Democrats & Liberals Archives

Something smells wrong: Pump Prices to Drop

According to published reports (and i heard this on the radio this morning too), gas prices are expected to drop dramatically by the end of the year; possibly as much as $.75 lower by Labor Day.

Holy Oil-Profits Batman, what earth-shattering news brought this on?

Did we find a new treasure trove of alternative fuels?

Did we make nice in the Middle East and promise not to invade anymore sovereign countries, in exchange for $40 barrel oil?

Or did Jed Clampet discover a bigger oil field than the Ar Rumaylah while huntin' for some varmints?

My guess and I realize that I’m cynical, there’s got to be some political thing happening here. Not that I should never look a gift-horse in the proverbial mouth, but I’m also smart enough to realize that any sudden drop in oil/gas prices this close to mid-term elections is a nothing more than an election-year sham designed to exploit the most prevalent issue on the minds of Americans today: the cost of fuel.

Since the cost of fuel has increased cost for every American in every facet of their daily lives. Fuel cost is the most critical issue that we face today. Food costs have skyrocketed. Fuel surcharges are a common site and businesses are altering their businesses to adapt to the upsurge of fuel charges. Oil companies are the exception, of course; they’re making record profits. But normal Americans are paying more for everything from food to furniture to sheet rock because of fuel prices, not to mention every time that they fill up the hummer.

Even though this article is written by an oil industry pundit, it smells of a political sham. Because from this administration, with all of its media manipulation and planted stories from supposed journalists, it’s become intuitively obvious that this story has political roots.

For the pattern is clear: plant ridiculous stories about $.75 drops in pump prices now. Continue to pound the media with these stories about a $.75 drop until around July and let the story set in. Then, when the usual late-summer $.10 drop happens, certain politicians will claim that their hard work helped pump prices drop. And by then, Americans will be conditioned to believe that actual $.10 drop in pump prices will feel like $.75.

This administration did it with the buildup of the Iraq war; they did it with the NCLB act; they even did it with the Plame case.

Let’s not forget in November, when the pump prices are arguably lower than today that the games and shenanigans that the politicians are playing now with pump prices and protecting big business will not work any longer.

Let’s vote them all out.

Posted by john trevisani at May 10, 2006 10:57 AM
Comments
Comment #146829

John,

We’re still paying over $3 a gallon here in Phoenix.

Posted by: Rocky at May 10, 2006 11:19 AM
Comment #146834

Only caring about the people when you need their vote has been the standard MO for ALL politicians for a loooong time.
It will be 80% wallet that decides the next election and the parties are starting to play towards that.
We are a lazy people.

Posted by: kctim at May 10, 2006 11:36 AM
Comment #146841

How about a total commitment to all things that are askew as is the gasoline cost and vote out all irresponsible incumbent politicians who contribute to that situation.

voidnow.org is working dilligently to that end.

Posted by: steve smith at May 10, 2006 11:47 AM
Comment #146846

It’s sometimes difficult to follow the reasoning in some of these posts. Every day I read of the President’s incompetence and how stupid he is and then I read above how this same President fooled most of the country in our Iraq adventure, NCLB act and the Plame case.
Now, the President and administration is being billed as greedy and in bed with the oil industry yet capable of the brilliance needed to bring gas prices down by 75 cents a gallon.
Which is it? Does anyone really believe that this President is so powerful that he can control world crude oil prices? That spigots turn on and off on His whim? Many of the writers on this post are extremely well-informed and very intelligent…except when they write about President Bush. Then, common sense fails, reality and laws of economics are ignored in favor of hunches, vile accusations and just plain foolishness. Jim

Posted by: Jim Martin at May 10, 2006 11:55 AM
Comment #146864

Jim,

Well stated…but will be refuted and reviled…

Posted by: cliff at May 10, 2006 12:31 PM
Comment #146872
Let’s vote them all out.

And that goes for BOTH parties.
Fuel prices are going down because the cost of crude is going down. If crude takes another jump in price expect gas prices to do the same. Regardless of what month it is.
This has nothing to do with politics but the market. But then I reckon yaall think that a President can control the market.
I’m not going to defend the oil companies as to how high the price of gas went. I believe they did some price gouging there myself.
Gas here is currently going for $2.789/gal. In the last week it’s dropped 10 cents. While this isn’t as fast as it went up. It’s the fastest I’ve seen it drop in a long time.

Posted by: Ron Brown at May 10, 2006 12:46 PM
Comment #146881

The price of gasoline is subject to supply and demand. Many people anticipated the usual greater demand for the driving season. It did not materialize because of higher prices. So prices drop.

