published Wednesday, February 22nd, 2012

Gas Prices

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

142
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Boy Clay, this is dangerously close to you being critical of Obama.

It is to a great deal Obama's fault, but not for the reasons stated by the nooga. It is stunning how leftists will try to trivialize an issue with wild distractions.

February 22, 2012 at 2:59 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

How about a cartoon of Obama singing the blues while the guy fills up his tank?

February 22, 2012 at 3:47 a.m.
dougmusn said...

Sorry, nooga/BRP et al. Rising gas prices are no more the fault of President Obama than the rain is. Is he (notice I did not capitalize 'He'--I do not worship the man or his 'theology') building a nuclear capability in the Middle East? Is he threatening to close the strait of Hormuz? Is he raising the standard of living or the numbers of people who wish cars and fuel to drive them in China, India and Brazil? I do not object to caution when we talk about Canadian tar sands or natural gas fracking--I for one do not wish to trade any source of energy for my only source of water since last I looked I do not drink oil.

Barack Obama is not the Antichrist, a Muslim Socialist or the root of all evil. He is a man in a nice office but still just a man who puts on his pants one leg at a time and seeks to do his best in a difficult job.

February 22, 2012 at 5:53 a.m.
joneses said...

I remember when gas prices rose to 2.56 per gallon under President Bush and all you liberals were screaming about President Bush being in bed with the oil companies. another fine example of your lies. Now the price of gas is the highets it has ever been in February and you give this pathetic fool you idol as president a pass. Have you ever thought that his irresponsible or lack of an energy policy might be the culprit behind the high gas prices? This pathetic fool you support as president is doing more by his lack of an energy policy to increase profits to the oil companies you pitiful liberals hate. Another fine example of liberal hypocrisy. Gas prices do not matter to this disgusting president as he does not have to pay for his or Michelle's gas so why would he even care? I wonder how much it cost us for Michelle to vacation in Aspen this week? I think this is vacation #16 at the taxpayer expense. I would bet the unemployed in this country would love to go to Aspen. Pathetic!

February 22, 2012 at 5:54 a.m.
rolando said...

Perhaps The Obama isn't directly responsible for those things, doug, but he has certainly enabled the guilty...which amounts to the same thing. His "best", plain and simply, is the destruction of the American middle class.

February 22, 2012 at 5:57 a.m.
joneses said...

I think the sign on the gas pump in this cartoon should read "Do not forget to thank obama".

Another nugget of information.

This pathetic fool you dusgusting liberals worship has spent 6 trillion dollars in 3 years and then I read this headline in the Chattanooga Times Free Press.

"Chattanooga Mayor Ron Littlefield warns Westside of waning federal funds for housing"

I was sure this disgusting president's goal ws to help the poor. Does this not make you disgusting liberals feel more stupid than you actually are? Amazing.

February 22, 2012 at 6:04 a.m.
fairmon said...

Supply and demand, a free market phenomena that works. Oil production is dropping in non OPEC sources except in the U.S. Prices at the pump may continue up to the $5+ range in the spring. Some say drilling and seeking more supply is not a good option since it takes 5 to 15 years to realize any benefit. Could it be if we had started 5 years ago we would be much closer to increasing the supply from U.S. sources? If we don't get started in five years people will still be saying that as prices continue to increase toward $10 a gallon. Some say exports would increase. Is that all bad since the money would flow to the U.S. instead of out of the U.S. to countries that don't like us. U.S. prices for domestic oil would still be lower with shipping cost avoided making it attractive to sell U.S. sourced oil in the U.S.

Energy independence utilizing wind, solar, nuclear, coal, natural gas, sources not yet known and oil would be a positive impact on the U.S. economy and the middle class. Holding down the increased cost for oil therefore oil dependent products and the production of those products by a working middle income segment in the U.S. is a positive for the economy. The impact is much more than the jobs of mining the oil, refining and transporting it etc.

An aggressive energy policy including low environmental risk regulations, some insist on unrealistic zero risk, would yield very good results. It is hypocritical to spend ourselves into bankruptcy and send our young men and women to fight in areas where our main mission is to protect foreign oil sources under the pretense of spreading democracy and human rights while those in combat are not at home participating in America's freedoms but losing their lives and being injured and disabled for life. Like spending other peoples money, it is easy to justify war when you are not the one doing the fighting but sending someone else to do it for you. Take away the flow of money and those disruptive countries would not be able to finance their aggressive behaviour.

February 22, 2012 at 6:06 a.m.
joneses said...

Obama's Green Energy Investments Continue to Fail

In recent days we learned sales of the Volt and Leaf cratered, President Obama's failed green jobs program is under investigation, and another "clean energy" company's in trouble. Green is the new red.

Each week, it seems, brings fresh evidence that the Obama administration's obsession with so-called clean energy is an increasingly costly failure.

January car sales data out this week provided additional proof that consumers are turning their backs on electric cars, making President Obama's pledge to get a million of them on the road in three years look even more ridiculous.

Chevy sold just 603 Volts in January. (It sold almost five times as many gas-guzzling, 12 mpg Suburbans that same month.) Nissan moved just 676 Leafs, and the company hasn't sold more than 1,000 in five months.

And these dismal sales figures come in a month when overall auto sales were surprisingly strong — hitting a high not seen since May 2008.

Consumers' lack of interest in electric cars helped push another Obama-backed company — Ener1 — into bankruptcy protection late last week, despite the $118 million grant its battery-making subsidiary got from the Energy Dept. As the CEO put it, the company suffered a lack of demand, thanks to lower-than-hoped-for electric car sales.

Ener1 joins two other failed green companies — Solyndra and Beacon Power — that took $571 million in taxpayer subsidies down with them.

To top things off, the House is stepping up its probe into Obama's $500 million green job training program, according to a USA Today story this week.

An earlier Labor Department inspector general report found the program placed just 8,000 people in jobs after 17 months, or about 10% of the program's goal.

The IG went so far as to suggest scrapping the program altogether and returning unspent money to the Treasury.

Unfortunately, like a bad investor, Obama wants to double down on his failure.

February 22, 2012 at 6:37 a.m.
MickeyRat said...

