Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The OT' started by juan ellitinez, Apr 27, 2005.
Anybody know (the equivalent) price of a gallon of gas in Canada?
Its Canadian dollars per liter. Good luck.
And car speed is measured in furlongs per fortnight!
Seriously, though. Cananda's prices have always been higher than US, but not as high as in other countries. We have been able to keep prices lower than the rest of the world because of our strategic reserves. We have been buying oil to increase the reserve but soon we will top it off. That is when I expect spot prices to drop some more.
maybe thats why I'm asking for the equivalent price of a gallon of gas? :lol:
According to the CAA (Canadian version of the AAA), the Dec '04 price per litre national average was $0.86 9/10. A web site called gasticker.com gives current prices by random posters and it seems to hold steady a little below that currently.
So you just go to xe.com for a currency conversion. That works out to $0.687/litre in US$.
A litre is 0.26 of a gallon. Lets just call it a quart. So that works out to $2.75 per gallon.
BTW, gasoline SHOULD be far cheeper in Canada than in the USA. Canada, thanks to Alberta and Newfoundland is self-sufficient in oil and natural gas. The difference is taxes. In the US, all gasoline taxes go for road construction and are fairly low. In Canada, taxes go to the general revenue budget and are much higher.
BTW, gasoline SHOULD be far cheeper in Canada than in the USA. Canada, thanks to Alberta and Newfoundland is self-sufficient in oil and natural gas.
I seem to recall that, after Saudi Arabia, our neighbors to the north and south (Canada & Mexico) constantly vie for second place in terms of crude oil exported to the US. Canada is also in first place in exporting refined petroleum to the USA.
I'll ask a Canadian friend of mine who winters in Florida about the current price. Any time we've ever talked about the price here versus there, though, he mentions how much cheaper it is here. Canada taxes fuel much more than we do.
To show how far we are from energy independence we are, as long as we depend upon petroleum, we have about 3% of the world's oil supply under our land, but we currently use about 25% of all the petroleum consumed each day.
What Bush should have proposed in his energy speech yesterday, if he really wanted to bring about some radical progress in achieving independence, is that we would be phasing in increased fuel taxes which would make the price of a gallon of gas $4 a gallon 18 months from now, no matter what the price of a barrel of crude is. The additional taxes could go to pay for the war in Iraq, or even better, could go to make some real progress in alternative fuel sources. The taxes could go to help finance the changeover to hybrid vehicles, including significant tax breaks for those who bought them. If paying the extra tax on gas wasn't enough, a special tax could be applied to Hummers to be used to purchase extra shielding for Humvees in Iraq and Afghanistan. Whole new industries would spring up meeting the challenges of energy independence. Instead, Bush trotted out the same old supply side energy like always, with the emphasis on a cheap supply, with hardly a mention of things to reduce the demand.
Same old blame people answers from the party that claims to be "of the people". Taxes, taxes, taxes, and more taxes.
Drill the ANWR wasteland.
Allow the wonderful mountain top removal process for coal mining to resume at 1980s levels.
Allow the burning of coal at 1980s EPA regs levels.
Open a new nuke power plant every six months for a decade.
Open a new coal fired power plant every six months for two decades.
Roll back EPA tailpipe regs to 1995 levels, and freeze them there for 20 years.
Now the far outs will use words like "poison" and "environmental catatstrophy".
Except of course what I post above IS THE POLICY of every other industrial country (substitute "some other God forsaken wasteland" for "ANWR Wasteland".
The environmental extremists told us their loopie ideas had no costs attached to them. They were wrong, and now, rather than admit they didn't know what they were talking about, blame Y O U and M E for having the audacity to be prosperous enough to use energy.
Every time this very sensible proposal is mentioned, someone will react in the way that SamC did.
I'd like to see a heavy tax eased in on fuel. I say "eased", because people should be given time to make plans to adjust their behavior to it. Our balance of trade with the rest of the world is going to bankrupt the country, and it's due in large part to the importing of oil.
I say let those who are causing the need to import the fuel be the ones who pay. We'll all pay, of course, because everything related to our society is tied to energy in one way or another. But those who use more will pay more. The rest of the world seems to understand this very fundamental idea. Even Canada, a net oil exporter, taxes more than we do.
If we're not even willing to insist on higher MPG numbers for the worst of our guzzlers, I don't see a chance of collecting higher taxes in the energy sector.
By the way, my Canadian friend says that gas is now about $2.91/gallon (US dollars/US gallon).
Same old answers from the party that has no soul and no vision for the future. Just do it like we always did it.
Being more of a moderate Libertarian in my political views, I found it highly ironic that the GOP-backed federal government did not tax my unemployment benefits from last year, but the BLUE STATE Massachusetts Department of revenue *did*, turning a $500 refund into a $650 tax bill in one single line item. (When the tax program asked what percentage of my UI came from MA)
This means that MA taxes the unemployed and DC doesn't. What was that bit about being for the "little guy"? Oh don't worry - I have plenty of complaints about the GOP as well
Yeah - raise the gas tax - that's the second most regressive tax there is.
Make it harder for the hard-working lower-income people to get to their jobs so they can climb out of (near) poverty.
But of course - that's what you leftists want, isn't it? Keep them down so they're forever dependent on the government.
Yup - that's what you want, so you can blame the continued poverty on the Republicans.
Of course. We want to keep people dependent on government. You anarchists want to keep people dependent on the oil from foreign countries. Thats why the presidents energy bill is same old, same old. You guys want to keep things the way they are. So we can continue to blame the continued poverty on the Republicans. :lol:
Do you see any need to reduce the consumption of oil in the US? If so, how do you propose to do it any time soon without discouraging the use of automobiles?
An increased tax would cause everyone to raise prices, so the hard-working lower-income people you mention would all have to charge enough more for their services to offset the cost of fuel. What's the problem?
And just to dispel the myth you're trying to perpetuate, I know plenty of low-income people who aren't hard-working.
I know a lot of high income people who aren't hard working either.
Yep, but we play hard to make up for it!