House OKs bill to ban school junk food sales



R

Roman Bystrianyk

Guest
Gregory B. Hladky, " House OKs bill to ban school junk food sales", New
Haven Register, May 19, 2005,
Link:
http://www.nhregister.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=14552144&BRD=1281&PAG=461&dept_id=517515&rfi=6

State House lawmakers, worried about the epidemic of childhood obesity
and diabetes, voted Wednesday to ban sales of high-sugar soda and junk
food in public schools in Connecticut.

In a last-minute compromise, the House approved an amendment that would
permit diet soda and sports drinks such as Gatorade to be sold in
school vending machines, along with milk, water, fruit juice and other
approved drinks and snack foods.

The bill would also require that all students in kindergarten through
fifth grade get at least 20 minutes of recess a day.

Debate over the bill turned into a partisan marathon lasting more than
eight hours, with Republicans angrily offering amendment after
amendment even though they were doomed to defeat.

The House eventually voted 88-55 to send the amended bill back to the
Senate. The Senate passed a different version of the measure 24-11.

Critics charged that the bill would interfere with local control of
schools and parents' authority, potentially rob after-school and
athletic programs of badly needed money, and wouldn't have any real
impact on obesity.

But supporters of banning soda and junk food vending machines during
school hours insisted that the health of children created an overriding
need for the bill.

"We know that some Connecticut children are being shortchanged on
exercise and nutrition," said state Rep. Mary M. Mushinsky,
D-Wallingford. "Our loyalty should be to these children first."

State Rep. Vicki Orsini Nardello, D-Prospect, said the sale of
high-sugar sodas and junk food snacks in Connecticut schools was often
permitted only because it brought in revenue for school programs.
"It's not good for kids, but it was a good thing for schools hard-up
for cash," Nardello said.

The legislation triggered a massive lobbying war, with soda giants
Coca-Cola and PepsiCo hiring some of Connecticut's most influential
lobbyists to work for the bill's defeat.

But many other groups, from high school coaches associations to some
school administrators and boards of education, also opposed the
legislation because of fears of lost revenue.

Voting on the bill and a key amendment broke generally along party
lines, with most Democrats in favor and most Republicans against.

State Rep. Themis Klarides, R-Derby, criticized the backroom
negotiations that led to the compromise allowing diet soda and
electrolyte-replacement drinks in school vending machines.

"We need to take them all out," insisted Klarides. "If I hear one more
time that it's 'for the kids,' I'll scream. ... They're all
just as bad."

Other opponents insisted that mandating that all schools provide
kindergarten through fifth grade at least 20 minutes of recess or that
amount of time to exercise could cut into needed time for academics.

Gregory B. Hladky can be contacted at [email protected] or (860)
524-0719.
 
Roman Bystrianyk wrote:
> Gregory B. Hladky, " House OKs bill to ban school junk food sales",

New
> Haven Register, May 19, 2005,
> Link:
>

http://www.nhregister.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=14552144&BRD=1281&PAG=461&dept_id=517515&rfi=6
>
> State House lawmakers, worried about the epidemic of childhood

obesity
> and diabetes, voted Wednesday to ban sales of high-sugar soda and

junk
> food in public schools in Connecticut.
>
> In a last-minute compromise, the House approved an amendment that

would
> permit diet soda and sports drinks such as Gatorade to be sold in
> school vending machines, along with milk, water, fruit juice and

other
> approved drinks and snack foods.
>
> The bill would also require that all students in kindergarten through
> fifth grade get at least 20 minutes of recess a day.
>
> Debate over the bill turned into a partisan marathon lasting more

than
> eight hours, with Republicans angrily offering amendment after
> amendment even though they were doomed to defeat.
>
> The House eventually voted 88-55 to send the amended bill back to the
> Senate. The Senate passed a different version of the measure 24-11.
>
> Critics charged that the bill would interfere with local control of
> schools and parents' authority, potentially rob after-school and
> athletic programs of badly needed money, and wouldn't have any real
> impact on obesity.
>
> But supporters of banning soda and junk food vending machines during
> school hours insisted that the health of children created an

overriding
> need for the bill.
>
> "We know that some Connecticut children are being shortchanged on
> exercise and nutrition," said state Rep. Mary M. Mushinsky,
> D-Wallingford. "Our loyalty should be to these children first."
>
> State Rep. Vicki Orsini Nardello, D-Prospect, said the sale of
> high-sugar sodas and junk food snacks in Connecticut schools was