Liberals think people are stupid. That is the only explanation I can find for the posts we see here all the time. As Jim says (and he is right), they think the president can trick people all the time. And this post proports that not only can the president secretly manipluate the media, but people won’t be able to count well enough to figure out if they saved money at the pump.

As I wrote on my side, I don’t want the price to drop, but I think it will. Too bad.

Posted by: Jack at May 10, 2006 1:03 PM
Comment #146887

Ron, were still waiting for lower prices in riverside, today gas still is $3.39, $3.49,$ 3.59 . the government has taken in quite a lot of extra tax revenue these past three months.! the public is pissed so let’s back it off a little.

Posted by: RODNEY BROWN at May 10, 2006 1:15 PM
Comment #146890

I agree that a price drop is bad news. Did I just agree with a Repub? Someone call me a doctor…

The only thing that will ever motivate this nation to get off of gas and onto a better energy source is money, so I’m keeping my fingers crossed for $4/gal. Then, the carpools become necessities, public transportation a necessity, less SUVs and other wasteful vehicles, real advance in alternative fuels (NOT E-85!), and a real opportunity to make a change that has long term economic, environmental, and political benefits.

Posted by: David S at May 10, 2006 1:17 PM
Comment #146892

John,

(a) Sounds like 1984 and Chocolate rations.

(b) Maybe it has to do with this correlation?

Jack,

Liberals think people are stupid. Posted by Jack at May 10, 2006 01:03 PM ,

Actually, one might say as of 4/18/06 about 36% of people are stupid and 61% are not.

Ron,

Gas tax is a fixed dollar amount per gallon and is not percetage related. Gas Tax revenues will decrease as does usage.

Posted by: Dave at May 10, 2006 1:20 PM
Comment #146896

Jim Martin:
Fair enough. Constructive criticism taken. My posting is too obtuse.

The point of the posting isn’t that the price fluctuates up or down. i understand supply and demand. i understand market fluctuations. The point is the timing of everything.

i’m not a fortune teller. Yet Tom Kloza, the supposed expert in the article, is claiming that pump prices will plummet by $.75 by labor day. Why isn’t anyone challenging this guy instead of regurgitating his words for public consumption? Why? Well i believe it plays into the message that the administration wants stated: that they are doing everything in their power to reduce the prices at the pump. It’s the media that puts this propaganda like this out; i believe the administration is behind it.

It has nothing to do with macroeconomics. It has to do with media manipulation and the exploitation of American citizen’s suffering.

Posted by: john trevisani at May 10, 2006 1:29 PM
Comment #146897

John:

So let me get this straight.

1. If the price of gas goes up, it’s Bush’s fault.

2. If the price of gas goes down, it’s Bush’s fault.

Actually, supply has been outpacing our use for a while. We are “stockpiling” oil because with futures trading the way it is, it makes sense to hold on to the fuel, or crude to use it later.
In an up market it makes sense to hold the oil and sell later, until there is no place left to put the oil. We must be getting there.

The other issue is Iran. It doesn’t matter if there is no place left on earth to store the oil. Fear can drive the price of oil up still further.

A final issue is Exchange traded funds. Now you to can own oil directly through exchange traded funds that mandate that when you purchace a share, the fund is required to actually purchase an store the oil.

Estimates I have read say that there is over $20.00/barrel built into this market by speculators who have no intention of owning the oil full time. They are rich folks just trying to make an honest living out of speculating on oil. To use Texas jargen, they are “All hat and no cattle”.

Someday that “bubble” will pop, and oil should settle down to supply and demand figures which is about $45.00/barrel.

Bush and his policies have an indirect relationship to oil, but not the one liberals hope fore. It is not because Bush is in bed with big oil. It is because his policies are messing with the middle east and causing fear. The oil pricing is due to fear of war in the middle east. (As well as some interesting fold in the rest of the world.

All does not rest on the election cycle.

Craig

Posted by: Craig Holmes at May 10, 2006 1:30 PM
Comment #146912

“Does anyone really believe that this President is so powerful that he can control world crude oil prices? “

Your completely missing the point.
No, bush is barely smart enough to feed himself. As with his entire presidency, he’s merely the puppet in this game. The behind the scenes orchestrators will be the ones planning this strategy, not the chimp-in-cheif.
We dont think bush thinks up all this stuff. Thus the term “Bushco” to describe the machine behind the man.
“bush” reads speaches….badly.
“Bushco” orchestrates strategy and plans shenanigans.

Posted by: norby at May 10, 2006 2:14 PM
Comment #146913

“The price of gasoline is subject to supply and demand.”

