Gas prices rise for 33 days straight!

45 posts / 0 new

About 160 million people in our country feel the pain of smaller paychecks and rising costs, so they notice when gas prices tick up a few cents at the pump. Well, those prices have now gone up for 33 days straight. According to CNN, the average price for a gallon of regular unleaded gasoline has shot up 13% in about a month, which brings the national average to $3.73 per gallon.

The Energy Information Administration says the price of crude oil has gone up 10% in the last two months, and represents about two-thirds of the price per gallon. Speculation in the market, like anticipation of higher demand or fears about the looming sequester, also drives gas prices up. And more demand, and higher crude prices, just help Big Oil rake in more than ever – like the combined $120 billion dollars in profits the oil companies made in 2012 alone.

So, why are we still subsidizing big oil? It's time to make Big Oil pay for making billions off our commons. Not only should they pay for extracting our oil, on our land, but we should charge them for the external costs of fossil fuels – like pollution and illness. Costs that they've passed down to consumers for years. Even better, let's invest in green energy and say “no” to Big Oil once and for all.

Thom Hartmann Administrator's picture
Thom Hartmann A...
Joined:
Dec. 29, 2009 9:59 am

Comments

I wonder what would happen to the US economy if we subsidized the consumer price of gas at $3/gal for a year. It seems every time we start to get some traction here in CA, gas prices rise and the oil companies skim some more profits off captive consumers.

DynoDon
Joined:
Jun. 29, 2012 9:24 am

Buy a Tesla.

Redwing's picture
Redwing
Joined:
Jun. 21, 2012 4:12 am

I wonder how much of this rise in gas prices is part of the Koch brothers pro-Keystone XL pipeline campaign (which spreads the lie that the pipeline will lower gas prices in the US, although the foreign press has carried stories for years stating most of the refined products will be exported from the US). Some of the increase may also be caused by manipulation of the prices from speculators, some of whom are betting that the pipeline will be approved.

This seems to be too early for the annual increase in gas prices caused by changing refinery production from the winter gas blend to the summer blend. I also do not recall any recent refinery fires or hurricanes disrupting production. The exaggerated increase in demand from China or India is also being parroted again.

Let's see, no stories in the press about rampant pirates in the Persian Gulf, no pipeline explosions, no revolutions toppling friendly oil barons, no camels farting on pipelines, ...

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 11:13 am

If the Koch Bros. could control the price of fuel, it would have been $10/gal just BEFORE the election. Stop dreamin' and start drillin' and eliminate all the different State mandates for fuel .

Or, shut up and pay the price.

Redwing's picture
Redwing
Joined:
Jun. 21, 2012 4:12 am

See the thread "Printing Money."

chilidog
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

The state of California, with its 3rd highest per gallon tax on gas at 49.1 cents per gallon, hurts middle and poor families worse that the inconvinience to the 1%. Fuck the poor let them walk.

darlinedarline1@aol.com's picture
darlinedarline1...
Joined:
Aug. 29, 2012 8:27 am

Stick it ! Those are not only my thoughts or my words, but those of people who know more about this situation then you or I do, 'nut ... the bros KNOW that all you gun nuts would have revolted against the fossil fuel overlords if they even got close to $10 a gallon for gas.

You, see, today's "slaves" are armed to the teeth, unlike those in the old south.

The people who should think about shutting up are the ones spreading pro-big-oil and pro-big-coal and pro-fracking propaganda that will make energy prices go up just to generate more profits for the Koch's and other billionaires that only have their own families interests in mind, not yours.

I'm not the dreamer here, the dreamers are the numb nuts sucking on the tailpipe that is the Keystone XL tarsands pipeline. You'll let go eventually when things get to hot.

The only smart thing you wrote is the need for states to get together and establish fewer air pollution standards so they can reduce the different varieties of gasoline the refineries have to produce. If they come up with fewer variations in the standards, they increase the demand for each fuel type which can lead to lower prices and fewer shortages.

