McCains econmic plan

Ok... since this seems to be attacking McCain on the issues of being the same as bush, or attacking Obama based on the fact that he's an inexperienced liberal, I figured we should talk about the issues here...

Below are the bullet points from McCains website detailing his economic plan, and my thoughts on them...

* John McCain believes we should send a strong message to world markets. Under his plan, the United States will be telling oil producing countries and oil speculators that our dependence on foreign oil will come to an end - and the impact will be lower prices at the pump.

Ok, so we tell them that our dependence on oil will end, and that lowers gas prices? Seriously, how is this going to work? Offshored drilling is 10 years away from actually producing oil, and even then we can mandate that the oil companies sell it domestically at a loss...

* John McCain's policies will increase the value of the dollar and thus reduce the price of oil. In recent years, the declining value of the dollar has added to the cost of imported oil. This will change. Americans will have a stronger economy, a stronger dollar and greater purchasing power for oil, gas and food.

And Obama is supposedly the one light on specifics. You cant control the value of the dollar as if it were the volume knob on your stereo... I'm not sure how he proposes to do this. Even if he were able to raise the value of the dollar, it would only decrease the price of imported goods...

* John McCain believes we should institute a summer gas tax holiday. Hard-working American families are suffering from higher gasoline prices. John McCain called on Congress to suspend the 18.4 cent federal gas tax and 24.4 cent diesel tax from Memorial Day to Labor Day.

ok... we've heard this one before, how would we make up for the federal shortfall in revenues?

* John McCain will repeal the 54 cents per gallon tax on imported sugar-based ethanol, increasing competition, and lowering prices of gasoline at the pump.

I dont get this one at all... sugar is one of the most destructive crops to grow, and the largest producer of sugar based ethanol is venezeula (Chavez is our friend, really). How will lowering the price of something that most americans would not be able to buy (no gas stations), and cannot use (do your vehicles run ethanol) decrease the procies of conventional gasoline?

* John McCain will roll back corn-based ethanol mandates, which are contributing to the rising cost of food.

I Agree with this one, corn based ethanol is a sham... the market should drive the demand for alternative energy, not a federal mandate.


Anyone else have thoughts?

I agree with the gist of your commentary. McCain's plan, as laid out on the website is light and fluffy.

However, one small fact that I wanted to clarify is that Venezuela's economy is nearly 100% occupied by petroleum, and has very little invested in alternative fuels.

Here's a link to the Renewable Fuels Association showing the largest ethanol producers by country and the ammount. I believe you're thinking of Brazil as the largest producer of ethanol from sugar cane.

http://www.ethanolrfa.org/industry/statistics/#E
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ve.html#Econ

Awesome... yes... Brazil...

gotta say i have gone to his site to look up his stances. i felt i must not know the right way to search or something because it all seemed so vague and no substance. i thought since i dont monitor his every town hall meeting there must be some important things he says there that are just assumed to be known so werent included. your post makes me figure what i got out of it is much the same as you got out of it ....and wtf--someone got rid of our lipsticked pig smiley???

floridafun wrote:...and wtf--someone got rid of our lipsticked pig smiley???

I'm guessing it wasn't Mort or Bman...

wtf--someone got rid of our lipsticked pig smiley???

>:c (

I don't remember what other pig we had but I havn't deleted any smiley. Link me to one and I'll upload it.

Here's one. Rt. Click > Save Image As...

floridafun wrote:gotta say i have gone to his site to look up his stances. i felt i must not know the right way to search or something because it all seemed so vague and no substance. i thought since i dont monitor his every town hall meeting there must be some important things he says there that are just assumed to be known so werent included. your post makes me figure what i got out of it is much the same as you got out of it ....and wtf--someone got rid of our lipsticked pig smiley???

I had an ulterior motive... to put McCains policies out there so that someone can defend them.... chirp chirp chirp :-)

:aw:

I had an ulterior motive... to put McCains policies out there so that someone can defend them.... chirp chirp chirp :-)

In regards to foreign oil everything I've heard from him is to drill, drill, drill and at the same time develop alternatives.. basically a version of the Pickens Plan only probably not as focused on T Boone's wallet as his plan is. McCain is a very strong supporter of Nuclear technology which means he wants more shifts towards electric power rather than fossil fuels.