Your kidding, right jack????

“Liberals think people are stupid.”

Were rarely wrong.

Posted by: norby at May 10, 2006 2:16 PM
Comment #146915

Craig:
Please see my post to Jim. That should clarify the meaning of the post. It’s not as much about oil prices as it is about media manipulation and exploitation.

Posted by: john trevisani at May 10, 2006 2:21 PM
Comment #146933

Insert Bush holding hands with Saud here >

Posted by: Justin Anderson at May 10, 2006 2:53 PM
Comment #146935

OK — if gas prices really are determined by supply and demand, and if we’re all simply paying “fair market prices” at the pump, then can somebody explain to me the BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars that Exxon Mobil is paying to its top executives?

The fact is that greed and gouging DO have A LOT to do with gas prices!

And ask yourself this : WHO gets the majority of the political contributions from these executives?

REPUBLICANS, that’s who —- especially those who kiss the lard-packed posteriors of oil execs. And chief among these hypocrites is George Bush, who has the dirtiest lips of them all (except Dick Cheyney, maybe)

In fact, liberals DO understand about supply and demand. Unfortunately, the truth is in short supply and in even less demand — especially by Republicans.

Posted by: PatiencePie at May 10, 2006 2:54 PM
Comment #146942

Pie,

Bush doesn’t kiss Big Oils’ asses, he’s one of THEM

Posted by: Dave at May 10, 2006 3:12 PM
Comment #146950

Jack

Yes, gasoline prices are subject to supply and demand laws, but the supply is very easily manipulated because it is in the hands of an oligarchy and that oligarchy has its hands on the wheel of the US government.

And, yes, you’re right, I’m liberal, so I’m one of those stupid people. I just don’t see the connection between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden (who?). I think the purpose of the economy goes beyond making the rich richer. And I believe that we need to use the machinery of government to ensure the safety and health of everyone, to the extent humanly possible. Poor, pathetic human being. If I could only grasp the beauty of the invisible hand of the marketplace and how it makes everything perfect and good. Oh, that sounds a little like a religion, doesn’t it? Sorry, I’ll try to be more rational, like a good conservative.

Posted by: Mental Wimp at May 10, 2006 3:29 PM
Comment #146967

Sorry, folks. But Jack is right. The simple fact is that Labor Day spells the end of the summer driving season and therefore the end to peak demand for gasoline, which in turn will lower increase supply and lower pump costs, all other factors held constant. There is no political factor involved in this simple supply/demand equation.

Now if prices don’t drop, something will very likely be amiss.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 10, 2006 4:27 PM
Comment #146977

See its funny that conservatives like to just point to the market and then try to use the “The President is just one man” excuse to justify why the gas problems is not his fault.

…of course it is his fault.

He has created an environment where companies like those in the oil industry have very little or no legal oversight. Mental Wimp is right, the oil industry is controlled by an oligarchy. If congress had the balls to actually investigate the people who pad their wallets, I’d bet you’d see evidence of severe price gouging. How else do you explain the RECORD profits the oil industries have racked in? US demand on oil has not gone up at a rate which correctly coorelates with industry profits, so that cant be the case. If the prices going up were strictly related to increased worldwide demand (meaning increased crude oil prices) the oil companies’ profits would also stay static.

There is no such thing as supply and demand when an elite group owns all the energy needed to drive our vehicles. You want real change? Alternative fuel sources is the key. Just look at what Brazil has done with creating cars that can use various fuel sources.

Its not a matter that Bush pushes a button and gas prices go up and down. But rich higher ups at the oil companies want Republicans in office. They pass tax cuts that by and large benefit the rich. They allow special interests to write their own policies. They are big business shills interested only in their own pocket books and not the American people they are supposed to represent. So the oil companies will do just about anything in their power (which is considerable) to ensure that their shills stay in office; including manipulating oil prices.

Can we really trust a group that so blatently diobeys the law. Forget the old argument that Bush lied us into Iraq. Just read the news, it seems like every week that a Republican is getting in trouble for doing something illegal. How about “Hooker-gate?” What about Rove and his ties to the Libby leak? How about Rush? When will people wake up and see that having absolute power has absolutely corrupted the Republican party.

And Where is the media on this? Thats right, the media is just as corporatized as the government. Its too bad we cant vote our talking heads on and off the TV like we can the contestents of American Idol.

Its scary times people. I agree with Steve Smith, the government has stopped working. It’s time for a new one. Voting in new people may be our only chance to get back on a positive track towards making this country what it was and should be. I’m tired of feeling like the country has been hijacked by big business and being sucked dry by the “inivisible hand.”