***

excerpt from a reply to another thread, but applicable here too:

2/7/13 -

New item today on Thom's message board from polycarp2 ... interview with Greg Palast on the connection between the Keystone XL pipeline and the Koch brothers, and how the pipeline will save the Koch's about $2 billion a year while further polluting our environment.

the post from polycarp2 (I added links for related items there):

Keystone Pipeline - Koch Bros. Connection

to play the video for the interview:

Koch Brothers Driving Keystone XL Pipeline from Canada to Cut Out Venezuelan Oil

***

So, you 'nuts want to risk the water supply of most of the US mid-west just to make these damned billionaires richer?

WTF???

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 11:13 am

Bring on Keystone XL.

Redwing's picture
Redwing
Joined:
Jun. 21, 2012 4:12 am
Quote Redwing:

Bring on Keystone XL.

And say hello to higher gas prices, more cancers and other illnesses caused by refinery pollution, more pipeline breaks and spills like the Enbridge tarsands pipeline break of 2010 in Kalamazoo that is STILL being cleaned up, say hello to foreign corporations being able to seize your land through falsely awarded eminent domain verdicts for private gain without paying true value for it, say hello to more storms like Sandy and Irene and Katrina, ...

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 11:13 am

Did the pipeline in Alaska ruin everything and kill off all the wildlife?

There is 40,000 miles of small gathering pipelines for crude oil mainly in Tx, Ok, La, and Wy.

There is 55,000 miles of crude oil trunklines in the US.

There is 95,000 miles of refined product lines in the US.

100's of thousands of miles of natural gas pipelines because gas is delivered directly to homes and businesses.

Total is over 305,000 miles of pipelines. This doesn't include electrical transmission lines.

How many devastating accidents have there been?

mikslivr and others here seem to be ingnorant of the fact that pipelines criss-cross the entire US, as that is how most of the energy is moved around the US, with very few accidents and fewer still with any envirinmental consequences. Envro-wackos just love to bitch and raise hell about anything that has to do with energy production or delivery.

The Keystone pipeline would provide many jobs, but that doesn't register in their wacko heads.

darlinedarline1@aol.com's picture
darlinedarline1...
Joined:
Aug. 29, 2012 8:27 am

On the internet, the number of his posts do not correlate to actual knowledge.

Redwing's picture
Redwing
Joined:
Jun. 21, 2012 4:12 am

Miksilvr..... These people don't care about facts or actual reason. You are wasting your time trying to convince them.

northlander
Joined:
Feb. 14, 2013 2:23 pm

Reckon the enviro-nazis are more interested in stopping progress or getting revenge on the Koch brothers?

darlinedarline1@aol.com's picture
darlinedarline1...
Joined:
Aug. 29, 2012 8:27 am

What facts are those? Reason can be subjective and not constant.

darlinedarline1@aol.com's picture
darlinedarline1...
Joined:
Aug. 29, 2012 8:27 am
Quote Redwing:On the internet, the number of his posts do not correlate to actual knowledge.

What the hell does that gibberish mean????

***

The time when your writing made the most sense was when you were promoting gun control to other gun nuts after Newtown.

Those comments in one of the Newtown threads were some of the most original thoughts of yours that I've seen, not some of the frequent cynical or condescending b.s. or RW second hand propaganda from Beck or some other peddler.

When you talk about environmental stuff, you're out of your comfort zone.

Stick to your guns.

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 11:13 am

About a month ago gas locally here in CA was $3.29 a gallon. The same station now has it at $3.99 a gallon trying to keep it under the $4 mark. This IS a refinery town and usually prices are a little lower than elsewhere in the SF Bay Area. To compare gas prices though you need to strip away the taxes since some states have higher taxes on gasoline. In fact Californians passed a proposition that stated the tax could ONLY be used for highway maintenance and improvement. The state assembly folks hijacked it anyway.

Redwing: Teslas are expensive and for the lucky who have won the lottery. What about a Leaf or Spark EV (coming later this summer)? When we get decent $12K EVs people will buy. Above $15K they are showstoppers. Most people just keep their old jalopy in shape which saves money in the long run rather than buying a fuel efficient car. It has to make sense.

Darline, ever been to California? It's spread out and a mess. I'd love to walk to the store but it is up a hill that I don't consider safe to walk up since it really need a protected sidewalk let alone being very steep. We need better planned communities where one can walk or use light rail.

The Kochs are as evil as an movie villain. Why do we put up with them?