often
> permitted only because it brought in revenue for school programs.
> "It's not good for kids, but it was a good thing for schools hard-up
> for cash," Nardello said.
>
> The legislation triggered a massive lobbying war, with soda giants
> Coca-Cola and PepsiCo hiring some of Connecticut's most influential
> lobbyists to work for the bill's defeat.
>
> But many other groups, from high school coaches associations to some
> school administrators and boards of education, also opposed the
> legislation because of fears of lost revenue.
>
> Voting on the bill and a key amendment broke generally along party
> lines, with most Democrats in favor and most Republicans against.
>
> State Rep. Themis Klarides, R-Derby, criticized the backroom
> negotiations that led to the compromise allowing diet soda and
> electrolyte-replacement drinks in school vending machines.
>
> "We need to take them all out," insisted Klarides. "If I hear one

more
> time that it's 'for the kids,' I'll scream. ... They're all
> just as bad."
>
> Other opponents insisted that mandating that all schools provide
> kindergarten through fifth grade at least 20 minutes of recess or

that
> amount of time to exercise could cut into needed time for academics.
>
> Gregory B. Hladky can be contacted at [email protected] or (860)
> 524-0719.


Of course, no one has had the gall to suggest that they actually
provide adequate funding for the schools so that they are less
dependent on funds from the sale of the sugar-water.

But this is a step in the right direction.

Now, these people need to understand that the gatorade-type drinks and
many supposed "fruit" juices are sugar-bombs in disguise. Some are
worse than soda.

TC
 
"TC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Of course, no one has had the gall to suggest that they actually
> provide adequate funding for the schools so that they are less
> dependent on funds from the sale of the sugar-water.


What? We are on the same page, amazing. Bingo. Dubya and the rest of the
big business cronies are not doing jack **** with education, health
care just to name a few trivial issues. Getting Activist judges
appointed and Social Security seem to be the only issues they want
tackle. The rest of the cabinet members seem to be sleeping. Oh wait we
have the unfunded "no child left behind' program. Yup this real winner.
In Texas they showed great improvement by leaving students behind so
they could not take the test and counting students that quit using some
bizarre new math. Then we made that slick dude Secretary of Education.
When third world countries have better schools then us we may wake up.


> But this is a step in the right direction.
>
> Now, these people need to understand that the gatorade-type drinks and
> many supposed "fruit" juices are sugar-bombs in disguise. Some are
> worse than soda.


They equally suck but this is the compromise they need to make with big
business and unfortunately still fund schools.

-DF
 
"Doug Freese" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "TC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Of course, no one has had the gall to suggest that they actually
> > provide adequate funding for the schools so that they are less
> > dependent on funds from the sale of the sugar-water.

>
> What? We are on the same page, amazing. Bingo. Dubya and the rest of the
> big business cronies are not doing jack **** with education, health
> care just to name a few trivial issues. Getting Activist judges
> appointed and Social Security seem to be the only issues they want
> tackle. The rest of the cabinet members seem to be sleeping. Oh wait we
> have the unfunded "no child left behind' program.


It is unfunded because they needed the money to fund the No Millionaire Left
Behind Program.

Yup this real winner.
> In Texas they showed great improvement by leaving students behind so
> they could not take the test and counting students that quit using some
> bizarre new math. Then we made that slick dude Secretary of Education.
> When third world countries have better schools then us we may wake up.
>
>
> > But this is a step in the right direction.
> >
> > Now, these people need to understand that the gatorade-type drinks and
> > many supposed "fruit" juices are sugar-bombs in disguise. Some are
> > worse than soda.

>
> They equally suck but this is the compromise they need to make with big
> business and unfortunately still fund schools.
>
> -DF
>
>
 
Mark Probert wrote:
> "Doug Freese" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "TC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > Of course, no one has had the gall to suggest that they actually
> > > provide adequate funding for the schools so that they are less
> > > dependent on funds from the sale of the sugar-water.

> >
> > What? We are on the same page, amazing. Bingo. Dubya and the rest

of the
> > big business cronies are not doing jack **** with education,

health
> > care just to name a few trivial issues. Getting Activist judges
> > appointed and Social Security seem to be the only issues they want
> > tackle. The rest of the cabinet members seem to be sleeping. Oh

wait we
> > have the unfunded "no child left behind' program.

>
> It is unfunded because they needed the money to fund the No

Millionaire Left
> Behind Program.
>
> Yup this real winner.
> > In Texas they showed great improvement by leaving students behind

so
> > they could not take the test and counting students that quit using

some
> > bizarre new math. Then we made that slick dude Secretary of

Education.
> > When third world countries have better schools then us we may wake

up.
> >
> >
> > > But this is a step in the right direction.
> > >
> > > Now, these people need to understand that the gatorade-type

drinks and
> > > many supposed "fruit" juices are sugar-bombs in disguise. Some

are
> > > worse than soda.

