Petrena fills up on gas
Petrena, D&C Community board member, wrote this bit over at the D&C Editorial blog about Oil Company Tax breaks and the tax on Gasoline. Unfortunately Petrena throws up her hands with this short-termed view:
So what can the government do? They can repeal the tax breaks they give to oil companies but that isn’t going to lower the price of gas. These are private companies so I’m not sure how much leverage the government has.
I wanted to scream - “Yo Petrena - Are we talking about the the same government who writes the laws? That government can’t do anything? Isn’t it the government who is giving them these tax breaks?” However, she then continues….
I wonder what the profit margin is for the government as a result of the gasoline tax? Last I checked, we were taxed somewhere between 43 to 48.7 cents per gallon. Why not halt the taxes on gasoline, at least temporarily?
Again, I wanted to scream, “Governments make profits?” No, they take in revenue and redistribute it to the citizens in the form of goods and services. How else do all those potholes on E. Henrietta road get paid for?”
As I’ve written time and time again, taxes are necessary to a society that has a government. That said, taxes should be a shared responsibility. Meaning, removing entities from the tax pool puts the burden squarely on everyone else. Whether or not COMIDA is exempting retail businesses from taxes, or the Federal government is granting special privileges to oil companies, it all impacts the citizen. I mean, Florida doesn’t have a state income tax. Why not? Well, they get tax revenue from the tourist industry. I’ll bet if they were not so reliant on tourism they would have an income tax.
But, most importantly, taxes also need to be invested wisely in order to get the most bang for the tax dollar.
Does anyone really think that if ~50 cents were eliminated from each gallon of gas (the approximate taxes) - that the price would not ultimately rise to what the consumer is paying now?
I mean, the cost of gas is certainly affecting consumer prices in general, but frankly the market can and is paying the current price for gas. An elimination of a gas tax would simply remove revenue to the government and give additional revenue to Big Oil. The role of the corporation is to maximize shareholder value.
But, back to Petrena’s piece. This is the kicker. Why are gas prices going up anyway? Well, a combination of factors. Demand from developing nations, refining capability, and the weak dollar. Yep. The weak dollar. From the International Herald Tribune just last month.
The immediate catalyst for the spike in energy prices is the drop in the value of the dollar. Currency traders are selling dollars and buying euros to take advantage of the difference in interest rates between the United States and Europe.
Why are we lowering interest rates? To stimulate the economy. That whole subprime mess thing. Heck, I think we are getting stimulus checks, aren’t we? Use those to pay for the difference in gas prices.
Petrena - Want to save the cost of gas? Car pool, walk or ride a bike.
Meanwhile - reallocate tax dollars into industries that liberate us from dependence on foreign oil. At the same time - figure out a way to invest existing tax dollars so we can draw capital back into the United States.
I warned you folks that Petrena was full of hot air. Some of you defended and still defend her.
She is poorly informed on the issues and has a very limited conception of government and politics. She has attempted to intervene on the Chili blog to deflect attention away from Dunning’s problems. If she is not getting paid as a political operative then she ought to be.
WE need to get the d and c to find some competent community columnists. This kind of ill-informed commentary stops discussion rather than enriches it.
Actually - the position ends shortly - apply.
Oh -
Can you be more specific?
I defended her. I still blame the paper more than I blame her.
I didn’t blame Darko when the Pistons drafted him in front of Carmelo Anthony, I blamed the Pistons. Same thing here.
Must have missed that. Maybe I should read RT more often. Sorry.
The issue here is views and philosophy. One can hope she is moving down a path to at least relating to “the other side”. This community Blog gig is a great opportunity to do that. I just haven’t seen it happening.
But exile is correct - the paper gets the blogger they want. A paper-based medium hiring a interactive person. I mean look at the editorial board - post and forget. People ask questions and generally they don’t get answered on the Editorial board by the blog authors. Oh, I’m talking about the real employees of Gannett not the doing it for free bloggers.
Must have missed that. Maybe I should read RT more often. Sorry.
I think I just said something once in the comments. It’s not like I did a YouTube video arguing that she should get a Pulitzer…so I can how most might have missed it.
And yet a writer is responsible for his or her own words, don’t you agree?
Yes - I agree.
WE need to get the d and c to find some competent community columnists. This kind of ill-informed commentary stops discussion rather than enriches it.
I’m afraid the stupidity is a feature, not a bug. The D&C is pitching itself to the dumbest, least informed members of our community, not to citizens who are interested in intelligent discourse. Let’s hope that others fill the gap and provide smarter stuff. I’m seeing hopeful signs at Channel 13 and the Messenger-Post.
