gone.

[aumd03 2]

The fact remains, we have 3% of the global supply of oil. Say we introduce every single bit of remaining oil we have - the global price will hardly be effected.

Oil in Alaska and off the coast IS our National Strategic Reserve.

Keep up the party line and keep up polluting those who cannot defend their families. Like you give a damn about poor people in the world. You are just a Left-bot spewing the whacko environmentalist crap.

More oil means less price. If we dont have any oil on the shelf, and many say we have much more than this distorted article, why is Cuba leasing offshore drilling now?

Wow, I guess I hit a nerve. Oil is on the way out - the sooner we accept this the better off we will be. We will eventually use every bit of the oil we have here. Now is not the time.

We need to recognize that reforming an entire energy infrastructure will take decades, and tons and tons and tons of energy. If we blow through resources, it’s conceivable that we wouldn’t have enough energy to convert the orientation of our infrastructure into one that could produce & deliver the same amount of energy.

We need to look at the big picture here. Saving 20c on gas is extremely short sighted.

The current 'strain' we are in is forcing us to adapt our lifestyles. We are now buying cars that make sense, carpooling, intelligent living that we should have done years ago.

You are right. We have to reform our system. Oil is on the way out. But its not gone. And your assertion about running out of energy is beyond absurd. You thought about writing science fiction? We have to be realists. The technology isn't here to convert entirely to non-petroleum sources. And when the environmentalists block things like nuclear energy, it leaves us with very few options. For example, corn ethanol is not a realistic option. It takes too much acreage to produce too little ethanol. It could be better used elsewhere. There are limited types of energy. I'm sorry, but wind and solar energy technology today are not anywhere close to producing the kind of energy we need. We are much more likely to go under from recessions and inflation and devalueing of the dollar than we are the dreaded "we ain't got no more energy" problem. We won't run out, we just won't be able to pay for it. My thought is that it will get to a point that the assertion that Bush went to war for oil won't seem like such a travesty anymore and will seem justified. But thats just me.

[AUTiger1 0]

Ok Justin5, here is a question that I will propose for you. What do the poor do under the current conditions, how do we relieve the price for them immediately? Remember that they are poor and can't afford to buy a new Hybrid nor can they afford to move to a location that is more convenient.

Real World Example for you: An elderly couple (73 yrs old) that attends the same Church that my wife and myself attend are struggling bad. He is a retired carpenter, she was a homemaker (PC way of saying housewife) he has no real retirement other than what little he managed to save while raising 3 children and Social Security. He has to go to Dialysis several times each week. Since his kidneys are failing this also leads to other medical problems and he has several doctor visits a month. His Dialysis is about a 40 minute drive from where he lives. They have two vehicles between them, one old Ford Crown Vic and one old Pickup Truck. Not exactly fuel efficient vehicles, and to go out and pay a couple of K for a dependable gas sipper is not an option, and the price of used gas sippers is rising everyday, trust me, I have been looking for one myself. Older vehicles have to be serviced more often correct? He and his wife are struggling and they are too proud to ask for help. For the past several months the wife and I have been placing an envelope with cash in their mailbox to help them out. We do this to keep them from knowing, b/c it would embarrass them. Now on my sys admin salary and my wife's teacher salary we aren't doing bad, but we aren't knocking down $100K either. Not only that, I have drove him to the doctor a few times on my off days before. So what do you propose to help people like that other than having them take charity? It's not just the cost of fuel that is hurting them, it the rising cost of food and other necessities that are taking its toll on them also.

Bump

Tell me Dems, what are you going to do for these kind of people immediately and in the short run to ease their pain? Do they have to suffer in the 5, 10 or 15 years that it will take for a complete solution to oil?

[CCTAU 3,336]

Ok Justin5, here is a question that I will propose for you. What do the poor do under the current conditions, how do we relieve the price for them immediately? Remember that they are poor and can't afford to buy a new Hybrid nor can they afford to move to a location that is more convenient.

Real World Example for you: An elderly couple (73 yrs old) that attends the same Church that my wife and myself attend are struggling bad. He is a retired carpenter, she was a homemaker (PC way of saying housewife) he has no real retirement other than what little he managed to save while raising 3 children and Social Security. He has to go to Dialysis several times each week. Since his kidneys are failing this also leads to other medical problems and he has several doctor visits a month. His Dialysis is about a 40 minute drive from where he lives. They have two vehicles between them, one old Ford Crown Vic and one old Pickup Truck. Not exactly fuel efficient vehicles, and to go out and pay a couple of K for a dependable gas sipper is not an option, and the price of used gas sippers is rising everyday, trust me, I have been looking for one myself. Older vehicles have to be serviced more often correct? He and his wife are struggling and they are too proud to ask for help. For the past several months the wife and I have been placing an envelope with cash in their mailbox to help them out. We do this to keep them from knowing, b/c it would embarrass them. Now on my sys admin salary and my wife's teacher salary we aren't doing bad, but we aren't knocking down $100K either. Not only that, I have drove him to the doctor a few times on my off days before. So what do you propose to help people like that other than having them take charity? It's not just the cost of fuel that is hurting them, it the rising cost of food and other necessities that are taking its toll on them also.