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

The Koch's and others with a stake in the tarsands projects probably are behind one of the speculation in the oil and gas markets ... driving up domestic gasoline prices may help build their big lie that the Keystone XL pipeline will bring US gasoline prices down, when the opposite is more true. There have been articles for years in the foreign press clearly stating the purpose of TransCanada Keystone XL tarsands pipeline from Alberta to the Texas coast is to export the refined products.

People mistakenly confuse the existing Keystone crude oil pipeline which terminates in the midwest with the Keystone XL. The existing Keystone pipeline handles crude oil only, and did help keep gasoline prices in the US midwest from rising further. That can easily change if the existing crude pipeline is extended on the Keystone XL tarsands pipeline right of way from the current termination point in Cushing Oklahoma to the Texas coastal refineries owned by the Koch's and other oil companies.

The Koch's have spent millions of dollars on a lie campaign in order to save $2 billion a year by not buying the heavy crude from Chavez and Venezuela. They bought these refineries in Texas that can ONLY process the heavy crude which is NOT available in enough quantity from Texas and other sources in the US southwest. There are tarsands projects planned for Utah that will also produce a supply, which can be shipped via rail car or tanker truck.

The Koch's Texas refineries are currently processing heavy crude they bought from Venezuela, and also some tarsands that have been shipped via rail. California also has refineries that are refining tarsands that is shipped by rail or barge or tanker.

TransCanada and other companies with investments have been unable to secure a pipeline to the Canadian west coast, which is why they are pushing for the Keystone XL pipeline. Another tarsands pipeline project with a Chinese company has been proposed to take the crap to a port on the Canadian west coast, but some in the Canadian government are resisting it, as are the Native population and others that live in the proposed right of way.

If you want to write about a topic, please do some research on it so you know what you are talking about, otherwise you are wasting your time and mine.

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 11:13 am

I drove a Tesla roadster. Very hard to get in and out of. Failed miserably in the snow and ice. Cold was hard on the batteries and if you ran the AC in the summer it got a lot less mileage on a charge. Plus side was, it was very fast. A speed limiter stopped acceleration at 125 mph, and it took no time to get there.

Don't hold your breath on an EV for under $12,000. Tesla currently wants $30,000 for replacement batteries but other makers are less, but not warranted.

Redwing's picture
Redwing
Joined:
Jun. 21, 2012 4:12 am

Speeded up development of this obviously good idea would be a good idea then, don't you think? We should invest in Tesla and other battery development to find the ones that can be warrantied and stop the idea that this is all about making money instead of making our money work to get us what we need. There will be money made by those who create value, but we are not in their thrall to be sucked as profit centers in a process drawn out to get every drop of turnip blood possible. We need to get to Green as fast as possible, not as slowly as they would like.

Other than on this side subject, I despair of the ignorance displayed by you and darlin' in the series of posts above. Obama's petro production has been up from Bush. There is an industry interest in acquiring untapped resources so they can leverage the "realization of these assets" for which it claims "rights" that get close to those believed to secure human liberty. Again, how much profit can be sucked out of us for how long is their business plan, for which they bribe Congress.

When you look at the politics of doing something about the environment, getting the Kochs out of politics is clearly an important strategic objective, and while we continue to present the critical issues of environmental politics, exposing what we are up against in sleaze is very important because people have been living in a Koch produced narrative more than they think possible. When you scratch ALEC, and when you go PNAC, you do not lose contact with the Kochs.

drc2
Joined:
Apr. 26, 2012 11:15 am

If you want to see America's future rent "Dredd" which is one of the best dystopian visions of the future I've seen and what might very well happen. This is not a remake of the Sylvester Stallone "Judge Dredd" film but one that more faithfully follows the original comic book. You see the US as one big megacity of 800 million stretching from Boston to Washington DC. And it is a fascist state. What's depicted could very easily happen if we let these rich goons run roughshod over us.