The government could, if it so chose to, negotiate with oil companies. It could say, hey guys, voluntarily drop your prices and we won’t raise your taxes. It does indeed have leverage, either voluntarily, or mandatorily (if that is a word).
Yes, I realize that this is never going to happen…
yes it can. Trouble is the metaphorical Petrena types toss up their hands and say it can’t be done.
Again - just like the D&C supporting the Energy Bill then railing against the tax breaks it gave the oil companies.
Remember this?
the us government has strong powers to regulate business. In the pre civil war days there were extensive regulations of a mercantilist nature. In the progressive era, the new deal, and again in the later 60’s and 70’s regulatory agencies were created which opposed big business interests. The problem is that most regulatory agencies tend to get captured by the very interests they are meant to regulate.
She’s a dog groomer for God’s sake! She was cheap, and every editorial staff needs a Gee Davey to fall back on.
If that’s the best they can do (sorry Ex, I know you have a love affair with butter)…I continue to read other news online and not be fed from the spoon by the braindead at the D&C.
Subscription rates must be WAAAAAAAAAY down. Now that they used their genious to change their online site, it’s impossible to even want to visit there. Moronic version of a massive AOL chat board.
Let’s talk about something fuzzy now. Maybe warm AND fuzzy.
That’s a little harsh.
Comes with the job Exile. If she can’t report the truth, and is nothing more than a mechanism for slanted attitudes and gossipy misrepresentations, I’m sure there is a job for her in the next fireman’s parade carrying the flag for the GOP.
In this world, in this state, in this county, there is little room for a high school newspaper reporter. Ambition is ia poor substitute for talent.
I still think you’re a little out of line here. There’s no need to make this personal.
Actually, I’m with Exile here. As a Community Blogger her opinions and philosophies are fair game (as are mine).
Whether or not she grooms dogs or whatever - I could care less. It is not pertinent to the conversation.
Excuse me??!! There are high school news reporters who can write and investigate an issue beyond any (almost) reporter at the D&C. Check out the BHS Trapezoid, for example.
Ok, guy’s - this is probably against by better judgment, but I will give it a go. I have always been in support of the right for everyone to express their opinions, no matter what political affiliation they have. I respect those that are true to themselves in what they believe, whether I agree or not - the door should swing both ways.
I have read here from time to time as I have found it to be informative, and yes, at times entertaining. This particular blog prompted me to sign on for the first time as I can sit on my hands no longer.
I have never been a fan of personal attacks on any any forum. From what I have read here this morning, I am saddened to learn that the words towards Petrena personally have been written. Till now, I really thought that you guy’s were above this. Today, you have proved me wrong.
Petrena is a dog trainer, not groomer - not that it would make a difference what her lively hood is, she makes an honest living. Would you prefer she sat home on your dime and collected a check at your expense?
And don’t stoop to slinging that “conservatism” back at me because I have run with the very best of you in my day. For me, this is not about that.
I disagreed with the “dog groomer” comment and said it was too harsh. You have all kinds of nasty stuff going on in your comments over there. Ours are quite polite by comparison and when someone crosses the line, we let them know, as I did here. I don’t hold Petrena or the Chili bloggers responsible for all the awful things their commenters say (in fact, I give Mia at Chili in particular credit for her efforts to deal with the rude bunch that comment on her blog).
Frankly, the D&C blogs are an embarrassment as I have said many times. I don’t blame you or Petrena for this, I blame the paper. I also find it strange that Petrena is allowed to write whatever she wants when other, more liberal writers were constantly censored.
My issues here are with the paper, not with you or Petrena or any of the others. I find nearly everything written in the D&C blogs to be misinformed and illogical, but, again, I blame the paper for creating and fostering an environment in which illogic and misinformation rules the day, not with any of the commenters or posters themselves.
I hope I’ve made myself clear here.
Thank you for dropping by.
For clarification, I’m referring to the firing of Peter Boulay when I speak of censorship of more liberal blogges.
Thanks for stopping by.
I would caution against painting with a wide brush because it is coming across that you have an issue with this blog or this specific post rather than a specific specific commenter. A commenter who, I beleive, went too far with some mud slinging and has been redirected.
But terms like “you guys” or “And don’t stoop to slinging that “conservatism†back at me because I have run with the very best of you in my day.”
I’m not sure to whom you are directing your comment. If it is me, the post author, a specific commenter or the other Front Pagers at RT please be specific.