Posted by: Nick at May 10, 2006 4:59 PM
Comment #146981

Norby

I think the proper use of the term is puppet of OCCULT forces.

Mental

I didn’t say liberals were stupid. I said liberals think the people are stupid or at least easily tricked by President Bush, despite all the liberal warnings. To believe they could be tricked based on the premise of this post, you would have to stipulate that they could not count beyond ten or at least could not draw any conclusions from the counting.

Posted by: Jack at May 10, 2006 5:06 PM
Comment #146985

Could it be true that speculators have driven the price of oil up possibly as much as $20 per barrel. Is this what you mean by supply and demand Jack.

The whole world, especially the U.S. and China, are using more and more oil. That is supply and demand.

The Iranians are getting ready to build nuclear weapons and could cause grave problems in the future. Thats speculation.

There is a war going on in Iraq. Iraq oil is dripping one drop at a time out of a broken pipe that could have been repaired and protected two years ago. That is manipulation.

Many believe that Iraq has been turned into a debacle because of the Bush administration is totally inept. I am not so sure. It is possible that they know exactly what they are doing.

Is it possible for a president to manipulate the markets? You bet he can.

Which is it that we are to believe? All of the problems that are driving the price of oil up will disappear this summer and the price will dramatically fall.
Or could it possibly be that the oil companies and the speculators know which politicians are buttering their bread, and are more than willing to help them out this fall if at all possible.

Posted by: jlw at May 10, 2006 5:16 PM
Comment #146987

Intepid reporter Justin has uncovered secret meetings somewhere in Wyoming.


Bush pronounces: “I can’t quit ya, Ab.”

Posted by: gergle at May 10, 2006 5:35 PM
Comment #146993

“See its funny that conservatives like to just point to the market and then try to use the “The President is just one man” excuse to justify why the gas problems is not his fault”

Wow, Remer is now a conservative. Who’d have thunk that.

“You want real change? Alternative fuel sources is the key”

But yet Jack, you know, one of the guys bringing up supply and demand, promotes alt fuels. How can a Republican, who favors big oil, also be for alt fuels?

“They pass tax cuts that by and large benefit the rich”

Hooray, I’m now rich. Please tell my banker.

“Can we really trust a group that so blatently diobeys the law”

You forgot to mention the Republican who was just busted lying about taking drugs and being drunk and hitting a barricade. Damn Conservatives!

“And Where is the media on this?”

In bed with that evil Republican Hillary?

“I’m tired of feeling like the country has been hijacked by big business and being sucked dry by the “inivisible hand.””

Then quit blaming one side and see the big picture.

Posted by: kctim at May 10, 2006 5:57 PM
Comment #146997

David:

Sorry, folks. But Jack is right. The simple fact is that Labor Day spells the end of the summer driving season and therefore the end to peak demand for gasoline, which in turn will lower increase supply and lower pump costs, all other factors held constant. There is no political factor involved in this simple supply/demand equation.

Now if prices don’t drop, something will very likely be amiss.

Even if Jack is right, it’s still Bush’s fault.

Craig

Posted by: Craig Holmes at May 10, 2006 6:13 PM
Comment #147005

Nick:

If congress had the balls to actually investigate the people who pad their wallets, I’d bet you’d see evidence of severe price gouging. How else do you explain the RECORD profits the oil industries have racked in? US demand on oil has not gone up at a rate which correctly coorelates with industry profits, so that cant be the case. If the prices going up were strictly related to increased worldwide demand (meaning increased crude oil prices) the oil companies’ profits would also stay static.

http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/mi01_stupak/042806PUMPIntroduction.html

Speculators on the futures market are driving up the market. They have no ties to the oil industry. They are just honest rich folks trying to make a buck at your expense because they can.

Craig


Posted by: Craig Holmes at May 10, 2006 6:28 PM
Comment #147006

Nick,

Use your head…
If you got everything you wanted in your post:

Take away all profits of major oil = .09/gallon
Fire all overpaid execs = .02/gallon

There’s your answer… 11 cents a gallon…
Makes perfect cents to me, Nick…you’re right…

I suppose you are right, getting rid of all Republicans would reduce gas prices to a $1.50 gallon…

Posted by: Cliff at May 10, 2006 6:31 PM
Comment #147010

“I said liberals think the people are stupid or at least easily tricked by President Bush, despite all the liberal warnings.”

If we took away easy, innacurate stereotypes, would you guys have ANYTHING to post?

Posted by: norby at May 10, 2006 6:38 PM
Comment #147015

ktim-
Well, thanks for misunderstand and misrepresenting my words….Let me clear a few things up for you:

Wow, Remer is now a conservative. Who’d have thunk that.