> >
> > They equally suck but this is the compromise they need to make with

big
> > business and unfortunately still fund schools.
> >
> > -DF
> >
> >


Don't forget about the No Oil-Tycoon Left Behind program.

TC
 
TC wrote:
> Mark Probert wrote:
> > "Doug Freese" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > "TC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > Of course, no one has had the gall to suggest that they

actually
> > > > provide adequate funding for the schools so that they are less
> > > > dependent on funds from the sale of the sugar-water.
> > >
> > > What? We are on the same page, amazing. Bingo. Dubya and the rest

> of the
> > > big business cronies are not doing jack **** with education,

> health
> > > care just to name a few trivial issues. Getting Activist judges
> > > appointed and Social Security seem to be the only issues they

want
> > > tackle. The rest of the cabinet members seem to be sleeping. Oh

> wait we
> > > have the unfunded "no child left behind' program.

> >
> > It is unfunded because they needed the money to fund the No

> Millionaire Left
> > Behind Program.
> >
> > Yup this real winner.
> > > In Texas they showed great improvement by leaving students behind

> so
> > > they could not take the test and counting students that quit

using
> some
> > > bizarre new math. Then we made that slick dude Secretary of

> Education.
> > > When third world countries have better schools then us we may

wake
> up.
> > >
> > >
> > > > But this is a step in the right direction.
> > > >
> > > > Now, these people need to understand that the gatorade-type

> drinks and
> > > > many supposed "fruit" juices are sugar-bombs in disguise. Some

> are
> > > > worse than soda.
> > >
> > > They equally suck but this is the compromise they need to make

with
> big
> > > business and unfortunately still fund schools.
> > >
> > > -DF
> > >
> > >

>
> Don't forget about the No Oil-Tycoon Left Behind program.
>
> TC


Or the no-drug-left-behind program of FDA.
 
"PeterB" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> TC wrote:
> > Mark Probert wrote:
> > > "Doug Freese" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > >
> > > > "TC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > Of course, no one has had the gall to suggest that they

> actually
> > > > > provide adequate funding for the schools so that they are less
> > > > > dependent on funds from the sale of the sugar-water.
> > > >
> > > > What? We are on the same page, amazing. Bingo. Dubya and the rest

> > of the
> > > > big business cronies are not doing jack **** with education,

> > health
> > > > care just to name a few trivial issues. Getting Activist judges
> > > > appointed and Social Security seem to be the only issues they

> want
> > > > tackle. The rest of the cabinet members seem to be sleeping. Oh

> > wait we
> > > > have the unfunded "no child left behind' program.
> > >
> > > It is unfunded because they needed the money to fund the No

> > Millionaire Left
> > > Behind Program.
> > >
> > > Yup this real winner.
> > > > In Texas they showed great improvement by leaving students behind

> > so
> > > > they could not take the test and counting students that quit

> using
> > some
> > > > bizarre new math. Then we made that slick dude Secretary of

> > Education.
> > > > When third world countries have better schools then us we may

> wake
> > up.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > But this is a step in the right direction.
> > > > >
> > > > > Now, these people need to understand that the gatorade-type

> > drinks and
> > > > > many supposed "fruit" juices are sugar-bombs in disguise. Some

> > are
> > > > > worse than soda.
> > > >
> > > > They equally suck but this is the compromise they need to make

> with
> > big
> > > > business and unfortunately still fund schools.
> > > >
> > > > -DF
> > > >
> > > >

> >
> > Don't forget about the No Oil-Tycoon Left Behind program.
> >
> > TC

>
> Or the no-drug-left-behind program of FDA.


That is one of the imaginary programs.
 
Mark Probert wrote:
> "PeterB" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > TC wrote:
> > > Mark Probert wrote:
> > > > "Doug Freese" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > >
> > > > > "TC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > > Of course, no one has had the gall to suggest that they

> > actually
> > > > > > provide adequate funding for the schools so that they are

less
> > > > > > dependent on funds from the sale of the sugar-water.
> > > > >
> > > > > What? We are on the same page, amazing. Bingo. Dubya and the

rest
> > > of the
> > > > > big business cronies are not doing jack **** with education,
> > > health
> > > > > care just to name a few trivial issues. Getting Activist

judges
> > > > > appointed and Social Security seem to be the only issues they

> > want
> > > > > tackle. The rest of the cabinet members seem to be sleeping.