Look, I got on here in defense of Petrena after what I had read on this site. I was not asked, nor invited (but thank you for the welcome though, it is appreciated) I came to make a point, and I did it in peace as I am not the enemy - I would be grateful to not be addressed as one. Obviously, I am not familiar with posting on this forum, so I am not seasoned to know that it is one person that I need to specifically address. I just got on and commented in general, didn’t know to do otherwise. I do understand now.
There appears to be a little of “us” and “them” going on around between the community bloggers and RT. Why, I have no idea, but my bet would be politics. I am quite capable of separating “personal” and “politics”. I would expect the same could be offered to me. That is where my comment came from as I know most of you read the blogs, know my party affiliation and what I support. Again, that should not make me the enemy. And if you have read at any length, I am not a basher - just a girl with very strong opinions and I reside in Irondequoit, not Chili. Mia is a childhood close friend of mine for 30+ years (please don’t do the math, ok?)
I support anonymity on these forums but do blog under my own name. I take that risk, perhaps it is but another move against my better judgement. I do not hide. At times it is no big deal to me (most of the time anyway) but there have been times that it hasn’t been on my side, and the cards have fallen all over the place since my participation in the past 2 years.
Not really sure if I really need to be so open, but I am making an attempt to allow you to learn what I am about and what my intentions are. There appear to be some assumptions (I feel that in the air here) that I am a painter with a brush that may not be suited for my subject. My focus is Petrena. She did not deserve to have been written about in that manner. It bothered me this morning and still does. Dig?
I will not sit back when someone that I consider a friend gets thrown under the bus for expressing opinions. I would expect the same from any of you, if the table were turned. And if I turned your blog into a chat house, it was not my intention - I’m just a little long winded at times.
Blogs are confusing with so many people commenting on them and it’s easy to paint with too broad a brush at times. I’m sure we’ve been guilty of it as well at times. (Though we always take pains to point out that our criticism of the D&C blogs does not extend to Lee Strong, who did a good job and is not a member of the far right.)
I do think that it’s important to distinguish between blog posts and comments, though. Your objection was to a comment that I as a poster also objected to. I don’t think it’s fair to cast aspersion on our blog on the basis of a comment that others here also disagreed with.
As for the D&C bogs: quite simply, I think the D&C blogs are poorly written, poorly argued, and way to the right for the most part. I don’t think the paper should put that kind of thing out under their name. We wouldn’t tolerate that kind of posting here at RT and I would think that a professional outfit like Gannett wouldn’t either.
Thanks for dropping by and I apologize if you feel you’re being attacked. I certainly felt like your own comment was a bit of an attack on us, but that comes with the territory. My point here is that we don’t engage in personal attacks and that when a comment takes on a harsh edge we say so. But you can judge for yourself how good we are about that.
I checked out the D&C blogs after a long hiatus and they have improved (the Irondequoit one is fun for example), so saying they’re “mostly” bad, as I’ve claimed previously, is no longer accurate. But it is interesting that many have a far right-wing bent while none have a liberal bent.
I find that troubling.
Yes, Irondequoit can be a fun ride - glad that you see it this way. We’re lucky to have Ray McDonald - he is fair, and very creative - and has exceptional humor too. I personally, am drawn to that on a blog.
I see these open forums as a radio station - If the topic is not my taste - turn the station, if possible.
As far as the left/right bent - It’s not always as it appears via the keyboard. It’s very challenging for a lot of us to read where some may be. I read that there is mix - and Im fine with it. My policy has been - When you strip others opinions from them, you may as well surrender your own.
I see now that you did not contribute to the hit on Petrena, and it was you that controlled the comment(s). We’re cool. Petrena didnt deserve that, nor did she earn to be personally attacked - it freaked me out to have read the words above about her. Thank you for the follow up and for the fairness you have shown me regarding her.
Thanks for coming by and also for your fairness in understanding this.
An admirable trait to be sure.
Exile sums it up nicely above in terms of the difference between Posters and commenters and the confusion it may cause-
My point was there is a different between commenters and posters. In no way did I think I attacked Petrena personally in the original post. I think one of our commenters did in the comment section and that wasn’t right.
My paint brush comment was trying to get to exactly what your were bothered by - the original post or the comment.
So - if you had an issue with a specific comment (the one about being a “dog groomer” comes to mind) - I think we are in agreement - if you had an issue with a post I wrote - that is a different matter.
Hope that clears things up.
[...] few weeks ago, we wrote about a typically misinformed D&C piece about the proposal that gas taxes be temporarily suspended. The D&C wrote in favor of the [...]