The strong dollar is more of an overall position on the economy. He is right though, a stronger dollar will lower oil prices as our dollar will purchase more. As for specifics, I believe both candidates are for a strong dollar, but neither has any ideas on how to get there.. at least not that I've heard them say.

I haven't heard anything about the gas tax, it appears he's either abandoned this idea or moved on and rightfully so it was a bad idea.

I looked at BO's site..... there's very little specifics on it. Neither candidate has laid out their detailed plan on their website. Just, as you stated, bullet points on what their goal is.

i dont think any nominee ever lays out a specific blueprint. for one thing if obama did, mcsame would copy and paste it all into his own website

they would be foolish to give away their detailed game plan and have it be under the microscope of the other party and the media. if they win, when they give clear details it part of a competition for winning the literary prize of prez office i think.

floridafun wrote:i dont think any nominee ever lays out a specific blueprint. for one thing if obama did, mcsame would copy and paste it all into his own website

they would be foolish to give away their detailed game plan and have it be under the microscope of the other party and the media. if they win, when they give clear details it part of a competition for winning the literary prize of prez office i think.

Indeed.. it would be a bad idea for BO to display his blueprint that doesn't do half of what he's claiming.

cardinal5150 wrote:
Indeed.. it would be a bad idea for BO to display his blueprint that doesn't do half of what he's claiming.

Seriously, how do you know that? Maybe I'm being naive. You are saying that he is not posting his [blueprint], and then claiming it's because he wont get half of it done? Without the blueprint, I'm not sure what you can possibly be basing that on aside from your own bias... bias is fine, you are under no obligation of objectivity, just pointing it out.

It seems that everyone decides who their presidential choice is based on core issues... life/choice, gun/control, raise taxes/cut taxes... big govt/small govt, Pro War/Anti-War...

Then, debate really amounts to attacking the opponent's positions on none of those things... I'm guilty myself... I like Obama not because I am particularly drawn to any of his specific positions, but rather that the core of his positions is most in line with my personal viewpoints.

pez wrote:

cardinal5150 wrote:
Indeed.. it would be a bad idea for BO to display his blueprint that doesn't do half of what he's claiming.

Seriously, how do you know that? Maybe I'm being naive. You are saying that he is not posting his [blueprint], and then claiming it's because he wont get half of it done? Without the blueprint, I'm not sure what you can possibly be basing that on aside from your own bias... bias is fine, you are under no obligation of objectivity, just pointing it out.

Yes.. I am being somewhat bias.... but I believe his own campaign last week came out and said there was no need for him to come out with specifics that would just be attacked and ripped apart. Well, if you really believe they'll work, what do you have to hide? Shouldn't you welcome the criticism as a chance to display your stance and how it will help more than they think it will hurt?

That's my thinking anyway. I also don't think BO will accomplish half of what he wants if elected in general though, mostly because he's developing new agencies for every single issue he can think of, that's a LOT of funding that is going to come from somewhere, and frankly, I don't buy the idea that the wealthy are going to absorb all that cost.

Plus the recent financial packages could cost us in the short term, which most people believe means taxes will be raised by whoever is in office in Washington next. Which could mean no matter what happens, the next president will be a one and one.

It seems that everyone decides who their presidential choice is based on core issues... life/choice, gun/control, raise taxes/cut taxes... big govt/small govt, Pro War/Anti-War...

Then, debate really amounts to attacking the opponent's positions on none of those things... I'm guilty myself... I like Obama not because I am particularly drawn to any of his specific positions, but rather that the core of his positions is most in line with my personal viewpoints.

I think most people believe this as well.. look at our subjects. Taxes/economy as most important to me, and what I'm most "up to date" on, so they are what I focus on. BO basically believes in a gov't agency for every issue, McCain believes in smaller federal gov't and letting people resolve problems on themselves, or in their state gov't. That to me is what the Republican party used to be but strayed from years ago, and that's why I'm for him.