napi21
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-17-05 10:25 AM
Original message |
Dems should push for national gasoline formulation to lower prices. |
|
For years I've heard about the time and retooling expense that's involved in making all the special formulations of gasoline required by a lot of different pats of the US. Sometimes, there's an overstock of one formulation but a severe shortage of fuel in another area.
This is all crazy! Why can't all areas agree on one formulation? Even if the final formulation was one of the more expensive ones to produce, the final cost would be MUCH less because we've eliminated changeovers. Anyone who works in manufacturing knows that!
I think this could be a great Dem proposal. It would benefit the people, the refineries, and wouldn't harm anyone! We could be known as the Party that helped solve the problem of gas prices, at least in the short term!
Once back in office, the Dems could then concentrate on higher cafe standards for cars & trucks, etc.
|
kahleefornia
(530 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-17-05 10:56 AM
Response to Original message |
|
but I think the Dems should just really hammer on conserving. To me, that's the message people really need to get. And the high prices are kind of "tough love" for that right now. Although I agree that the poor are getting hit, while the rich are only slightly inconvenienced.
|
jwirr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-17-05 11:10 AM
Response to Original message |
2. I would rather we emphasize the bottom line. We need |
|
to get moving on conservation, mass transit, ride-share and alternative energy issues. As the gas prices go up I am amazed to hear how many people are getting the long term message. Gas prices should not be manipulated - they need to reflect reality. ONLY then will we rise to answer the needs of the future. I live in an area that is rural and almost everyone is driving 20-30 miles one way to work. That is making things very clear.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 09:58 PM
Response to Original message |