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Keystone’s Thousands of Jobs Fall to 20 When Pipeline Opens

Job forecasts are based on the number of positions created for every dollar spent, according to Lara Skinner, associate director of research at Cornell and author of the Keystone jobs report. TransCanada is overstating construction jobs by assuming the entire project budget will be spent in the U.S. when about half will be spent on the Canadian segment and on design and permitting in the U.S. and Canada, Skinner said.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-13/keystone-s-thousands-of-jobs-fall-to-20-when-pipeline-opens-1-.html

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 11:13 am

Where are all demands to bring the oil executives in front of Congress and explain the increases... and carry it nonstop on CNN, MSNBC, and MSM just like they did when Bush was prez. I wonder why that isn't happening now.

noparty
Joined:
Oct. 31, 2011 6:14 pm
Quote noparty:

Where are all demands to bring the oil executives in front of Congress and explain the increases... and carry it nonstop on CNN, MSNBC, and MSM just like they did when Bush was prez. I wonder why that isn't happening now.

Citizens United bucks are in nearly every politicians pocket, with a lot of it coming from the fossil fuel barons.

Both parties are dirty. Both parties take bribes disguised as "contributions", which the donors like Adelson refer to as "investments".

The Prez had fracking commercials in the last two SOTU addresses and in other speeches or appearances; at least he left out the "clean coal" propaganda this time.

I hope he did not take money from the a-holes behind the Keystone XL.

The 'nuts are holding back at throwing down the crap about "the president should do something about the gas prices", because we know where to find the Faux news video saying that the president can not control gas prices (it was W then).

This is probably mostly speculation again, like Goldman Sachs and others drove up gas prices in 2008-09, maybe at other spike times.

As I said earlier, I suspect this very likely is part of the Koch's plot to get the Keystone XL pipeline approved ... they have spent millions of dollars on the propaganda campaign saying the pipeline would bring down gas prices in the US, when the opposite is more probable as the fuel will be exported.

The lame stream media is just as guilty as the politicians; the networks are sucking up that fracking money and BP gulf cleanup propaganda money and that "clean coal" b.s. money, as well as $$$ from the oil companies and the gasoline dealers.

Exxon even went to court to have an anti-Exxon PSA kept off the air during the SOTU last week.

The only hope we have at showing the truth is with the independent news channels and independent journalists.

I've only heard one mention of tapping the strategic reserve, which takes too long to really do much good. The mere threat of doing it knocks a few rungs of the market price for oil, and gas slowly begins to drop after that.

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 11:13 am

2/20/13 -


tarsands pipeline out telling ppl oil will lower gas prices. Any response?


think has good info. pipe is going to the coasts to be shipped out & tarsands are only profitable when gas prices high.


well we gotta get that message out, the pro-tarsands trolls are out on social media en masse.

...

*** So much for the jerks on this message board that talk about the anti-pipeline "propaganda" ... Pro outspent anti 35-1 !!! Like I said, do your damn research before wasting time writing about it!

Keystone XL Supporters Outspend Opponents 35 To 1 | ThinkProgress

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 11:13 am

Ogenius' answer to high gas prices was to use less oil. Tell that to people in Texas that have considerable distances to commute to work from and to rual areas. He did not have that attitude in 2008. Shows his double-speak and hypocrisy.

""Progress" isn't exactly how Obama described the country's energy picture in 2008, when gas prices were closing in on $4 a gallon. Then, it was a clear sign of "Washington's failure to lead on energy," which was "turning the middle-class squeeze into a devastating vise-grip for millions of Americans."

"For the well-off in this country," Obama said in May 2008, "high gas prices are mostly an annoyance, but to most Americans they're a huge problem, bordering on a crisis."

In August that year, he declared rising energy costs to be "one of the most dangerous and urgent threats this nation has ever faced" and that gas prices "are wiping out paychecks and straining businesses."

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/022112-601827-obama-shifting-talk-on-high-gas-prices.htm

darlinedarline1@aol.com's picture
darlinedarline1...
Joined:
Aug. 29, 2012 8:27 am

At least Darline will have someone to pick on for the next 4 years. There isn't anyone in the Romney family named Darline is there?

DynoDon
Joined:
Jun. 29, 2012 9:24 am

Just shows what a hypocrit oliar is along with the rest of the lying congress idiots, of course. Why has he changed his position on high energy prices?

darlinedarline1@aol.com's picture
darlinedarline1...
Joined:
Aug. 29, 2012 8:27 am

Gee-maybe he just realized he has no control over what the private oil companies charge for their monopoly on oil. Anyone for a nationalized oil company?