Oh
> > > wait we
> > > > > have the unfunded "no child left behind' program.
> > > >
> > > > It is unfunded because they needed the money to fund the No
> > > Millionaire Left
> > > > Behind Program.
> > > >
> > > > Yup this real winner.
> > > > > In Texas they showed great improvement by leaving students

behind
> > > so
> > > > > they could not take the test and counting students that quit

> > using
> > > some
> > > > > bizarre new math. Then we made that slick dude Secretary of
> > > Education.
> > > > > When third world countries have better schools then us we may

> > wake
> > > up.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > But this is a step in the right direction.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now, these people need to understand that the gatorade-type
> > > drinks and
> > > > > > many supposed "fruit" juices are sugar-bombs in disguise.

Some
> > > are
> > > > > > worse than soda.
> > > > >
> > > > > They equally suck but this is the compromise they need to

make
> > with
> > > big
> > > > > business and unfortunately still fund schools.
> > > > >
> > > > > -DF
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > Don't forget about the No Oil-Tycoon Left Behind program.
> > >
> > > TC

> >
> > Or the no-drug-left-behind program of FDA.

>
> That is one of the imaginary programs.


Vioxx is imaginary? Wow, this really is the Matrix.
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Mark Probert" <Mark [email protected]> wrote:

> It is unfunded because they needed the money to fund the No Millionaire Left
> Behind Program.
>


Damn.
And I thought _I_ was cynical!

<lol>

This would make a good sig. line!
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-*****." -Jack Nicholson
 
"OmManiPadmeOmelet" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Mark Probert" <Mark [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> It is unfunded because they needed the money to fund the No
>> Millionaire Left
>> Behind Program.


Isn't it amazing that the oil companies are making record profits? The
price of a potential barrel of oil goes up in OPEC and gas prices at the
local pump go up the next day. It's a wonder that the oil companies can
take that barrel and get it refined and to the gas station in a single
day? They wouldn't be so greedy as to charge us excessive amounts for
the gas that was refined last month and still in the tanks? Of course
not.

And how many from Enron have be sent to jail?

> Damn.
> And I thought _I_ was cynical!
>
> <lol>


I never thought we would have a president and administration with less
scruples than Nixon. Amazing how we strive for new "standards."
Cynical - we are getting screwed and not even a kiss. I'd laugh if it
wasn't so sad.

-DF
 
"Doug Freese" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "OmManiPadmeOmelet" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> "Mark Probert" <Mark [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> It is unfunded because they needed the money to fund the No Millionaire
>>> Left
>>> Behind Program.

>
> Isn't it amazing that the oil companies are making record profits? The
> price of a potential barrel of oil goes up in OPEC and gas prices at the
> local pump go up the next day. It's a wonder that the oil companies can
> take that barrel and get it refined and to the gas station in a single
> day? They wouldn't be so greedy as to charge us excessive amounts for the
> gas that was refined last month and still in the tanks? Of course not.


Sorry, but oil companies are not utilities. They are in business to make
money. If you don't like it, take public transportation or ride a bike.

Jeff

> And how many from Enron have be sent to jail?
>
>> Damn.
>> And I thought _I_ was cynical!
>>
>> <lol>

>
> I never thought we would have a president and administration with less
> scruples than Nixon. Amazing how we strive for new "standards." Cynical -
> we are getting screwed and not even a kiss. I'd laugh if it wasn't so
> sad.
>
> -DF
>
 
"Jeff" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Sorry, but oil companies are not utilities. They are in business to
> make money. If you don't like it, take public transportation or ride a
> bike.


Spoken like a true Republican. No one wants to deny any business from
making a fair profit. Notice the word 'FAIR." These SOB's remind me of
the people after the hurricane when they were selling generators for 10x
the normal price. I guess you think that is a fair profit. How about the
oil for food, another fair profit? We are help captive with very little
options by flat out greed. Why don't we raise the hospital rates of
those during an emergency. I'll bet we could squeeze some extra bucks
before the doctors resuscitate.


As for mass transportation I would love to it but I don't have any. To
ride my bike 45 miles to work is outlandish. With the oil companies and
those cronies in power mass transit will never happen. More mass
transit, plain and simple means less profit, so who will build the
tracks and buses. Show me the incentives the Government provided so we
would have alternate fuel for our cars. Nope we build more SUV's call
them trucks and suck the pumps dry to feed these same greedy bastards.

You are either grossly naive, slow on the uptake or work for an oil
company but you can't see the forest for the trees. They have carefully
stuck the umbrella up our butts and will now proceed to open it before
they pull it out.