I was writing my post while Remer posted his, hence I didn’t read his post…I agree that part of the price increase is increased demand. I’m not saying that if you vote Bush out of office that gas will drop back to $1. I am, however, saying that global demand does not IN AND OF ITSELF account for a 300%+ increase in gas prices over the past 6 years.

But yet Jack, you know, one of the guys bringing up supply and demand, promotes alt fuels. How can a Republican, who favors big oil, also be for alt fuels?
Ok I’ll narrow the people I’m blaming here: neo-cons. Not Republicans, not good old traditional conservatives. I’m blaming big business, big government, trickle-down economics, moral rights heralding neo-cons like the regime in office and the people like Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, etc. Republicans, in and of themselves, are not bad people and many of them have good ideas and DO care about getting us out of our energy problems (and maybe doing a little something to help the environment at the same time).
Hooray, I’m now rich. Please tell my banker.
OMG, thick much? BUSH’S TAX CUTS BENEFIT THE TOP 1%. Were you top 1% before? If not, then you didn’t REALLY get help. What makes you think I was saying “Republicans are the only ones who benefit from tax cuts”, because that is NOT what I’m saying. Its the simple math of trickle down econ. The rich get more money in the banal hope that they will spend more, hence stimulating the economy. The problem is that doesn’t happen. They became rich because they were good at SAVING their money and making it work towards creating more money for themselves, not spending it.
You forgot to mention the Republican who was just busted lying about taking drugs and being drunk and hitting a barricade. Damn Conservatives!
What does Kennedy’s son have to do with anything? I’m talking about people turning themselves in for illegalities against the American people. For example, Abramov. Everyday Republicans (not Democrats) are turning themselves in for doing all types of illegal things. If you do a little hunting its in the news (burried deep, unfortunately).
In bed with that evil Republican Hillary?
I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again: The news media doesn’t have a political bias. They don’t have a liberal bias, nor a conservative one (except Fox News, who are just blatent liars). The News media has a sensationalism bias. Its not about reporting the news anymore, its about reporting sensationalism, i.e. “If it bleeds, it leads”. Even though this stuff is juicy, its not as big as kids getting kidnapped, or deadly toxins POSSIBLY being in food, or uncovering something that people take for granted as being possibly harmful. The idea is similar to what the Bush Administration does: Get people scared. The news knows that if they scare you and tell you that only they can tell you what you need to know to stay safe, then you’ll watch. Its a pretty easy tactic, people’s #1 priority in life is SAFETY, so make them feel unsafe, tell them you can protect them, and they’ll believe anything you say.
Then quit blaming one side and see the big picture.
Reread my last paragraph…I’m not taking one side or the other…..THE GOVERNMENT IS BROKEN…that’s not a one side or other statement…I think all incumbents need to go. Posted by: Nick at May 10, 2006 6:50 PM
Comment #147024

I have evidence that Jack is actually anti-Bush.

I was reading William F. Buckley’s column and he refered to this graphic.


Jack advocates higher gas prices and thereby (at least according to Buckley) the impeachment of George Bush.

I’m glad Jack sees the light.

Posted by: gergle at May 10, 2006 7:19 PM
Comment #147025

Speaking of oil and gas costs. I just learned that the tax cut bill in the House will give the wealthy a tax credit equal to the amount of a brand new Lexus every year. My family will get under $400.

I say keep my $400 and take back all them Lexus’s and PAY DOWN THE DAMN DEFICITS !!!!

Republicans just raised the debt ceiling limit in March. Word is out now they are going to ask for another one within the week. I never considered Democrats fiscally disciplined before, but, Republicans are making Democrats look like MONKS, now!

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 10, 2006 7:19 PM
Comment #147045

John Trevisani,

Let’s form a protest on the D.C. mall, ofcourse I’m gonna’ need you to kick in on the gas though.

David Remer,
Clinton’s fiscal responsibility platform doesn’t ring any bells? 1995-2000 were pretty good “monk” years for the left. And the wealthy are pretty much FICA-free if you count in the loopholes and write-offs.

GERGLE,
Jack is about as anti-Bush as The Kennedy’s are anti-booze. I read that post and he’s just finding a new and absurdist angle by which to defend the leader of his party. the whole Republican party is split and calling Bush a liberal when we sure as sh*t don’t want him or his illegal alien amnesty BS that serves the large corporations. THat BTW, would get in alot of trouble should the dems regain the 2 houses and the oval office. WE don’t stand for illegals and never did, even if they do vote democratic. Bush has a libertarian right-wing agenda that is what that is. It’s the John Stossel influence not the left—that’s the argument I hear that’s pissing me off. I knew it would all somehow be our fault. Nice use of the pics BTW.