Uh joneses,

Hmm, I seem to remember that under George W. Bush, the price of gasoline increased from $1.25 +- per gallon when he took office in January 2001 to $4.00 per gallon in July 2008.

Additionally, all of you conservatards conveniently neglect to mention that Republicans torpedoed every attempt to try to get the country off of its oil dependency, which is of course the only long-run solution to higher gas prices and global warming.

February 22, 2012 at 6:44 a.m.
EaTn said...

Major oil companies, oil speculators and wall street play a bigger role in pump prices and US politics than either a small desert dictator or our president. They rely heavily on our gullibility to shift the blame while they rake in billions and keep Washington under their thumb.

February 22, 2012 at 6:55 a.m.
joneses said...

mickeyrat,

I also remember you pathetic liberals whining about President Bush not getting the country off it's oil dependency and you say nothing about all the failed greeen intitiatives and the trillions wasted on same by this pathetic fool you support. Are you so stupid to think getting off oil dependency can happen over night? It takes time you moron. Republicans want responsible clean energy and not implement it from a knee jerk political reaction like this fool you support as president does. Obama investing trillions in failed windmill and battery companies is not working but you are so mesmerized by this pathetic fool you think is the Messiah you cannot see the truth. Did you know the largest private investors in alternate energy are the oil companies? The smart people, Republicans, know private industry can provide alternative energy better than your Messiah. Take a look at your Mesiah's failed investments in Solyndra and others for proof. How is that working? By the way this is the highest gasoline has been in any February and it is projected to rise well over $4.50 per gallon. Saying we need to find alternative energy sources does not lower the price of gas. Also the high price of gas has a larger negatie impact on the poor who this pathetic president seems so willing to support. Enjoy that $20.00 per month your God just gave you stupid.

February 22, 2012 at 7:06 a.m.
dude_abides said...

joneses is having a rough morning! I hope his wife has the good sense to stay clear of him today, or she may see the back of his hand. Get the SWAT team ready, boys, he seems a little "standoffish!"

February 22, 2012 at 7:23 a.m.
joneses said...

dude

You are another example of liberal stupidity. I find it amazing you and mickeyrat dislike President Bush because he did not implement the same failed policies as this fool we have as president now, amazing.

EaTn

Why were you liberals not saying "Major oil companies, oil speculators and wall street play a bigger role in pump prices and US politics than either a small desert dictator or our president. They rely heavily on our gullibility to shift the blame while they rake in billions and keep Washington under their thumb." when President Bush was in office? Another fine example of liberal hypocrisy.

February 22, 2012 at 7:37 a.m.
EaTn said...

joneses...regardless of whether it's our president or our state senator either running for or holding office, when the big oil companies are a major contributor to their coffers it's hard to ignore that the politicians are probably in their back pockets.

February 22, 2012 at 7:54 a.m.
lumpy said...

Hypocrisy is right! Gallup says the unemployment rate is up to 9%, the CBO says it's really at 15%, who knows how many are underemployed and Gas is up 83% under Obama.

The fact is there is nothing to replace fossil fuels for a long, long time. Energy that renews itself, produces no waste and can sustain industry and our personal needs is a fairytale right now. The keystone pipeline is proof that Obama is a fool.

February 22, 2012 at 7:58 a.m.
joneses said...

Jay Carney, Obama's Press Secratary, blamed Republicans today for blocking Keystone. Real Clear Politics reported:

White House press secretary Jay Carney first says Republicans “forced” President Obama to deny the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline. Later in his press briefing, Carney says Obama didn’t turn down the pipeline.

“In terms of Keystone, as you all know, the history here is pretty clear. And the fact is because Republicans decided to play political with Keystone, their action essentially forced the administration to deny the permit process because they insisted on a time frame in which it was impossible to completely approve the pipeline,” Carney said when asked about the pipeline by ABC News’ Jake Tapper.

Later in the briefing, Carney says it is the Republicans’ fault.

The elite media,ABC, CNN, CBS, NBC, MSNBC also reported that Reupblicans were responsible for blacking Obama's budget last year when Harry Ried and the Democrats did not have enough votes in their own party to get it passed.

What shameless liars.

February 22, 2012 at 8:09 a.m.
joneses said...

EaTn,

I agree with you as all politicians receive money from all corporations. My point is when President Bush was in office this is not what the pople on the left were saying. I was pointing out the hypocrisy shown by the left by claiming President Bush wasin bed with the oil companies. If,like you say, Obama is reeiving money from the oil companies why are the liberals not saying the same thing about Obama? It is hypocrisy at it's finest. Believe me when I say I w pissed,as I amnow about these high gas prices knowing in Venezuela and Saudi Arabia and other oil exporting countries they are paying cents for a gallon of gas versus dollars like we are and they export more petroleum than we do. If the gas prices were cents versus dollars our onomy would be busting at the seams and people wouldbe employed. But people being less dependant on the government and a strong economy is not on this presidents agenda. Why is it that Obama or any dummycrat never mentions that 50% of the people in this country do not pay income taxes but soakup more of the resouces in this country. The 50% that do not pay income taes are the ones not paying their fair share not the wealthy.

February 22, 2012 at 8:18 a.m.
EaTn said...

joneses and others....the most assured way to beat Obama in November is to elect a capable runner in the primaries. Only about a third of the extreme right-wing part of voters are dumb enough to buy the smoke screens.

February 22, 2012 at 8:26 a.m.
NGAdad said...

Yep joneser is missing some of its vitally needed meds again today. As I think we are all aware the current field of electric vehicles are 1) new, thus few used and 2) expensive and 3) don't yet have national 'refueling stations'. It is not Obama's fault that more of our cities haven't found better mass transit methods, ones that people would use. Imagine New York or San Francisco without them... it's called Atlanta and L A . And joneser's best argument is name calling... really smart, really??

February 22, 2012 at 8:31 a.m.
alprova said...

Francis offered this gem: "Are you so stupid to think getting off oil dependency can happen over night? It takes time you moron. Republicans want responsible clean energy and not implement it from a knee jerk political reaction like this fool you support as president does."

How much time does it take for people to start the process of weaning themselves off of oil, when the alternatives are smacking them in the face today?