Bump

Tell me Dems, what are you going to do for these kind of people immediately and in the short run to ease their pain? Do they have to suffer in the 5, 10 or 15 years that it will take for a complete solution to oil?

They will tax you and me and give a fuel stipend to the poor. Achmed has nothing but Robin Hood economics planned.

[AUTiger1 0]

Ok Justin5, here is a question that I will propose for you. What do the poor do under the current conditions, how do we relieve the price for them immediately? Remember that they are poor and can't afford to buy a new Hybrid nor can they afford to move to a location that is more convenient.

Real World Example for you: An elderly couple (73 yrs old) that attends the same Church that my wife and myself attend are struggling bad. He is a retired carpenter, she was a homemaker (PC way of saying housewife) he has no real retirement other than what little he managed to save while raising 3 children and Social Security. He has to go to Dialysis several times each week. Since his kidneys are failing this also leads to other medical problems and he has several doctor visits a month. His Dialysis is about a 40 minute drive from where he lives. They have two vehicles between them, one old Ford Crown Vic and one old Pickup Truck. Not exactly fuel efficient vehicles, and to go out and pay a couple of K for a dependable gas sipper is not an option, and the price of used gas sippers is rising everyday, trust me, I have been looking for one myself. Older vehicles have to be serviced more often correct? He and his wife are struggling and they are too proud to ask for help. For the past several months the wife and I have been placing an envelope with cash in their mailbox to help them out. We do this to keep them from knowing, b/c it would embarrass them. Now on my sys admin salary and my wife's teacher salary we aren't doing bad, but we aren't knocking down $100K either. Not only that, I have drove him to the doctor a few times on my off days before. So what do you propose to help people like that other than having them take charity? It's not just the cost of fuel that is hurting them, it the rising cost of food and other necessities that are taking its toll on them also.

Bump

Tell me Dems, what are you going to do for these kind of people immediately and in the short run to ease their pain? Do they have to suffer in the 5, 10 or 15 years that it will take for a complete solution to oil?

Bump

Still waiting on an answer.

[arnaldoabru 11]

Ok Justin5, here is a question that I will propose for you. What do the poor do under the current conditions, how do we relieve the price for them immediately? Remember that they are poor and can't afford to buy a new Hybrid nor can they afford to move to a location that is more convenient.

Real World Example for you: An elderly couple (73 yrs old) that attends the same Church that my wife and myself attend are struggling bad. He is a retired carpenter, she was a homemaker (PC way of saying housewife) he has no real retirement other than what little he managed to save while raising 3 children and Social Security. He has to go to Dialysis several times each week. Since his kidneys are failing this also leads to other medical problems and he has several doctor visits a month. His Dialysis is about a 40 minute drive from where he lives. They have two vehicles between them, one old Ford Crown Vic and one old Pickup Truck. Not exactly fuel efficient vehicles, and to go out and pay a couple of K for a dependable gas sipper is not an option, and the price of used gas sippers is rising everyday, trust me, I have been looking for one myself. Older vehicles have to be serviced more often correct? He and his wife are struggling and they are too proud to ask for help. For the past several months the wife and I have been placing an envelope with cash in their mailbox to help them out. We do this to keep them from knowing, b/c it would embarrass them. Now on my sys admin salary and my wife's teacher salary we aren't doing bad, but we aren't knocking down $100K either. Not only that, I have drove him to the doctor a few times on my off days before. So what do you propose to help people like that other than having them take charity? It's not just the cost of fuel that is hurting them, it the rising cost of food and other necessities that are taking its toll on them also.

Bump

Tell me Dems, what are you going to do for these kind of people immediately and in the short run to ease their pain? Do they have to suffer in the 5, 10 or 15 years that it will take for a complete solution to oil?

They will tax you and me and give a fuel stipend to the poor. Achmed has nothing but Robin Hood economics planned.

And the Republican economic plan has been what?

[Justin5 20]

I don't know what you want to hear. I mean I could come up with a situation if I wanted to refute yours. Its ridiculous to come up with one random person and base an entire countries economic or energy policy on it.

[Justin5 20]

Further more, if you want the price to go down you should be in favor of the D's congress upcoming bill stopping oil speculation. Even the OPEC president admits its is playing a huge part.

The LAST person that would ever admit that supply isn't the only problem would be the person supplying it.

'Khelil said that just because computer or car prices were high, "would one ask their producers to make more?", insisting again that oil was being driven higher by factors other than supply alone -- most notably speculation and a falling dollar. '

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=08...;show_article=1

[Justin5 20]

They will tax you and me and give a fuel stipend to the poor. Achmed has nothing but Robin Hood economics planned.

Sounds good to me. If all that AUTiger is concerned about is the poor, he should have no problem with this.