-DF
 
"Doug Freese" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Jeff" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> Sorry, but oil companies are not utilities. They are in business to make
>> money. If you don't like it, take public transportation or ride a bike.

>
> Spoken like a true Republican.


I am a Democrat. But I also realize that realize that businesses are in
business to make money. Their real masters are the stock brokers (and in the
case of the automakers and old airlines, their retirees).

> No one wants to deny any business from making a fair profit. Notice the
> word 'FAIR." These SOB's remind me of the people after the hurricane when
> they were selling generators for 10x the normal price.


Oil is selling for around $50 per barrel. That is around $1/gallon of crude.
Gas sells for around twice that. That price includes refining, taxes,
transportation, profit for the gas station, labor, etc. That seems like a
fair price to me.

> I guess you think that is a fair profit. How about the oil for food,
> another fair profit?


No that was corruption. Poor and simple.

> We are help captive with very little options by flat out greed.


How about taking the bus or walking? How about getting smaller cars or not
buying thristy SUVs?

How about insulating your home and putting in water-saving water shower
heads?

How about nuclear power? And not going to war in Iraq?

> Why don't we raise the hospital rates of those during an emergency.


Actually, they do. Ever go into a hospital and see what the list price is
for an emergency room visit?

> I'll bet we could squeeze some extra bucks before the doctors resuscitate.
>
>
> As for mass transportation I would love to it but I don't have any. To
> ride my bike 45 miles to work is outlandish. With the oil companies and
> those cronies in power mass transit will never happen.


Who votes for those cronies?

> More mass transit, plain and simple means less profit, so who will build
> the tracks and buses.


Motor Coach Industry and other bus makers.

> Show me the incentives the Government provided so we would have alternate
> fuel for our cars. Nope we build more SUV's call them trucks and suck the
> pumps dry to feed these same greedy bastards.


We do. That is the key. We made this. And now we depend on other countries
for oil. Guess what? We have lie in it.

> You are either grossly naive, slow on the uptake or work for an oil
> company but you can't see the forest for the trees.


I can see the forest for the trees. Who did the Americans elect for their
vice president? The guy who wouldn't even tell us who his energy advisers
are. And who is the dimwit who we elected for President? The guy with an
Harvard MBA who couldn't even make money in the oil business in Texas.

Oil companies invested billions of dollars in tankers, oil fields, and
infrastructure to get and refine gas. They will reap the profits. That is
the American way.

> They have carefully stuck the umbrella up our butts and will now proceed
> to open it before they pull it out.


They weren't the ones buying the SUVs, building housing and office buildings
that should be more energy efficient, moving 40 miles from work, etc.

It is not the oil companies that put the umbrella up our butts. We pushed
the umbrella up ourselves.

Jeff

> -DF
>
>
>
>
 
We could vote for leaders who will subsidize solar energy, put a hefty
tax on gas-guzzling vehicles, etc., but we'd rather argue about which
kinds of couples can get married, and few really want to give anything
up. Those who love to stress "family values" are creating a world that
will be in deep trouble for their ancestors, but I guess we'll have the
Apocalypse before then, so it doesn't really matter, right?

Now back to the scientific reality:

what I find interesting is the definition of "junk food," that is, like
"saturated fat," it's not specified by our "nutritional experts."
Lard, at 39% saturated, is called a "saturated fat." This is not
scientific, nor is it even logical, but my point here is that so many
"experts" are talking "fruit and vegetables" and yet they contain most
of the same sugars that "junk food" does. What fruit does not contain
are the large amounts of fatty acids, most of which are usually
polyunsaturated or the dangerous MUFA, erucic acid. Let's do some real
science - let's take each food apart, and look at the molecules
involved. Then we could see which ones are causing the "obesity
epidemic," the "diabetes epidemic," or whatever one wants to call the
various problems at hand.
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Doug Freese" <[email protected]> wrote:

> "OmManiPadmeOmelet" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "Mark Probert" <Mark [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> It is unfunded because they needed the money to fund the No
> >> Millionaire Left
> >> Behind Program.

>
> Isn't it amazing that the oil companies are making record profits? The
> price of a potential barrel of oil goes up in OPEC and gas prices at the
> local pump go up the next day. It's a wonder that the oil companies can
> take that barrel and get it refined and to the gas station in a single
> day? They wouldn't be so greedy as to charge us excessive amounts for
> the gas that was refined last month and still in the tanks? Of course
> not.


And it's not proportional.
If oil prices go up 2%, gas prices go up 4 to 5%.