Nick,

CNN and MSNBC do have a corporate right-wing bias as they don’t want to lose viewership so they straddle the fence and offend all sides. ABC is just corporate product, CBS is great but it’s impartiality gets misconstrued as leftism. I wish USA Today would go into the cable news business, CNN is spoonfed and makes idiot excuses for this president, while at the same time knock him down to prove that it is the news source of the people—which it is not. Who trusts CNN anymore? Who can?

CRAIG,
And those honest rich folk are all monetarily supporting Bush as The Bush family is very much one of those honest rich folks themselves reorganizing the playing field so they can make a buck with a very corrupt richboy congress.

JACK,
Then why are you still supporting Bush? Because we were right and you hate that fact and refuse to concede an inch. Admit it damn it!!!! Admit it!!!

Posted by: Novenge at May 10, 2006 8:40 PM
Comment #147048

Remer is a conservative? How come no one told me I was being demoted? Where’s the ACLU when you need them? Never mind, got their card in my wallet, I will give them a call.

I am at least thankful I wasn’t demoted to liberal as well. That might have created identity and psychological problems too overwhelming to contemplate.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 10, 2006 8:49 PM
Comment #147058

Norby

Yes. If you guys stopped posting such things, I would not have anything to respond to.

Gergle et al

I have advocated higher gas prices my entire adult life - before Bush was president and after he is gone, now and forever. Cheap gas is responsible for exacerbating many of our problems including but not limited to:

Juvenile delinquency
Urban degeneration
Obesity
Sprawl
Middle East crisis
Air pollution
CO2

I am delighted by the high prices. My only regret is that they will come down.

Posted by: Jack at May 10, 2006 9:15 PM
Comment #147061

It is time for all of them to go.
Neither side in this whole thing has shown one bit of resposibility.
The republicans are spend, spend, spend.
The democrats could filibuster but chose to attach thier own pork.
The President lost his veto pen ( although I have heard a rumor that Bill took it with him when he left).

Whatever your reason, try to find it in you to get rid of the whole lot in Nov.

Posted by: Ted at May 10, 2006 9:18 PM
Comment #147087

Novenge

CRAIG, And those honest rich folk are all monetarily supporting Bush as The Bush family is very much one of those honest rich folks themselves reorganizing the playing field so they can make a buck with a very corrupt richboy congress.

Obviosly you have never been to a national democratic convention have you. It’s pretty sad, but both parties are in it up to their eyeballs.

So much for the pary of Truman.

Craig

Posted by: Craig Holmes at May 10, 2006 10:24 PM
Comment #147108
The price of gasoline is subject to supply and demand.

Yes and no. You can make the same argument about energy, but we in California know how energy markets can be manipulated by the unscrupulous.

For years, Senator Boxer has been trying to get Bush’s FTC to find out why, when prices go up 3% everywhere else, they go up 19% in California. They refuse to look into it.

And even a casual glance at oil prices shows that the connection between gasoline prices and the market are tenuous at best. For example, the gasoline we’re getting at the pumps right now was distilled from oil purchased many months ago.

There’s no market-based reason for gasoline prices to go up when the price of oil goes up. Especially not if — as Jack contends — oil is a limitless resource that flows into our country in ever increasing amounts.

As for political manipulation, does anyone doubt that an administration that Tom Ridge admitted manipulated the terror alert system to win an election wouldn’t manipulate gas prices? Bet on it.

But, I don’t think it’s going to impress anyone. The public is coming to understand that oil is bad, and lack of a Republican energy plan means the Republican Party is ineffective at solving the root cause of high energy costs and American bondage to foreign oil.

Posted by: American Pundit at May 10, 2006 11:02 PM
Comment #147121

Man, this is a tough crowd.

I sometimes post absurdist statements as political comentary. Lighten up guys. It’s a joke. Buckley meant it as a joke and so did I. Jeesh!!

I thought the correlation was interesting though.

Posted by: gergle at May 10, 2006 11:50 PM
Comment #147128

Ron,

Gas tax is a fixed dollar amount per gallon and is not percetage related. Gas Tax revenues will decrease as does usage.