Republicans have never been interested in weaning this nation off of oil. The GOP reaction to the President delaying the Canadian Pipeline deal is proof of that. How do you define "clean energy" if it involves the continued consumption of massive quantities of oil?

Do you have any idea what a contradiction in terms that phrase constitutes, when people like you throw it around while doing nothing at all in your personal lives to use less oil?

Republicans as a general rule don't buy electric cars. They buy SUV's. They buy nothing that uses alternative energy sources. And all the while, while lamenting the costs associated with operating those SUV's, they blame the President for the price of gasoline.

Ignorance is indeed bliss. Hypocrisy from the right never seems to run out of gas.

When do Republicans start weaning themselves off of oil? What do they think that it takes to begin that process?

President Obama has involved himself in projects that are dedicated to the process of offering people a chance to reduce their dependency on oil, but they are not paying off. Do you have any idea why that is? Because those who have the money to purchase products that run on alternative energy sources refuse to do so.

And this is the fault of the President? Amazing logic you display there.

Francis, are you personally doing anything to wean yourself off of oil? What kind of vehicles do you drive? Have you ever owned a vehicle with a four cylinder engine that gets you where you need to go? Or are you beating your war chest, criticizing the President's alternative energy ventures, while having a driveway of gas guzzling vehicles that get less than 20 mpg?

When was the last time you rode a bicycle? Do you even own one? Have you ever considered purchasing a motor scooter that gets upwards of 60 miles to the gallon?

I'm willing to bet my life that if the truth were known, you are nothing short of a typical right-wing hypocrite when it comes to this issue, as is the case for most people who lean to the right.

I'd also be willing to be my life that the overwhelming majority of those few who have purchased hybrids and electric vehicles, support Democrats and applaud our President for being the alternative energy President that he is.

Providing alternatives to gas guzzling modes of transportation is hardly knee jerk, by any stretch of the imagination. What will it take for those on the right to begin the conversion to such products? $5.00 a gallon at the pump? $10.00? What?

February 22, 2012 at 8:43 a.m.
miraweb said...

I would have to guess that we are seeing an early switchover of the refineries because of the very mild winter in the NorthEast plus some uncertainty about Iran (and Syria, and Sudan, and Libya, and Egypt). . .

There may also be some price gouging by the oil companies to try and slow the economy before the election, but there really isn't enough time for that to work. It would also be, frankly, despicable to be willing to push families out of work to control an election.

The oil producers would have had to adjust production to the worldwide drop following the financial crash and may be behind in tuning it up for the current upswing.

February 22, 2012 at 8:43 a.m.

joneses, how do you arrive at a figure of "trillions" for what Obama has invested in "failed windmill and battery companies" ?

And did you know Solyndra also had hundreds of millions of investments from private sources? That's right, it wasn't just the federal government investing in it, but stalwart REPUBLICAN CAPITALISTS! They put somewhere close to a billion into that company, and why? Because they thought it was a good idea.

And of course, that whole program WAS supported by one George W. Bush and numerous other Republicans, not a creation of Obama. Of which it turns out, Solyndra is just one small part. But it doesn't add up to trillions of dollars, the whole program is somewhere around 40 billion. Of which how many companies have failed versus how many are doing just fine? Do you even know about them? Did you bother to look them up? Did you bother to count how your figures only reach some 700 million, not even a billion before you spewed that complaint about trillions wasted?

So could you try to avoid the hyperbole? When you make such critical errors as that, you tend to destroy your whole argument with a lack of factual basis.

Also, I have a question, you make that remark about that 50% who don't pay federal income taxes again.

Please tell us how much that 50% makes in total? Please tell us what the demographic breakdown of that 50% is, because you know what? Not all of it is working age population. Many of them are retired or disabled. For the former, that means they may have paid into the tax rolls considerably already, for the latter, well I'm sorry, but some of them just won't be working effectively no matter what you do.

February 22, 2012 at 8:53 a.m.
alprova said...

BRP wrote: "Boy Clay, this is dangerously close to you being critical of Obama."

Only you could begin to make such a connection.

"It is to a great deal Obama's fault, but not for the reasons stated by the nooga."

You join Michelle Bachmann for making a totally ignorant statement blaming any President for the price of gasoline at the pump.

"It is stunning how leftists will try to trivialize an issue with wild distractions."

It is even more stunning how righties will try to blame President Obama for practically anything imaginable with wild and ignorant accusations.

February 22, 2012 at 8:54 a.m.
conservative said...

I totally agree with Joneses and Lumpy.

Everyone of you Lieberals blamed Bush and Cheney for high gas prices.

Everyone of you Lieberals are Hypocrites!!!!

February 22, 2012 at 8:56 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

EaTN said: “Major oil companies, oil speculators and wall street play a bigger role in pump prices and US politics than either a small desert dictator or our president.”

Indeed, EaTn. Since the demand in the U.S. is at its lowest point since 1957, people are wondering what’s driving the run-up in prices:

“Strangely, the current run-up in prices comes despite sinking demand in the U.S. “Petrol demand is as low as it’s been since April 1997,” says Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst for the Oil Price Information Service. “People are properly puzzled by the fact that we’re using less gas than we have in years, yet we’re paying more.”

Kloza believes much of the increase is due to speculative money that’s flowed into gasoline futures contracts since the beginning of the year, mostly from hedge funds and large money managers. “We’ve seen about $11 billion of speculative money come in on the long side of gas futures,” he says. “Each of the last three weeks we’ve seen a record net long position being taken.”

http://www.businessweek.com/finance/rising-gas-prices-not-demand-driven-02142012.html

February 22, 2012 at 8:57 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

SUPPLY AND DEMAND IS A SHAM

EaTN, Doug and Harp are dead on. Hats off to you guys!

The U.S. is now refining record amounts of oil while in the past 12 months American consumer demand has dropped 6 to 7%. To keep the oil flowing they started exporting more to Mexico, Ecuador, and other South American countries. Today, the U.S. actually exports more oil than it imports.

Oil speculators, a bunch of nervous Nellies by trade, are always looking down the road to the next global event that MIGHT cause the price of oil to go up. And then do their best to push up the price of oil futures in a greedy act of self fulfilling prophesy.