>
> And how many from Enron have be sent to jail?
>
> > Damn.
> > And I thought _I_ was cynical!
> >
> > <lol>

>
> I never thought we would have a president and administration with less
> scruples than Nixon. Amazing how we strive for new "standards."
> Cynical - we are getting screwed and not even a kiss. I'd laugh if it
> wasn't so sad.
>
> -DF


You're preaching to the choir....


>
>

--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-*****." -Jack Nicholson
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Jeff" <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Doug Freese" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "OmManiPadmeOmelet" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> In article <[email protected]>,
> >> "Mark Probert" <Mark [email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> It is unfunded because they needed the money to fund the No Millionaire
> >>> Left
> >>> Behind Program.

> >
> > Isn't it amazing that the oil companies are making record profits? The
> > price of a potential barrel of oil goes up in OPEC and gas prices at the
> > local pump go up the next day. It's a wonder that the oil companies can
> > take that barrel and get it refined and to the gas station in a single
> > day? They wouldn't be so greedy as to charge us excessive amounts for the
> > gas that was refined last month and still in the tanks? Of course not.

>
> Sorry, but oil companies are not utilities. They are in business to make
> money. If you don't like it, take public transportation or ride a bike.
>
> Jeff


The problem is, it does not just increase our auto fuel costs. It
affects _everything_.

Transporting foods and goods to market burns fuel also, so ALL the
prices go up! I can ride a bike or walk to the store, but what I have to
pay for groceries will still go up.

This **** is hurting a lot of people in a lot of ways.

And it's all based on GREED.
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-*****." -Jack Nicholson
 

> I am a Democrat. But I also realize that realize that businesses are
> in
> business to make money. Their real masters are the stock brokers (and
> in the case of the automakers and old airlines, their retirees).


Actually the list goes on but I was simply picking on oil because it is
so obvious. Look at Enron and their retirement. At least the airlines
get ten cents on a dollar.

> Oil is selling for around $50 per barrel. That is around $1/gallon of
> crude. Gas sells for around twice that. That price includes refining,
> taxes, transportation, profit for the gas station, labor, etc. That
> seems like a fair price to me.


I understand we can't do much about the price of a barrel. OPEC has us
by the balls and the administration is mothered by Cheney and company.
My point was they raise the price at the pump before the barrel is out
of the ground. It used to be the price of gas at the pump was adjusted
when the truck was delivered. It included the cost of the barrel,
profit, etc. Now the price goes up on Monday, Wednesday and Friday and
no delivery. The corollary, when the price of the oil drops, does the
price go immediately down? I think we know the answer. The only real
factor that causes the price to drop is when the sales go down. Ever
notice when we have long holiday's where people tend to drive, the
prices go up. This is another greedy ploy and accept the flogging.

What's truly sad is all the oil companies play the game and trying to
under sell each other as we do in most retailing of food, clothes, etc.
does NOT happen. We can't shop at cheaper gas station unless you
consider a few pennies different.

> How about taking the bus or walking? How about getting smaller cars or
> not buying thristy SUVs?


I agree and it will help. I live in rural America with no mass
transportation. I drive an efficient car.

> How about insulating your home and putting in water-saving water
> shower heads?


Things like this will help in a small way but it's still like a
Band-Aid after open heart surgery. How about allowing people to write
off the efficiencies to our home? We need to find an alternate sources
of energy and not nuclear. We have the technology but it needs to pushed
with grants, tax breaks, etc., so it can be accomplished quickly
without years of financial loss. As we both know the current
administration is doing little to nothing to remove the dependency. I'm
not a conspiracy nut but the collusion between big business and election
donations works. This is another issue which neither party wants to
solve.

> How about nuclear power?


NO, NO and NO! I could be smug and say as long as we can store the spent
rods in OPEC countries but this is one planet. I'm not willing to poison
the earth for this solution.

> And not going to war in Iraq?


We are on the same page with this! I think Dubya should be impeached for
lying out his ass for this blunder. At that level you don't point at the
other guy and say he told me so. And to keep the war going and our
troups safe we need more oil. More demand, bigger price. I'm sure this
is just a coincidence.

> Who votes for those cronies?


Good point and I think Carl Rove(Bush's campaign advisor) should get a
medal and Carey and the Democatic party should get the booby prize. How
the Democratic party's process could conclude with Carey as they savior
is beyond me. Bush was bent over the barrel with his pants down and the
Dems decided to play pick-up-sticks. Bush ran on a fake fear factor and
most people were duped. We are now in a financial abyss and more hated
then ever before. I'm just amazed that we can find the money to put the
country in a financial hole with this war but it was not available for
health care, education.