DynoDon
Joined:
Jun. 29, 2012 9:24 am

The federal government (taxpayers) have been protecting big oil interest in the middle east for years. IF obammy has had a sudden epiphany of the influence of big oil on government, then why hasn't he pushed for and end to their subsidies and tax breaks? Our tax money is used to protect their interests and subsidize them while they stick it up our asses. The best odumbo can do is tell us to us less oil? Nope, no corruption or collusion there.

A national oil company run by bureaucrats would be worse. I can't understand why anybody wants to hand the corrupt and colluding government more money and more power.Why don't we try to remove the corruption and collusion? Or do the proponents of big omnipotent centralized government not think there is any corruption or collusion in government now?

darlinedarline1@aol.com's picture
darlinedarline1...
Joined:
Aug. 29, 2012 8:27 am

"No president has the power to increase or to lower gas prices. Those are market forces.".

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 11:13 am

I haven't seen anyone on this post suggest he could. My point was the flipflop in his attitude about high fuel prices from a crisis in 2008 to just suggesting using less oil as a means of coping. Proves oliar is just a hypocritical political hack.

darlinedarline1@aol.com's picture
darlinedarline1...
Joined:
Aug. 29, 2012 8:27 am

Maybe the President is like some of the more common sense people on the planet. Myself and others like me tend to change our thoughts and ideas based on new information. Unfortunately there are many who can't seem to do that.

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 6:53 am
Quote Bush_Wacker:

Maybe the President is like some of the more common sense people on the planet. Myself and others like me tend to change our thoughts and ideas based on new information. Unfortunately there are many who can't seem to do that.

I saw that talking point spreading around the left wing media yesterday. I didn't expect to see it here so soon. So what is the rule? When has someone engaged common sense and evolved their ideas, compared to someone who flip-flops? Does it have anything to do with whether they have a D or a R after their name? Or is flip-floping just more noble when done on the left, like taking PAC and corporate money?

Paleo-con
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

No, before ododger, everybody wanted to blame bushie, including oblamer. And, now, all of a sudden moonbats have seen reality and oliar gets a pass on his flip-flopping hypocrisy.

darlinedarline1@aol.com's picture
darlinedarline1...
Joined:
Aug. 29, 2012 8:27 am
Quote Paleo-con:
Quote Bush_Wacker:

Maybe the President is like some of the more common sense people on the planet. Myself and others like me tend to change our thoughts and ideas based on new information. Unfortunately there are many who can't seem to do that.

I saw that talking point spreading around the left wing media yesterday. I didn't expect to see it here so soon. So what is the rule? When has someone engaged common sense and evolved their ideas, compared to someone who flip-flops? Does it have anything to do with whether they have a D or a R after their name? Or is flip-floping just more noble when done on the left, like taking PAC and corporate money?

I don't care if they have a D or an R by their name as long as they are willing to change when facts present themselves. I want what is best for the country and all of it's citizens. I don't care what political party gets it done. Too many politicians are either stuck on old ideas or being paid to keep old ideas. If an old idea is still a great one then that's fine but when history proves otherwise then it's time to change.

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 6:53 am

Maybe now is the time to regulate the floor on gas prices to something like $4.50 a gallon (I don't particularly like excise taxes - politicians look at excise taxes as a source of revenue and hesitate to raise them too much because God Forbid people will buy less of the taxed commodity and revenues will fall.)

The floor probably needs to be raised to $9.00 or more to cover all of the costs of getting that fuel from the oil field to the emissions from the tailpipe.

chilidog
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Redwing:

If the Koch Bros. could control the price of fuel, it would have been $10/gal just BEFORE the election. Stop dreamin' and start drillin' and eliminate all the different State mandates for fuel .

Or, shut up and pay the price.

Well, oil prices can only be controlled to a point through monoplies (OPEC) or futures markets. Demand/supply issues put a cap on how far the futures market speculation can go.....about 30% above a real supply/demand market price.

What the Koch Bros. are doing is promoting the tar sands pipeline. Their refineries are geared to utilizing the dirty, heavy stuff...not high-grade oil. Currently, they buy heavy Venezuelan oil. It costs more than the Canadian stuff. The pipline will save them billions per year. If a rupture destroys U.S aquifiers and water supplies.,..tough.

Don't expect the savings to be passed on. The gasoline will be peddled on the world market to the highest bidder. It isn't "ours".