Even though American consumer demand for gasoline is in record decline, the price is soaring because oil companies are exporting the excess. Obviously the $5 billion American tax payers fork over to Big Oil each year is going to a good cause.

I believe poor George received so much criticism because he campaigned as an 'oil man' even though he was the only one who never found oil in Texas. He claimed to have special relationships with the Saudis and was seen walking around holding hands with a Prince.

And didn't he do his level best to increase the direct availability of Iraqi oil?

February 22, 2012 at 8:57 a.m.

conservative, what about when the people you profess support for have actually made non-factual statements regarding the current president? Do you agree with their false claims?

But the hypocrisy is yours. If Bush is not responsible for gas prices going up on his watch, then how can Obama be? If you want to say they're both responsible, ok, but please do us the courtesy of relying on truthful statements to make your case.

Please tell us what Obama has done to increase gas prices. Or tell us what he should do to lower them. This will be much more productive.

I'd offer such detailed criticism of Bush, but well, that'd be pointless at this stage of things. He's not in office.

February 22, 2012 at 9:10 a.m.
MTJohn said...

We doomed ourselves to be the captives of high energy prices when we bought into "Morning in America".

We have doomed ourselves to be captives of turmoil in the major oil producing regions because of our selective support for U.N. resolutions pertinent to the region.

February 22, 2012 at 9:13 a.m.
miraweb said...

One more piece of the puzzle: demand is down in the U.S. but China is rolling along just fine. Oil prices are a world market controlled by price-fixing cartels. We pay more if China's demand increases.

February 22, 2012 at 9:16 a.m.
News_Junkie said...

I've never seen so many posts that are completely out of touch with reality. Virtually all of the posts so far have been made by complete morons. Anybody who is so moronic that they don't realize that the price of oil (and therefore gasoline) is essentially set on a world-wide basis is so stupid that nothing that they post is worth reading. To believe that anything that the U.S. does will have a meaningful impact of the price that we pay for gas in the U.S. is to show that you have no meaningful contact with reality.

February 22, 2012 at 9:17 a.m.
MTJohn said...

c

onservative said...

I totally agree with Joneses and Lumpy.

Everyone of you Lieberals blamed Bush and Cheney for high gas prices.

Everyone of you Lieberals are Hypocrites!!!!

Anymore hypocritical than conservatives who defended Bush and Cheney (two elected officials with a long history of ties to the petroleum industry) but now are criticizing President Obama? Somehow, I don't think so!

February 22, 2012 at 9:18 a.m.
potcat said...

Gas prices is such an important essential in every POOR and i will go out on a branch here an say every MIDDLEclass Citizen in America has to be feeling it too.. To the poor-gas prices is a freaking killer! You got to be able to afford to go to WORK.

Forgetabout buying Food, if it goes up much more, i don't know what a lot of My people are going to do, working POOR, and people who have kids, i don't know how they do it.

I'm glad i tought my children about the birds and bees and gave my Son a condon at 16 and put my whore Daughter on the Pill at 14..Its alright, my Daughter and i laughed about how big sluts we both were at that age, we recognoized and laughed our ass off. A coming togeather moment.

Its Getting Scary

This Economy is BAd , i can't how this is not NO1. Concern.

February 22, 2012 at 9:29 a.m.
conservative said...

MTJohn--

Conservatives were right to defend Bush and Cheney, they were not responsible for high gas prices, were they? However, Obamination does deserve SOME blame because he has thwarted oil exploration and production.

We don't have a real oil shortage but we do have an artificial one when we curtail the supply of it by not drilling and refinning it. The less available for the market when there is increase demand for it only drives the price of gas up. It is not complicated.

I blame the loons of green energy, enviornmentalism, Demoncrats, Lieberal Republicans, and Obamination for the high gas prices.

February 22, 2012 at 9:50 a.m.
chet123 said...

JONESES....LISTEN VERY CAREFULLY......."THE ENTIRE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS OWN BY THE OIL COMPANIES....WHY IS THERE A CO-RELATION TO HIGH GAS PRICES WHEN THERE'S A REPUBLICAN MAJORITY.......Hmmmm?Hmmmmm? THOUGHT I WASNT GOING TO CALL YOU ON IT....DO THE RESEARCH....DO THE RESEARCH.....SEE YOU CANT TELL THE TRUE!!!!

WHENEVER WE HAVE A MAJORITY REPUBLICAN CONGRESS..WE HAVE HIGH GAS PRICES...Hmmmmm I WANDER WHY????

WHENEVER THERE IS A CONGRESSIONAL HEARING WITH OIL EXECUTIVE...THE REPUBLICAN CONGRESS DEFENDS THEM WITH THEIR LIFE.....THEY WILL TAKE A BULLET FOR THE RICH OIL COMPANY

THE DEMOCRATS HAVE TO FIGHT THE OIL COMPNAY ALONG WITH THE KISS BUTT REPUBLICAN CONGRESS....DO YOUR HOME WORK FOR ONCE IN YOUR LIFE...

THE POSTERS CAN CHECK THIS FACT OUT...AND DONT USE HATE LINKS OR FIX NEWS...CREDIBLE SOURCE OR RECENT PERIODIC...YOU WILL SEE IT IS TRUE!....HEY JONESES ..THINK I WILL START CALLING YOU PINOCCHIO....YOUR NOSE JUST KEEP GROWING!!!HA HA HA....WHY CANT YOU TELL THE TRUE OR SHUT-UP.....WHY DO YOU CONTINUE TO LIE WHEN THERE IS A MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE

REPUBLICAN DID THE SAME THING WITH BILL CLINTON...ALLOW THE OIL COMPANY TO GOUGE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.....CLINTON HAD TO RELEASE THE FEDERAL RESERVE SUPPLY TO GIVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE RELEIF AT THE GAS PUMPS AND EVEN THEN THE REPUBLICAN GOT MAD HA HA HA.....DO YOUR HOME WORK FOR ONCE IN YOUR LIFE JONESES

OBAMA MAY HAVE TO DO THE SAME THING....THIS IS ORCHESTRATED ATTEMP BY THE REPUBLICAN AND OIL COMPANY TO BRING THE ECONOMY INTO A DOUBLE DIP RECESSION

THE OIL INDUSTRY SHOULD BE NATIONALIZE...THEY HAVE BECOME A SECURITY RISK AT THE EXPENSE OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE....