>> Show me the incentives the Government provided so we would have
>> alternate fuel for our cars. Nope we build more Suva's call them
>> trucks and suck the pumps dry to feed these same greedy bastards.

>
> We do. That is the key. We made this. And now we depend on other
> countries for oil. Guess what? We have lie in it.


There was a plan to increase the efficiency of cars but we allowed SUV's
to be exempted. Only now with gas prices rising so high that people are
looking into the hybrids. Let's add $5,000 to the cost of a SUV to go
to alternate energy solutions. Let those gas guzzlers fork the tab and
paint a scarlet gas pump on the car.


> I can see the forest for the trees. Who did the Americans elect for
> their vice president? The guy who wouldn't even tell us who his energy
> advisers are. And who is the dimwit who we elected for President? The
> guy with an Harvard MBA who couldn't even make money in the oil
> business in Texas.


Ain't this the truth. By the way Cheney, really runs the show, Bush is a
figurehead who is given a windmill to tilt at and keep busy. He is not
bright enough to run a ***** house with bevy of beautiful
nymphomaniacs.


> It is not the oil companies that put the umbrella up our butts. We
> pushed the umbrella up ourselves.


I agree, and the price of the lubricant is growing exponentially. The
only place we seem to disagree is fact that we get screwed at the pump
with premature, unfair price increases.

-DF
 
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Mark Probert wrote:
> > "PeterB" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > TC wrote:
> > > > Mark Probert wrote:
> > > > > "Doug Freese" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "TC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > > > Of course, no one has had the gall to suggest that they
> > > actually
> > > > > > > provide adequate funding for the schools so that they are

> less
> > > > > > > dependent on funds from the sale of the sugar-water.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What? We are on the same page, amazing. Bingo. Dubya and the

> rest
> > > > of the
> > > > > > big business cronies are not doing jack **** with education,
> > > > health
> > > > > > care just to name a few trivial issues. Getting Activist

> judges
> > > > > > appointed and Social Security seem to be the only issues they
> > > want
> > > > > > tackle. The rest of the cabinet members seem to be sleeping.

> Oh
> > > > wait we
> > > > > > have the unfunded "no child left behind' program.
> > > > >
> > > > > It is unfunded because they needed the money to fund the No
> > > > Millionaire Left
> > > > > Behind Program.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yup this real winner.
> > > > > > In Texas they showed great improvement by leaving students

> behind
> > > > so
> > > > > > they could not take the test and counting students that quit
> > > using
> > > > some
> > > > > > bizarre new math. Then we made that slick dude Secretary of
> > > > Education.
> > > > > > When third world countries have better schools then us we may
> > > wake
> > > > up.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > But this is a step in the right direction.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Now, these people need to understand that the gatorade-type
> > > > drinks and
> > > > > > > many supposed "fruit" juices are sugar-bombs in disguise.

> Some
> > > > are
> > > > > > > worse than soda.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > They equally suck but this is the compromise they need to

> make
> > > with
> > > > big
> > > > > > business and unfortunately still fund schools.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -DF
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Don't forget about the No Oil-Tycoon Left Behind program.
> > > >
> > > > TC
> > >
> > > Or the no-drug-left-behind program of FDA.

> >
> > That is one of the imaginary programs.

>
> Vioxx is imaginary? Wow, this really is the Matrix.


No, it is RealLife, where the FDA does not rubber stamp 100% of every
pharmaceutical application.
 
"OmManiPadmeOmelet" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Mark Probert" <Mark [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > It is unfunded because they needed the money to fund the No Millionaire

Left
> > Behind Program.
> >

>
> Damn.
> And I thought _I_ was cynical!


Nah....you have to truly understand GWB like I do to reach the same level of
cynicism.

> <lol>
>
> This would make a good sig. line!


If you decide to use it, I will waive my customary fee for full attribution.
 
"Doug Freese" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>> I am a Democrat. But I also realize that realize that businesses are in
>> business to make money. Their real masters are the stock brokers (and in
>> the case of the automakers and old airlines, their retirees).

>
> Actually the list goes on but I was simply picking on oil because it is so
> obvious. Look at Enron and their retirement. At least the airlines get ten
> cents on a dollar.
>
>> Oil is selling for around $50 per barrel. That is around $1/gallon of
>> crude. Gas sells for around twice that. That price includes refining,
>> taxes, transportation, profit for the gas station, labor, etc. That seems
>> like a fair price to me.