As with anything in this country, follow the money.

darline wrote: The state of California, with its 3rd highest per gallon tax on gas at 49.1 cents per gallon, hurts middle and poor families worse that the inconvinience to the 1%. Fuck the poor let them walk.

poly replies: Calif also has pretty good public transit compared to low gas tax Missouri. The poor in Calif,. have access to public transist...in rural areas, often inexpensive door to door service. Some communities refer to it as Dial-A-Ride. There is a viable option to walking. Where I live, (a Missouri town) there isn't. I maintain a car that I'd really prefer to do without. Insurance alone is a financial drain.

I could walk 2 miles to the closest supermarket. Returning home in the same manner with a week's supply of groceries...nope.

Moving to the expensive part of town...close to the market, isn't an optiion. Supermarkets avoid poor areas like the plauge. Probably forcing the poor to maintain a car isn't in their best interests or a good means to address global warming. Raising the gas tax to provide public transit is.

Conservative Missouri wouldn't dream of doing anything in the real interests of the poorer segments of the population. I imagine Texas is the same.

I'd be delighted to be able to give up my car. That's probably difficult for those in the middle class to comprehend.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

polycarp2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote darlinedarline1@aol.com:No, before ododger, everybody wanted to blame bushie, including oblamer. And, now, all of a sudden moonbats have seen reality and oliar gets a pass on his flip-flopping hypocrisy.

Hopefully, you count the Fox News heads as "moonbats," if defined by flip-flopping:

Fox News mid 2008: “The President [Bush] has no control over gas prices!”

Fox News April 2012: “President Obama’s policies are causing higher gas prices!”

Fox News May 2012: “Gas prices are falling, that means the economy is weakening. President Obama is weakening the economy!”

Considering the GW Bush himself was an oilman, and he led a parade of oil-related people to Washington - all with tight ties to the industry - I don't believe it was unreasonable to suspect there was some monkey business behind the oil-shock of 2008. So I believe there was at least a little rationality behind the left's charges against Bush and gas prices in 2008. Maybe they were wrong. Contrast that with birtherism and the litany of nutty conspiracy theories coming from the right. Now, THAT'S "moonbattery!"

al3's picture
al3
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Poly, we have what is called Central Texas City and Rural Rides as a public transit. They dirve around in big 20 passenger buses that are empty 95% of the time. Drivers are paid upwards of $15/hour. The cost to ride the bus is $1.00 for every 5 miles, you must call a day in advance. They must have 100 buses. It is just another feel good tax wasting government entity.

Raising the federal or state taxes on fuel is regressive as hell. "For the well-off in this country," Obama said in May 2008, "high gas prices are mostly an annoyance, but to most Americans they're a huge problem, bordering on a crisis."

darlinedarline1@aol.com's picture
darlinedarline1...
Joined:
Aug. 29, 2012 8:27 am

The Bushes are heavy into oil. Obama has no family wealth or personal stake in the oil business.

Mass transit works where the investments have been made. Like in Europe and Asia, but only in a very few spots in America. I suspect rural Texas transportation infrastructure for the car-less is about horses and feet. Oh, yeah your arrange in advance bus. What a Country!

Who has blocked mass transit in America? Let's think. Could it be the nefarious Highway Lobby of Cars, Steel, Oil and Road Builders? Who else? They destroyed our rail infrastructure to drive us onto their roads, into their cars and to use their fuel, which turns out to be an otherwise rather useless by-product of the refining process for the serious use of petroleum resources. What good fortune for these monopolists! What a tragedy for American transportation.

Darlin, brace yourself and take a deep breath and then try to understand this basic concept: In the Private Market, "We" are profit centers for the Privateers. Their business plan has no need to provide for our needs beyond some minimal levels as they find all the ways to suck us dry as their 'entitlement.' This is why we need to use democracy and own our own transportation infrastructure and have it designed for the General Welfare and Common Good instead of serving only military and corporate needs. Government is not the problem if we own it. It can even be the solution if we make democracy real. If we allow the predators to establish their entitlements, we reject democracy. Your fears of liberalism seem to blind you to the solutions of the problems you describe in medical, transportation and Empire (war). We really are not anything like the "moonbats" you keep calling us. We do not believe the nonsense you blame us for. We do not support the policies you hang around our neck.

