Not only did Jimbo respond to the massive flood-fraud story with a "....S&^% happens" shrug, he repeats simpleton idiocies about petroleum prices.
I don't know if he actually believes this crap, or whether he thinks that if he says it often enough, OTHERS will believe it.
Either way, he should resign for massive ethical failure of nerve.
Interview with the Appleton paper:
Q) Everyone is feeling the pinch of record gasoline prices. Is there anything the state can do to ease the burden?
A) ...what's really at issue are these oil companies that are making the biggest profits in the history of the world. ...Why can't the oil companies give us a break? But they won't, because they want to make as much profit as they can
Compared to what, Jimbo? They made a 10% nominal net pretax (approx.) Not really a big deal. And, by the way, the SHAREHOLDERS of the oil companies expect those profits. You may remember some of them: the Wisconsin State Retirement funds; mutual-fund holders; they're called US citizens, Jimbo.
Kudos to the newspaper, which noted that Jimbo forgot all about the State's super-large gasoline tax:
Q) Would the state consider a break or holiday on the motor fuel tax it charges to help out motorists?
A) Well, the problem with that is twofold. There's no reason for me to believe that the gas companies would pass the savings on. We could take off our gas tax, but I believe the oil companies simply would make more profits. They would continue to price gasoline at the same level. Second, we need those funds to make sure we have good roads and that our bridges are secure.
I would tell you that Doyle suffers from recto-cranial inversion complex, but that's far too kind. As to "good roads...and secure bridges," ---OK--he gets a partial credit.
The "S&^% happens" mentality emerges again, though. He can't help himself:
The big problem with a gasoline tax holiday, which (Sen. John) McCain (of Arizona) talked about, is that it would only save families on average about 30 cents a day or $30 a month. I think the oil companies simply would continue to charge the same price and pocket the additional profit.
That's the FEDERAL gas tax (18.4 cents/gal). The STATE's gas tax of 30.9 cents/gallon is 167% of the Fed tax. So the "average family" in Wisconsin could save FIFTY dollars/month if the Wisconsin gas tax were eliminated.
But what the Hell--$50.00/month is "S^%$ happens" money to Diamond Jim, just like $8 million or so in fraudulent flood aid.
HT: FoxPolitics
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
And what good reason do we have to subsidize driving even more than we already do by suspending the gas tax?
Oh and as for Doyle claiming the gas tax is affecting Milwaukeeans, bunk. Your typical Milwaukeean drives under 3000 miles a year and a significant number of the poor in Milwaukee simply use the bus system and don't even own a car. That is one of the advantages of living in a dense urban environment. You don't have to drive 15 miles to Walmart.
And what good reason do we have to subsidize driving even more than we already do by suspending the gas tax?
Um, because in most areas in the United States and even Wisconsin, driving is the norm. And it's a reality that's *not* going away. Ever.
And gas taxes are hurting families who can't get around on mopeds with 2, 3, 4 kids sitting in milk crates.
I have three kids. Gas taxes aren't really hurting me. They aren't fun, but they aren't really hurting me. If I were living in Port and driving to Milwaukee every day, they would be killing me. Besides which roads need to be paid for and we are over a billion dollars behind on maintenance and repairs in this state.
You seem to believe higher gas prices are a temporary phenomena. Your head is in the sand.
Taxes don't help. Blocking domestic drilling doesn't help.
It's great for you that gas taxes aren't hurting, but for a relatively newly married couple, with a young child, student debt, and a husband who just found steady work again - they're killing us.
Oh, and my city is adding an addition $20/year wheel tax to pay for roads.
I don't expect gas to be $1/gal. again. But $5 or more is the end of the line - you also forget gas prices affect how one heats their home. Guess I'm supposed to get use to 55ยบ in the middle of January, huh?
Well, DY, since you are not in pain, here's a deal for you:
Send Amy $600.00 for her gas-taxes.
Send it to me, too!
That way, since "they don't hurt YOU" they won't hurt us, either.