February 22, 2012 at 9:56 a.m.
chet123 said...

JONESES,BIGRIDGEPATRIOT,CONSERVATIVE......CAUGHT YOU LYING AGAIN HA HA HA HA

February 22, 2012 at 10:12 a.m.
chet123 said...

HEY JONESES....WHO'S YOUR DADDY!

February 22, 2012 at 10:17 a.m.
conservative said...

Don't quit writing Chet. You are the epitome of Lieberalism. You are not not afraid to show the world how a Lieberals thinks and what a Liberal believes. The other Lieberals who comment here are cowards compared to you.

Sincerely, CONSERVATIVE

February 22, 2012 at 10:23 a.m.
MTJohn said...

conservative said...We don't have a real oil shortage but we do have an artificial one when we curtail the supply of it by not drilling and refinning it.

We have had an energy crisis since the mid-70's. Ignoring it won't make it go away. The solutions that might result from drilling might last into the middle of next week.

And, regarding your criticism of those in the environmental movement, might I remind you that, implicit in "dominion" is care for the Creator's handiwork - not permission to rape it. Those "godless greenies" are obeying the charge given to us by the Creator. I can't say the same for those who would develop petroleum resources without regard to consequences to the creation - including the air we breath and the water we drink.

February 22, 2012 at 10:29 a.m.

This is all just a distraction from what is really driving the prices of gas and oil up. The Fed is monetizing our debt. They are getting ready to do it again. What they are doing is printing money and value right out of every dollar you spend and have saved. This makes everything you buy more expensive. Haven't you been to the grocery store lately? Have you noticed the prices of things going up or the portion sizes going down with no change in price? Right now, you are losing value out of every fiat dollar you hold. Your wealth is being stolen and taxes don't have to be raised one bit. Welcome to the new Argentina. I know we aren't in the same situation yet, but our time is coming. Nothing can stop it now.

February 22, 2012 at 10:47 a.m.
davisss13 said...

What is this, redstate.com?

February 22, 2012 at 11:03 a.m.
conservative said...

MTJohn--

"We have had an energy crisis since the mid-70's. Ignoring it won't make it go away. The solutions that might result from drilling might last into the middle of next week"

What does that mean? Surely a "crisis" would be because we are not drilling for the energy we need, would it not? "Ignoring it won"t make it go away". We get the energy out of the ground by drilling, how else could we get it? That "solution" has been working well for quite some time, much longer than a week.

Reducing the supply of energy when our economy demands it WILL cause a "crisis". That's not the "solution" I want.

Drilling for oil is not raping the envionment. If you really believed that you would not drive,ride, heat your home, light your house or otherwise use the benifits of oil, would you? Would you?

February 22, 2012 at 11:04 a.m.
potcat said...

I never thought in a million F ing years i would agree with FlyingPurpleSihtEater, its definetly heading in a somewhat Situation. A REVOLUTION would stop it!!!

February 22, 2012 at 11:04 a.m.

That might be the only thing left for you to eat if you haven't prepared pothead. I have prepared and won't be dining with you.

February 22, 2012 at 11:08 a.m.
MTJohn said...

conservative said...What does that mean? Surely a "crisis" would be because we are not drilling for the energy we need, would it not? "Ignoring it won"t make it go away". We get the energy out of the ground by drilling, how else could we get it? That "solution" has been working well for quite some time, much longer than a week.

The "crisis" is the consequence of the reality that our rate of petroleum consumption is not sustainable, compounded that, since we first became aware of that reality, consumption in other countries has significantly escalated. Drilling, at best, might postpone the inevitable. It would not make the problem going away. Ignoring it won't either.

conservative said...Reducing the supply of energy when our economy demands it WILL cause a "crisis".

Not the cause, but the consequence of the already existing crisis.

conservative said...Drilling for oil is not raping the envionment.

Virtually everything about the lifestyle of humans, at least since the transition from a hunter/gatherer to an agrarian economy has compromised the integrity of God's creation.

February 22, 2012 at 11:30 a.m.
lumpy said...

I just went for a walk and passed a construction site. Bulldozers and other equipment being used. Tell me, you geniuses, how do you propose those machines be built and run on "green energy"? There is no such thing as an energy source that renews itself, produces no waste product and CAN keep the engine of our economy going. Nothing exist like that now. Nothing.

You don't know what you're talking about and Obama is living in a fantasy land. This is what we have for now and for as far we can see. Everything revolves around oil, face it.

Talk about being hypocrites! Nothing is Obama's fault, but everything was Bush's fault. Bush deserves to be blamed for paving the way for Obama and setting the table for this clown, but Obama is 100% responsible for the actions he's taken on his watch.

February 22, 2012 at 11:47 a.m.
acerigger said...

I posted this yesterday on another thread,it's still true today,""The United States' rapidly declining crude oil supply has made a stunning about-face, shredding federal oil projections and putting energy independence in sight of some analyst forecasts.

After declining to levels not seen since the 1940s, U.S. crude production began rising again in 2009. Drilling rigs have rushed into the nation's oil fields, suggesting a surge in domestic crude is on the horizon.

The number of rigs in U.S. oil fields has more than quad­rupled in the past three years to 1,272, according to the Baker Hughes rig count. Including those in natural gas fields, the United States now has more rigs at work than the entire rest of the world." Says Simone Sebastian . Read it for yourselves,http://www.chron.com/, then find something else to whine about! February 21, 2012 at 2:18 p.m.

February 22, 2012 at 11:47 a.m.
potcat said...

Who the hell said any thing about dining, i'm very paticular who I break bread with. I'm prepared, i have a arsenal, garden and know how to survive on my on wits.

If all hell breaks lose, i don't know if i want to stay unless i am of help to Family. How did this get to here, are we going to have Pandemics, Nuclear Holocaust?

February 22, 2012 at 11:59 a.m.
sage1 said...

Actually, it's a win/win situation for the oil companies. Higher prices = less miles driven by the consumer. Higher prices on less gas sold equates to the same profits, yet less strain on refineries and their liquid gold product will last for many years into the future.