This is why you get in kind responses, including mine own. I want to encourage your civil inquiry and have tried to make it about your posts and not you because i do not know you. What gets posted can be emotional venting that shows up nowhere else in our lives, or it can be our true voice. How can anyone know? We have even run into some self-confessed 'posers' whose joy in this site comes from pretending to be something they really aren't just to see how people respond. Boring. Get a Life. But, it makes it hard to know just who is at the keyboard.

If you can avoid the hyperbole and the insults and address what I say and not just what you insist it must mean in rather crude terms, I think we can have a civil conversation. The things we agree on are important if not central. The problems of our disagreements can be put aside if we are both directing our conversation towards what we both care about.

To help, let me confess that I react badly to Libertarian dogma. You can look to my posts to LS to appreciate why if you care to. I find it utterly unrealistic and attractive to the less than human developmental process. Maturity is about Mutuality in which our Me is securely and confidently able to embrace the WE without getting lost. A lot of American Individualism treats "the collective" as if it were Satan's den rather than the other part of our essential human nature. Unique Individuals bound together in the necessity of Interdependence is who we are. It is not one or the other, it is both/and. Serious scholars have traced this American meme of Individualism and diagnosed its weakness in "Social Realism."

I try to understand and appreciate why good people are attracted to Ron Paul instead of just to a few of the issues he gets right. I think you can figure that out and a lot more if you give it a try. RP offers a nice alternative to having to admit that Liberals might be more right than the cons have been. He rings the chimes of American Individualism and offers a utopian alternative to what is messy and nasty. He also has an unfortunate relationship with "state's rights" open to very bad practice. As a civil libertarian, he fails the test. As an economist, oh boy what a load! But, Bernie and he got the Fed audited, so he is better than a stopped clock.

Let's have more fun and get over the tit for tat stuff. I really do want to know what begins with WTF and moved for me from ! to ? as I realized that we are in this together for better or worse. Even if Texas left the US, we would share important common interests and responsibilties. Even if you were on the other side of the globe, our common fate does not vanish.

I happen to like "mouthy women." What comes out does matter, but I do not want to play into any masculinist reactions you might feel as we spar. It is your ideas, not your gender, that i dispute. I would be a lot more worried were you a male. I know about us. How about getting down to how to end the empire and the corporate rip-offs? We can do a lot better thinking about how to get what we want than arguing about the whats and whys of what is wrong.

drc2
Joined:
Apr. 26, 2012 11:15 am
Quote chilidog:

Maybe now is the time to regulate the floor on gas prices to something like $4.50 a gallon (I don't particularly like excise taxes - politicians look at excise taxes as a source of revenue and hesitate to raise them too much because God Forbid people will buy less of the taxed commodity and revenues will fall.)

The floor probably needs to be raised to $9.00 or more to cover all of the costs of getting that fuel from the oil field to the emissions from the tailpipe.

B.S. !!

The damned oil companies made RECORD PROFITS last year with prices of gas ranging from $3 to $4 and change.

To hell with $9.00 a gallon ... nationalize the damned companies if they gouge us that bad.

Whether its taxes or profit that drives the price up to $9 does not matter ... you kill half the economy in the process of getting there, which will cut demand, and chop points off the price doing so.

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 11:13 am

al3, "Considering the GW Bush himself was an oilman, and he led a parade of oil-related people to Washington - all with tight ties to the industry - I don't believe it was unreasonable to suspect there was some monkey business behind the oil-shock of 2008. So I believe there was at least a little rationality behind the left's charges against Bush and gas prices in 2008."

drc2, "The Bushes are heavy into oil. Obama has no family wealth or personal stake in the oil business."

Just more blame bushie/cheney and give the current liar and spender in chief more passes because he is such a nice guy with such good intentions. That I happen to disagee with. As for no ties? LOL

At least, that is, until you consider who the man is that has received the most money in campaign donations from BP in the last twenty years– Barack Obama. He is in bed with BP and big oil and there is the real possibility that because of this the federal response has been less than adequate. Consider if you will what the reaction from the left would have been if the “big oil” administration of Bush/Cheney would have been so lacking. What is the difference here? Barack Obama received more money from BP than George Bush or Dick Cheney ever did. Yet Bush and Cheney were considered the “oil men” in the White House while Barack Obama is getting a pass.