Posted by: Dave at May 10, 2006 01:20 PM

I think you meant this for Rodney, but I’ll reply anyway.
Your right that tax on gas is a fixed rate. The government bodies that tax gas only get more money if they raise the tax or if folks buy more. It’s not based on the dollar amount sold but on the gallons sold.
So if folks are driving less because of the high prices, the government is getting less money. Makes you wonder why they aint raising hell about the high prices don’t it?
Right now in Georgia it’s around $.64/gal, give or take a few cents depending on the county and/or city. Which means that the governments, federal, state, and local get .$64 of the $2.689/gal it’s currently going for around here. The retailer gets $.03/gal regardless of the price at the pump. That leaves $2.019/gal that the oil companies are getting.
BTW, the retailer has to pay the trucking company that delivers the gas out of that $.03. Which cuts his profit to about $.005 to $.01 depending on what the company that delivers charges. And the oil companies just send it out on the next available truck. They don’t worry about the cost as they don’t pay it.

Posted by: Ron Brown at May 11, 2006 12:28 AM
Comment #147161

AP

Prices are forward looking. It doesn’t matter what you paid for the last barrel. It matters what you think you will have to pay for the next. With all due respect, a big problem for left leaning theories is they cannot seem to handle the dynamism in any market system.

Re oil - the supply is limitless, but it depends on the price. We may have run out of $40/barrel oil. We currently have an adequate supply of $70/barrel oil and we have even more at $100. Dynamism again, is hard to understand in the context of leftist methods of thinking that were developed for the 19th century machine age.

Posted by: Jack at May 11, 2006 8:53 AM
Comment #147172

“Well, thanks for misunderstand and misrepresenting my words….Let me clear a few things up for you:”

Please do.

“I was writing my post while Remer posted his”

Ah, ok.

“Ok I’ll narrow the people I’m blaming here: neo-cons. Not Republicans”

I see. I blame all of govt, but thanks for narrowing it done some.

“Were you top 1% before? If not, then you didn’t REALLY get help”

It has helped me and my family. Tax cuts for the rich is political tagline used by those wanting votes and who are envious.

“What does Kennedy’s son have to do with anything? I’m talking about people turning themselves in for illegalities against the American people”

You said: Just read the news, it seems like every week that a Republican is getting in trouble for doing something illegal. How about “Hooker-gate?” What about Rove and his ties to the Libby leak? How about Rush?

All of those are not crimes against the American people.

“I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again: The news media doesn’t have a political bias. They don’t have a liberal bias, nor a conservative one (except Fox News, who are just blatent liars)”

Dems and libs see FOX as biased.
Reps and Conservs see the rest of media as biased.
Why should the lefts view of bias be more valid than the view of the rights?
If you see it as bias, it is because you disagree with the message. You do not see it as bias when you do agree.

Posted by: kctim at May 11, 2006 9:22 AM
Comment #147270

Jack: With all due respect, I don’t think left leaning theories have a problem understanding the forces that motivate any market system.

I think that what most left leaning theorists have a problem understanding is why We The People have to accept a corrupt and immoral market system based on the actual premise that I have mine and I am going to get yours to because you are just a dumb lazy worker.

I think history will bear witness that any form of government or system of economics devised by men, if left to it’s own devices without checks and modifications by the citizens who are the subjects of that government and system will ultimately result in a consolidation of power which will lead to corruption and abuse.

Posted by: jlw at May 11, 2006 1:29 PM
Comment #147273

Ron, i understand fuel taxes are fixed, my point if the oil companies are making record profits, and if they make 8 cents a gallon on gas. then their selling a lot more gas than 3 years ago,i wish someone had a chart on fuel usage. more fuel used, more money to uncle sam.the price of gas will be a issue in the november election. do you think it will go up or down by then?

Posted by: RODNEY BROWN at May 11, 2006 1:40 PM
Comment #147275

jlw

No, you don’t understand the market. Your very statement shows that.

Many formulations of the market on the left still come from Marx, a creature of the 19th century, whose mechanistic views of economy were outdated before he wrote them. The market creates wealth. It requires the rule of law to work. Governments can redistribute to some extent, but they must do it in line with incentives to individuals who can choose among alternatives.

Posted by: Jack at May 11, 2006 1:49 PM
Comment #147294


Jack: Yes, I think I do understand the market.

Many formulations of the market on the right still come from Smith, a creature of the 18th century, whose capitalistic views of economy and his apparent lack of understanding of human nature were outdated before he wrote them. The market creates wealth and concentrates it supposedly into the hands of those who most deserve it. Yes, the market does require the rule of law. But, I am reminded of that old saying, the one our president knows so well, where there is a will there is a way. Yes, I agree that the government must provide incentives to individuals who can choose among alternatives. But, when those individuals decide that the maximizing of those incentives take precedence over the well-being of the working class, who also helped to create that wealth and with disdain for the environment and limited resources, then we must create a new pardigm for the future.