We are being financially weaned from the pumps......$10/gallon is coming.

February 22, 2012 at 12:15 p.m.
conservative said...

MTJohn--

from Vocabulary.com definition of crisis: A crisis is a difficult or dangerous time in which a solution is needed-and quickly.

When you used the word "crisis", I took that to mean something in line with the above definition and that is why I put "crisis" in quotes. I see from your last comment that you have claified your use of "crisis" to mean some time in the future. Even $5.00 gas will not be a "crisis" except for Obamination's reelection. However, if you deem $5.00 gas or the price we have now a "crisis", then we must drill for the oil we have, NOW. Green energy is too expensive now and will be for quite some time and that is why we are using oil and coal and will be for quite some time in spite of wishful thinking.

My jaw droped over your "Virtually everything about the lifestyle of humans, at least since the transition from a hunter/gatherer to an agrarian economy has compromised the integrity of God's creation" statement.

February 22, 2012 at 12:18 p.m.
jesse said...

while i have probs.w/mt.john inserting the bible into his reasoning process he is dead on about the CRISES situation! just because you refuse to recognize it don't mean it ain't there! when i have to start hocking my car title to be able to fill my tank up!THATS A CRISES SITUATION!! some times i think some of you live out there w/austrian from la la land AND we all know where he lives! given our situation today,where in the hell do you think we are gonna be 50 yrs.down the road!

February 22, 2012 at 12:33 p.m.
shifarobe said...

dougmusn, you are wroooooooooong, pal. He is a communist he is doing all the right things to make us weak and unstable. I think his wife helps him put his pants on. LOL

February 22, 2012 at 12:50 p.m.
shifarobe said...

obama is a bad, bad dude who luuuvs pushing people around.

February 22, 2012 at 12:52 p.m.
jesse said...

Obama is JUST another politician doin what politician's do! FIRST! GET ELECTED! (say whatever it takes) second! get re-elected!do what ever it takes! third: retire w/9 millin dollars! the ONLY diff. between Obama and every pres.since the start of the union is barak is black and that ain't a big deal except so is his heart!

February 22, 2012 at 1 p.m.
shifarobe said...

Looky, looky, look at Opoopy squirm. $6.00 gas! 9% unemployed! Trillions more in debt! Food cost rising! Look at all them little beads of sweat popping up on his big head. No vacation this summer, except for MEchelle. Ain't nothing going to stop her vacay time.

February 22, 2012 at 1:04 p.m.
conservative said...

Well Jesse, if you are certain we are in a "crisis" and you need gas for your car, how are you going to get it taking MTJohn's advice and siding with Obamination over lessening the supply of gas by not driiling for the oil from which gas is derived?

If you would carefully read MTJohn, you would have to conclude he is opposed to drilling for more oil. Is that what you want?

February 22, 2012 at 1:04 p.m.
jesse said...

WHAT you gonna do when they ain't NO place left to drill? like ,HEY COACH, WHAT ABOUT THIS SHET? a lot of folks around here have SHORT EYES! i ain't too worried about whats goin down in my life time ,i'm about done runnin my string out ,BUT what about my grandkids? imo:in 100 yrs .we gonna be back in the 1850's and everybody needs to stock up on horses ans mules!

February 22, 2012 at 1:21 p.m.
chet123 said...

CONSEVATIVE....DID YOU SAY DONT QUIT???? CONSERVATIVE THANK YOU VERY MUCH....DID YOU SAY I WAS THE EPITOME OF LIBERALISM??....THANK YOU AGAIN CONSERVATIVE...BECAUSE AS LONG AS RIGHT-WING REPUBLICAN CONTINUE TO GIVE ME THE AMMO ..I WILL CONTINUE TO RELOAD....BUT I WILL SAVE THE BIG GUNS FOR A LATER TIME....HA HA

I'M GLAD THE WORLD CAN SEE....KEEP POSTING INACURRACIES(LIES) AND I WILL KEEP REBUTTALING...HA HA HA

February 22, 2012 at 1:24 p.m.
jesse said...

hey chet! grab your jug and go back to bed!! the only thing you have EVER rebutted on here is eastridge 8 's statement that "actualy chet is SANE!!" (maybe she said"you were a good guy!) which brings up questions about HER sanity!!lol!

February 22, 2012 at 1:31 p.m.
chet123 said...

THANK YOU NEWS FREE-PRESS....POSTER WHO CANT CHALLENGE ME IN DEBATE OR IDEALS...TRYING TO CENSOR ME.....FUNNY HOW THESE SAME REPUBLICAN TALK ABOUT THE PROTECTION OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT....REALLY AMAZING

February 22, 2012 at 1:33 p.m.
chet123 said...

JESSE DO YOURSELF A FAVOR.....GO BACK TO MIDDLE SCHOOL AND TAKE A REFRESHER COURSE IN US HISTORY....

HOPE YOU ARE NOT OFFENDED BUT YOU ARE ILLITERATE...! YES DUMB AS A ROCK....YOU MUST BE BACKWOOD

February 22, 2012 at 1:38 p.m.

Wonder why many of you Obama supporters are so concerned about us using up all the oil and how evil we are for using oil, and how how our grandkids will suffer, yet you don't mind Obama spending us into debt and how that will cause them to suffer?

February 22, 2012 at 1:40 p.m.
jesse said...

chets off his meds again!just because your paranoid don't mean WE ain't AFTER YOUR SORRY NAPPY A$$!gonna get it too if you don't get it togather and fly right!!rotfli!! IF you ain't a right wingnut by SUNDOWN friday!we gonna come to git ya a$$!

February 22, 2012 at 1:44 p.m.
onetinsoldier said...

There is no such thing as the "free market" There is no such thing as democracy. You are meaningless conscripts doomed to the machinations of your corporate idols. So easily fooled by shiney objects and the need to go nowhere quickly. So quick to take up faith in your laziness of reason. You surely deserve all you complain about. Lets all put on our NIKES, get in our CHEVYS and go to WALMART to buy injection molded doodads from APPLE to take up space and time in our meaningless pursuit to escape reality or responsibility. As long as you worship at corporate americas feet, you can expect that toe jam taste to remain. "It's an all day matinee, getcha a little something that you can't get at home"

February 22, 2012 at 1:45 p.m.
BobMKE said...