>
> I understand we can't do much about the price of a barrel. OPEC has us by
> the balls and the administration is mothered by Cheney and company. My
> point was they raise the price at the pump before the barrel is out of the
> ground. It used to be the price of gas at the pump was adjusted when the
> truck was delivered. It included the cost of the barrel, profit, etc. Now
> the price goes up on Monday, Wednesday and Friday and no delivery. The
> corollary, when the price of the oil drops, does the price go immediately
> down? I think we know the answer. The only real factor that causes the
> price to drop is when the sales go down. Ever notice when we have long
> holiday's where people tend to drive, the prices go up. This is another
> greedy ploy and accept the flogging.


It is called the law of supply and demand. That is the way a free market
works. If you don't like it, you don't have to drive.

> What's truly sad is all the oil companies play the game and trying to
> under sell each other as we do in most retailing of food, clothes, etc.
> does NOT happen. We can't shop at cheaper gas station unless you consider
> a few pennies different.


Again, that is part of the free market system.

>> How about taking the bus or walking? How about getting smaller cars or
>> not buying thristy SUVs?

>
> I agree and it will help. I live in rural America with no mass
> transportation. I drive an efficient car.
>
>> How about insulating your home and putting in water-saving water shower
>> heads?

>
> Things like this will help in a small way but it's still like a Band-Aid
> after open heart surgery. How about allowing people to write off the
> efficiencies to our home? We need to find an alternate sources of energy
> and not nuclear. We have the technology but it needs to pushed with
> grants, tax breaks, etc., so it can be accomplished quickly without years
> of financial loss. As we both know the current administration is doing
> little to nothing to remove the dependency. I'm not a conspiracy nut but
> the collusion between big business and election donations works. This is
> another issue which neither party wants to solve.


That's because the public is not going to do what is needed to solve it.

>> How about nuclear power?

>
> NO, NO and NO! I could be smug and say as long as we can store the spent
> rods in OPEC countries but this is one planet. I'm not willing to poison
> the earth for this solution.


I agree that the disposal is a problem. We do need to do something about
that.

>> And not going to war in Iraq?

>
> We are on the same page with this! I think Dubya should be impeached for
> lying out his ass for this blunder. At that level you don't point at the
> other guy and say he told me so. And to keep the war going and our troups
> safe we need more oil. More demand, bigger price. I'm sure this is just a
> coincidence.
>
>> Who votes for those cronies?

>
> Good point and I think Carl Rove(Bush's campaign advisor) should get a
> medal and Carey and the Democatic party should get the booby prize. How
> the Democratic party's process could conclude with Carey as they savior is
> beyond me. Bush was bent over the barrel with his pants down and the Dems
> decided to play pick-up-sticks. Bush ran on a fake fear factor and most
> people were duped. We are now in a financial abyss and more hated then
> ever before. I'm just amazed that we can find the money to put the country
> in a financial hole with this war but it was not available for health
> care, education.
>
>
>>> Show me the incentives the Government provided so we would have
>>> alternate fuel for our cars. Nope we build more Suva's call them trucks
>>> and suck the pumps dry to feed these same greedy bastards.

>>
>> We do. That is the key. We made this. And now we depend on other
>> countries for oil. Guess what? We have lie in it.

>
> There was a plan to increase the efficiency of cars but we allowed SUV's
> to be exempted. Only now with gas prices rising so high that people are
> looking into the hybrids. Let's add $5,000 to the cost of a SUV to go to
> alternate energy solutions. Let those gas guzzlers fork the tab and paint
> a scarlet gas pump on the car.
>
>
>> I can see the forest for the trees. Who did the Americans elect for their
>> vice president? The guy who wouldn't even tell us who his energy advisers
>> are. And who is the dimwit who we elected for President? The guy with an
>> Harvard MBA who couldn't even make money in the oil business in Texas.

>
> Ain't this the truth. By the way Cheney, really runs the show, Bush is a
> figurehead who is given a windmill to tilt at and keep busy. He is not
> bright enough to run a ***** house with bevy of beautiful nymphomaniacs.


I disagree. Bush is very bright. He is an excellent politician. Not a good
manager or good with the economy, however.

>> It is not the oil companies that put the umbrella up our butts. We pushed
>> the umbrella up ourselves.

>
> I agree, and the price of the lubricant is growing exponentially. The only
> place we seem to disagree is fact that we get screwed at the pump with
> premature, unfair price increases.


No, that is just the market system. The same thing happens with milk at the
grocery store. Actually, while it seems unfair, if it were not for this
level of competition, I think the price of gas would be higher. Look at how
competition has lowered the cost of internet access. It used to be like
$100/month for DSL. Now it is $30/month for DSL/cable. And <$10 for dialup
access.


Jeff

> -DF
>