Posted by: jlw at May 11, 2006 2:40 PM
Comment #147361

jlw

I have read Marx. You never read Smith. Anyway, it is a fundamental misunderstanding among lefties that Smith is analogous to Marx. The other big misunderstanding is that there is such as thing as a class. We believe in individuals making choices.

Posted by: Jack at May 11, 2006 6:50 PM
Comment #147446

RODNEY
It’s any body’s guess.
There’s usually a $.10 to $.15 drop in prices shortly after labor day. I think they’ll be down some as they’re dropping right now. Of course that doesn’t mean they can’t jump back up again tomorrow.
If prices are down you can bet that the Republicans are going to take credit. If they’re up you can bet that the Democrats are going to Blame the Republicans.
Either way both will be full of BS.

Posted by: Ron Brown at May 11, 2006 11:33 PM
Comment #147463

Ron:

If prices are down you can bet that the Republicans are going to take credit. If they’re up you can bet that the Democrats are going to Blame the Republicans. Either way both will be full of BS.

I couldn’t agree more. I think there is too much credit/blame given for economics.

I do think the war in Iraq has caused higher fuel prices generally however.

Craig

Posted by: Craig Holmes at May 12, 2006 12:20 AM
Comment #147488

—And with a swipe of his regal hand Jack abolishes class.

Try telling this to a Rockefeller the next time your at the country club.

Posted by: gergle at May 12, 2006 1:36 AM
Comment #147519
Bush pronounces: “I can’t quit ya, Ab.”

gergle, you may have damaged my esophagus permanently from attempting to Breath, Drink, and Laugh at the same time.

All I know is that you owe me for an ounce or so of Inhaled Whisky, and a new Keyboard…

Posted by: Betty Burke at May 12, 2006 3:10 AM
Comment #147524

Thanks Betty and cheers! But you’ll have to get in line behind my other creditors.

Posted by: gergle at May 12, 2006 3:30 AM
Comment #147660

Gergle

Class in the persistent Marxist idea does not exist. If you take Marx’s class types, where do you belong? Is it the same one your father occupied? Do you feel you are in the same class now as when you were younger?

I my lifetime, I have occupied all but the highest income groups. Maybe some day I can get there too. My education attainment and tastes are very different from my father or my sister. If class is so easily changed by one person or in one generation, it has very little permanence and it makes little sense to talk about it except as a convenience. In other words, don’t take it seriously.

BTW - how would you define “working class” and what other classes do you think there are?

Posted by: Jack at May 12, 2006 1:53 PM
Comment #147716

In capitalism, it’s wealth that defines class. No I don’t mean that we have the Indian caste system, or that we fit the political theories of Marx. I don’t believe in Marxism.

Sadly many people in this country believe race has something to do with class. It used to and to some degree still does, but mostly it’s about wealth.

Working class to me means lower middle class, or sometimes even working poor class. Hmmm,I wonder why these terms exist in modern English?

Posted by: gergle at May 12, 2006 4:57 PM
Comment #147828

Gergle

So you define class by the ephemerial boundries of income? Not much of a concept if you can be in different classes each year.

Jay Gatsby was mistaken, I guess.

Not to give you a hard time, but a Ivy League professor (call him Charles Wiggham Winthrope) whose ancestors were also Ivy League professors for six generations is in a lower class than Tony Soprano, if big Tony makes more money from his garbage business than the professor gets from Harvard? But if the Feds raid Tony’s garage and impound his money, Professor Winthrope once again shoots ahead?

Posted by: Jack at May 13, 2006 12:50 AM
Comment #147846

Exactly Jack,

It’s completely phoney. People are people are people Whether they own a Learjet or eat from the dumpster.

Does it say something about their ability to cope in this society? yes.

Does it say something about their value as human beings or their moral character? no.

Classism is racism in another form. No one aspires to poverty, but some bring great benefit to many by their ingenuity and labor, some by their labor, some by manipulating the system causing distortions that hurt many people.

I don’t dislike wealth. I dislike the premise that wealth equates to superior moral fiber or superior value to society. Crooks are crooks, creeps are creeps whether they are drunks or just liars. Why do Rush Limbaugh and Patrick Kennedy get different justice than the bum on the corner?

That is classic classism.

Posted by: gergle at May 13, 2006 5:48 AM
Comment #148070

Good question, gergel. Jack, reply?

Posted by: ray at May 14, 2006 10:46 AM
Comment #148421

Gergle,

I’m confused do classes exist or do they not?

Posted by: Rob at May 15, 2006 7:39 PM
Post a comment