BTW, pisspoor roads in Manitowoc don't bother me at all. Maybe they are a problem for you--but tough. Get balloon tires.
Roads aren't free. Your payment of the gas tax is you just paying part of your way. (I'll leave aside that a portion of the gas tax should in an ideal world be put in general revenues.)
I would hope my lack of pain was more a reflection of prudence. I was in the situation of not steady work, so I do sympathize with you there. I hope it is good work. I think you would agree that lowering the gas tax is not the best way to provide welfare benefits though. Being in your situation helped me to stop being a Republican.
In regards to heating, we live in a generous 2100 sq ft home built 1905, or at least it is generous by even 1970 standards. I put the thermostat on 57 at night and 63 during the day. If I were you, I would act like energy prices are going to stay here or go higher. If that means buying smaller house, then do so.
Why don't you stop acting like a welfare queen Dad29? C'mon and pay your own way. You at least don't have the excuse of youth to be thinking that you can get something for nothing.
The liberal mind:
If you disarm yourself you will set the example for the bad guys and the world and they will disarm
Even though it is a small thing every little thing you do helps us be GREEN.
But they think:
If we drop or reduce our gas tax the bad guys (oil companies) will take advantage and won't do the same.
The tax is a small thing and wont really help in any significant way.
(They will never cut a tax only hide it in some other spot.)
DY, your efforts to conserve are admirable. Keep them up.
However, your implication that all others are wastrels is ignorant (or to be kind, unthinking.) You might gather some friends if you were not inclined to think of yourself as the Most Virtuous Energy-Saver in the entire State.
By the way, we pay taxes for the general welfare quite happily.
We do NOT pay so happily for waste, fraud, and abuse--such as Thompson's Selig-family gift, or Thompson's/Doyle's paving-over of the entire State.
That'd be great, DY. $600 would cover my rent for a month.
Why is it tax cuts are "welfare" but tax increases for bloated social programs isn't?
I think I recall the money in the WI transportation budget went to...balance the other mismanaged budget.
Spending on social programs is welfare. I didn't think anyone was trying to hide that from you.
The State gas tax exclusively funds transportation in Wisconsin. While Dad29 and I can debate the wisdom of many road construction projects in this state and we would probably come to agreement on getting rid of a number of them, there is not a dispute that we have not sufficiently funded our existing infrastructure. Again, I would get rid of much of it, but I'm not in charge. Your desire to use this infrastructure without paying for it is a welfare attitude.
Some money in reserve DOT funds was loaned to other State funds. Since you can't understand the concept of use taxing, I'm doubtful you'll understand what that was all about, even though I vehemently disagreed with the action.
Dad29,
I'm no conservation king. The only implication I will make is that people often respond angerily to things beyond their control. My first act as governor would be to sell the I system to some toll operator. My second act would be to transfer much of the gas tax to counties on a per capita basis and make them almost completely responsible for highway construction and maintenance. That's probably why I won't be elected governor.
I am half tempted to buy you and Amy a bus pass to show how generous I am though.
The State gas tax exclusively funds transportation in Wisconsin.
And the transportation fund was raided by Doyle to cover his mis-management in other areas. Are we supposed to foot the bill for his administration's fiscal failings?
Taxes in this state are outrageous. Doyle can blather about oil company profits all he wants, but the fact remains outrageous taxes don't help.
It's not wrong to expect our government to curb its bloated spending in other areas (like benefits) to cover the transportation needs, and reduce the cost of transportation on the taxpaying citizens of this state.
"Some money in reserve DOT funds was loaned to other State funds"
When will it be repaid?
When will it be repaid?
I realize this is supposed to sound intelligent, but it isn't. Amy is at least honest enough to think that other tax revenues should be raided to subsidize her driving habit. Dad29 goes one step further and recognizes that the problem is endless highway spending, which I'm assuming he's willing to trim. He has condemned the freeway expansion between IL and Milwaukee, and getting rid of that will help. Pretending accounting gimmicks are germaine to the gas tax debate serves only to obfuscate people's real purpose.
Post a Comment