If we had started drilling for oil in the 90's would Clay have drawn this cartoon? Lets go 15 years in the future. What would Clay draw regarding oil? If we really started the process for drilling for oil right now, wouldn't the Arabs be taken down a few notches right away? In the future would they start treating us a little better with the price of their oil knowing that their cash cow is producing more milk?

February 22, 2012 at 1:45 p.m.

Lumpy, a lot does resolve around oil. What do you propose will happen if the rate of consumption exceeds the level of formation? We might just have to go to the source from which the energy found in hydrocarbons is derived. Fortunately the sun will probably last a few billion years, by which time I hope we have other resources.

Blondebutnotdumb, I do mind the deficit and the debt. But I'm also bothered by failing infrastructure in this country, by pollution, by crime, and it turns out, I'm worried about educating the children. And like Mitt Romney said today, cutting government spending will slow the economy down. So what to do? Should we just let the country collapse like a delapidated house? Or should we find another solution besides endless cutting? If all you have to offer is complaints about cutting waste, please offer specific suggestions rather than bland plaudisms.

BobMKE, nope, they'd be sitting their oil still while we would have run out of even more of ours. US domestic oil production was at its second peak in the mid eighties, the first peak was in the early seventies. You can find a lot of reasons for the decline, but there is no way that more consumption of national resources would out us in a better position. If you want a way to energy independence, oil is not the path that will last. Even with the highest conceivable estimate of reserves, it will only last so long.

February 22, 2012 at 1:54 p.m.
jesse said...

if you drill a hole in every 3 square yard of the usa and SUCK every last barrel of crude out of the ground you are STILL left w/the bottom line that IT IS GONNA RUN OUT!! whatta you gonna do then? gittin on the TFP forun and sayin 'IT'S ALL BARACK 'S FAULT!" ain't gonna do you ONE BIT of good!! you sill gonna be diggin around in a hillsinde tryin to find a LUMP of coal!! i can handle dumb, its ignorant i have a prob.with!

February 22, 2012 at 1:59 p.m.
chet123 said...

BLONDEBUTNOTDUMB.....SEE THEY HAVE TAUGHT YOU HOW TO LIE HA HA....AND YOU CALL YOURSELF CONSERVATIVE.....REALLY AMAZING....WOMEN LIKE YOU ARE ABUSED BY THEIR HUSBAND....YOU ARE AN EXAMPLE OF AN ABUSED FEMALE....YOU TALK CRAZY....DONT YOU HAVE SENSE ENOUGH TO KNOW YOU ARE THE #1 BENIFICIARY OF THE LIBERAL MOVEMENT....THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION YOU WERE 2nd CLASS....HOW DUMB CAN ONE BE

February 22, 2012 at 2:18 p.m.
mtngrl said...

acerigger said...

I posted this yesterday on another thread,it's still true today,""The United States' rapidly declining crude oil supply has made a stunning about-face, shredding federal oil projections and putting energy independence in sight of some analyst forecasts.

After declining to levels not seen since the 1940s, U.S. crude production began rising again in 2009. Drilling rigs have rushed into the nation's oil fields, suggesting a surge in domestic crude is on the horizon.

The number of rigs in U.S. oil fields has more than quadrupled in the past three years to 1,272, according to the Baker Hughes rig count. Including those in natural gas fields, the United States now has more rigs at work than the entire rest of the world." Says Simone Sebastian . Read it for yourselves,http://www.chron.com/, then find something else to whine about! February 21, 2012 at 2:18 p.m.
February 22, 2012 at 11:47 a.m.

Thanks for posting this acerigger. I thought it merited repeating since some here apparently either completely missed it, or are intentionally ignoring it.

February 22, 2012 at 2:18 p.m.
chet123 said...

JESSE...WHERE YOU FROM 27HWY OF SODDY...LIVING IN A TIN CAN TRAILER....AND CALL YOURSELF A REPUBLICAN HA HA HA HA

I CAN SEE THE KOCH BROTHERS INVITING YOU FOR DINNER...HA HA HA

February 22, 2012 at 2:22 p.m.
chet123 said...

BLONDEBUTNOTDUMB....YOU REALLY THINK THE OIL IS BEING USED UP.....HA HA HA...YOU BEING HAD BY THE RICH AND GREEDY....THE OIL COMPANY....ITS CALL PRICE GOUGING....WAKE UP....YOU ARE NOT A LITTLE GIRL

February 22, 2012 at 2:28 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Davisss13 said: "What is this, redstate.com?"

Hmmmm . . . Are you referencing the swarm of red short-horned anti-Obama grasshoppers that don’t want to face reality and the impact that reality has on the price of oil?

"SINGAPORE — Oil prices hovered above $106 a barrel Wednesday in Asia amid concern that conflict over Iran’s nuclear program could lead to global crude supply disruptions.

Benchmark crude for April delivery was up 11 cents to $106.36 per barrel late afternoon Singapore time in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. The contract rose $2.65 to settle at $106.25, the highest since May, in New York on Tuesday.

Brent crude was down 16 cents at $121.50 per barrel in London.

Oil has jumped from $96 earlier this month amid escalating tension between Western powers and Iran. . .

. . . Iran said over the weekend that it will stop selling oil to Britain and France in retaliation for a planned European oil embargo this summer.

The move was mainly symbolic — Britain and France import almost no oil from Iran — but it raised concerns that Iran, which produces almost 4 million barrel a day of crude, could take the same hard line with other European nations that use more Iranian crude.

“A real stoppage of 4 million barrels a day will send crude markets to at least $130,” Carl Larry of Oil Outlooks and Opinions said in a report. “A stoppage longer than a month will push that number to $150. Damage to oil fields or transport areas will add even more premium that will not go away for years.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/markets/oil-near-9-month-high-below-105-in-asia-as-eu-agrees-to-greece-bailout-deal/2012/02/21/gIQABDCUQR_print.html

February 22, 2012 at 2:28 p.m.
jesse said...

nah man! i live in alton park! the3 koch bro's,din't want huttin to do w/me!!

February 22, 2012 at 2:32 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

What's with all the insults?