Of course, there are many others in both houses that are beneficiaries of the generosity of big oil, also.

It's called hypocrisy. Oblamer and his moonbat minions here seemed so concerned with skyrocketing fuel prices and blaming bush/cheney (which they may have desreved) in 2008 and the plight of the poor because of those high prices. Gasoline is not the only product NEEDED by the middleclass and poor, try heating oil to heat many homes in the noth and northeast and other products from petroleum refining. Also, high fuel prices lead to increases in food and other staple goods. Where is that blame now? Where is the concern? Instead, now he tells people to use less oil ( less heaing oil when it is 10 below? right) and take the bus.

Why not encourage and enable more domestic production of oil and abundant clean natural gas, instead? It would be the quickest solution. We have abundant supplies of both. Or is it a poltical game to make the corporate oligarchs and beneficiaries of high oil prices even wealthier enabling them to continue buy and control more politicians. And STOP speculation! In the meantime the middleclass and poor get raped and robbed even more by high gas and heating oil prices.

http://www.redstate.com/vladimir/2012/02/25/10-ways-obama-could-reduce-gasoline-prices-now/

Alternative energy production, as a solution, has been nice political rhetoric and political payback for decades now, with very anemic results, despite billions of tax dollars being thrown at its developement. IF wind and solar were/are economically feasible private enterprise would have long ago put them to productive use. Energy produced from wind and solar is the higher per kilowatt than conventional sources and does nothing for transportation.

But lets make sure ospender doesn't get any of the blame. And continue to throw tax money at feel good, do nothing, politically correct, unfeasible solutions and do nothing that could actually bring fuel costs down. In the meantime ospender throws money at his political allies and the tax breaks for big oil continue.

darlinedarline1@aol.com's picture
darlinedarline1...
Joined:
Aug. 29, 2012 8:27 am

Stop speculation? In a democratic capitalist country, how would one do that and be constitutional?

DynoDon
Joined:
Jun. 29, 2012 9:24 am

Quote darlinedarline1@aol.com:
Quote al3:Considering the GW Bush himself was an oilman, and he led a parade of oil-related people to Washington - all with tight ties to the industry - I don't believe it was unreasonable to suspect there was some monkey business behind the oil-shock of 2008. So I believe there was at least a little rationality behind the left's charges against Bush and gas prices in 2008.
At least, that is, until you consider who the man is that has received the most money in campaign donations from BP in the last twenty years– Barack Obama. He is in bed with BP and big oil and there is the real possibility that because of this the federal response has been less than adequate. Consider if you will what the reaction from the left would have been if the “big oil” administration of Bush/Cheney would have been so lacking. What is the difference here? Barack Obama received more money from BP than George Bush or Dick Cheney ever did. Yet Bush and Cheney were considered the “oil men” in the White House while Barack Obama is getting a pass.
Point taken, Darlene1, and you are good at reminding us about Obama things that dissapoint us about Obama, and thanks for the valid link. But money from BP is just a subtotal of oil and gas money total available for purchasing politicians.

From OpenSecrets.org:

“Individuals and political action committees affiliated with oil and gas companies have donated $238.7 million to candidates and parties since the 1990 election cycle, 75 percent of which has gone to Republicans.”[Emphasis mine]

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=E01

In the years up to the 2008 cycle, in which Obama did accept the $77K from BP, most from BP over 20 years, and $916K total from the oil and gas industry. But John McCain accepted $2.5 million, 3x what Obama accepted.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.php?ind=E01

My point is, the GOP and their candidates will always attract more blame for oil spikes –rightly or wrongly - because they are most often associated with Big Energy. With Bush/Cheney, both from Big Oil, and their secret oil meetings, it’s a rational basis to suspect some monkey business there. That was my only point.

al3's picture
al3
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Currently Chatting

A Warren Run Would Change Everything

Over the past few weeks, Elizabeth Warren has emerged as a leader of progressives on Capitol Hill. She led the charge against the part of the CRomnibus that gutted our financial regulations, and she is still fighting the White House over its nomination of bankster Antonio Weiss as Undersecretary of Domestic Finance in the Treasury Department.

Powered by Drupal, an open source content management system