This whole thing is a joke imo. ATM we in alaska are in the process of voting in a new tax structure for the new LNG pipeline (liquid natural gas) and our current govenor and the oil companies are trying to bully us into a really really bad deal that gives the oil companies control of our resources for almost 60 years with tons of tax breaks.
Since they technically dont lose money shutting this down since the price of the other gas they are pumping with skyrocket, I really see this as them trying to scare us into a shitty deal.
Alaskan pipeline shutdown
Moderator: Dictators in Training
It's inevitable. It may even $6 a gallon. I would support a measure to extend public transportation railways to more areas so people wouldn't have to drive so much. Like in the bay area, there is BART. Bart should go all the way out to Sacramento, and down through the central valley. That would solve a lot of problems with traffic congestion, exhaust gas emmissions, etc. I'm just wondering if every state has a system like BART that they can start working on and improving/extending.
“The more I study science the more I believe in God.” -- Albert Einstein
Back when BART was originally proposed, it was SUPPOSED to ring the entire bay, and be accessible from all counties. San Mateo and Santa Clara counties refused to contribute to the project, because: "They had CalTrain". Never mind that the two didn't link up even in SF, much less the south bay. Had those 2 counties agreed to BART at the beginning, it WOULD be a real bay-wide network. As it is now, extending it like 10 miles costs something on the order of 1 billion dollars, due to the increase in land costs, etc. So, there's effectively zero chance it'll ever get done.
-Arlos
-Arlos
The Alaska Legislature yesterday passed the state's biggest oil and gas tax law rewrite in decades as a way to spur development of Alaska's natural gas reserves. They drop the base tax rate a company would have to pay.
The tax bill would set a base tax rate of 22.5 percent of companies' profits from their Alaska operations. That tax rate would rise by 0.25 percent for every $1 rise in the price of oil above $55 per barrel. At current prices, the tax rate would be about 28 percent of companies' profits.
The tax bill would set a base tax rate of 22.5 percent of companies' profits from their Alaska operations. That tax rate would rise by 0.25 percent for every $1 rise in the price of oil above $55 per barrel. At current prices, the tax rate would be about 28 percent of companies' profits.
So prices will go up to pay for them to fix the problem, then when its finished the prices will just stay up because no one will notice they have been high for so long. More record profits inc.
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.
arlos wrote:Back when BART was originally proposed, it was SUPPOSED to ring the entire bay, and be accessible from all counties. San Mateo and Santa Clara counties refused to contribute to the project, because: "They had CalTrain". Never mind that the two didn't link up even in SF, much less the south bay. Had those 2 counties agreed to BART at the beginning, it WOULD be a real bay-wide network. As it is now, extending it like 10 miles costs something on the order of 1 billion dollars, due to the increase in land costs, etc. So, there's effectively zero chance it'll ever get done.
-Arlos
Would you be supportive of the government annexing the lands (eminent domain) for rapid-transit expansion? After all, it would be better for the environment... :P
“The more I study science the more I believe in God.” -- Albert Einstein