February 22, 2012 at 2:34 p.m.
jesse said...

ARE YOU NEW AROUND HERE??LOL

February 22, 2012 at 2:43 p.m.

Huh? Chet, you're kidding, right? That's a pretty harsh accusation against my husband. Do you know him?

February 22, 2012 at 3:06 p.m.
maddawg said...

It is no wonder the Times Free Press did away with commenting on news articles. Such cowards hiding behind their computer screens tossing insults after insults like children.
Gas prices are no more controlled by the president than by Dolly Parton. Bush or Obama. The latest rise in gas prices if any of you can remember back far enough was the instability in Libya. Prices rose rapidly then. There is enough fault to go around for increasing fuel costs such as speculators on wall street, unrest in all the middle east countries, our own oil companies exporting our oil to China and beyond because they can get a higher price and of course Iran's decision to boycott some European countries.
You guys blaming Obama and Bush sound utterly ridiculous.

February 22, 2012 at 3:12 p.m.
bret said...

It's astonishing how clueless the right-wingers using that argument can be.

Apparently some of these "Drill Baby, Drill!" types are naive enough to believe that oil drilled off the American coast has a nice shiny label on it, and must be sold in America. It doesn't work that way. All oil drilled offshore of the USA goes to the WORLD spot market for petroleum. It does not stay in the USA. Once on the world market, it gets sold to the highest bidder - China, India, Argentina, whoever. There are NO laws saying that the oil must stay in the USA for Americans to use.

So every time some oil executive or right-wing talking head tells you that we need to open up more drilling in the USA to achieve "energy independence", you can know right off the bat that they are lying to you. All they're trying to do is boost oil company profits - and sell the oil to the highest bidder.

So until/unless we have a law that requires all oil drilled in the USA to be bought and sold here, then that oil will continue to be sold on the world spot market. The reason they're talking about "energy independence" is because they count on the American public to be stupid enough not to realize how commodities future markets operate.

Don't like it that way? Fine - then change the law. That's what China does: all domestically produced oil in China is required to stay in China; it never goes to the world spot market. That way China only buys surplus oil. It's also why calculating China's oil consumption is hard; their domestic production numbers are a state secret.

Oil companies (and their puppets in Congress) get stupid rednecks all worked up over "drill, drill, drill" by telling them that it will help the American economy. They count on uninformed voters to not know how the global oil market actually operates. But drilling offshore only boosts oil company profits - it does NOTHING to make America less dependent on oil, foreign or otherwise.

And this says nothing about the problem of taking years, even decades, to bring an oil field from concept to production. A field that comes online in 2025 isn't going to do anything to lower gas prices today.

February 22, 2012 at 3:15 p.m.
chet123 said...

HA HA BLONDEBUT....SO HE DO BEAT YOU HA HA.....LEARN TO THINK BLONDIE...OR YOU WILL END UP ON A COMMUNE IN UTAH AS ONE OF TEN WIVES BY A CHAUVINIST PIG HUSBAND

February 22, 2012 at 3:30 p.m.
chet123 said...

BLONDIE.....DONT BLAME YOUR HUSBAND...I FEEL SORROW FOR YOU TO BE SUCH A PEA BRAIN

February 22, 2012 at 3:32 p.m.
chet123 said...

JESSE ...THERE'S NO TRAILERS IN ALTON PARK....NOR FRED SKILLERN(YOUR A.. IS MINE!!!) NOR RHONDA THURMAN......

February 22, 2012 at 3:35 p.m.
conservative said...

Bret --

Don't you know that when the oil supply is increased on the world market the price of that oil goes down? Conversely, when there is less oil on the world market the price goes up. Simply put, more oil = lower prices.

If you have ever been in a farmers market you will know that the price of tomatoes will go down when they are in season due to an increased supply and when they are out of season the price goes up due to a reduction in supply. Simply put, more tomatoes = lower prices.

Simple economics for "rednecks".

February 22, 2012 at 4:03 p.m.
acerigger said...

mtngirl,thanks but I think the wingers just choose to ignore the facts. It's actually a very informative article if you bother to follow the link. But then it would explode all the wingers talking points and blow up their attacks. Let 'em rant!

February 22, 2012 at 5:04 p.m.

Unfortunately for you conservative, economics are complex, and you're ignoring the influence of an oligopoly. OPEC has a price which they want to get for their products, and they cooperate to keep prices high.

Much like the Farmers might do, if they decided it was in their best interests. Oh wait, they have.

But OPEC has it even better, because their tomatoes? Don't spoil.

February 22, 2012 at 5:06 p.m.
conservative said...

Bulb--

Though your comment is "complex",you seem to have stumbled onto something there with your - "OPEC has a price which they want to get for their products, and they cooperate to keep prices high."

I'll check back in a while to see if you have discovered that the OPEC cooperation that you brought up makes my point.

February 22, 2012 at 5:36 p.m.

Let me clue you in, Bret, businesses exist to make money.

Yes, let's make more laws because there aren't enough.

Let's allow the government to dictate who you should sell your product to. Let's be like China. Then we can all bow to the President of China like Obama did

Pick your label, Bret, facist, communist, socilist or simply control freak.

February 22, 2012 at 6:06 p.m.
miraweb said...

Nothin' but poodles and trolls, today. Ah well - at least Clay is interesting.

February 22, 2012 at 6:08 p.m.
rolando said...

Short note for the texters here and those who insist on using all caps. Proper capitalization is important.

In the following phrase, note the change in meaning if you remove the caps, refuse to use them in their proper place, or make everything caps: "...helping Uncle Jack off the horse..."

Have a nice day.

February 22, 2012 at 6:14 p.m.
rolando said...

Not really, miraweb...not in either case. We are simply fed up with the total BS posted here by LibProgs. It is your side's turn in the barrel.

February 22, 2012 at 6:17 p.m.
fairmon said...

bret said.....

The reason they're talking about "energy independence" is because they count on the American public to be stupid enough not to realize how commodities future markets operate.

I assume you are going to educate those of us that play the commodities market by buying and selling futures contracts or options. You must not think that the commodites market is a zero sum game where there is a loss equal to any gain and vice versa. Are you going to enlighten us how the law of supply and demand doesn't work? it must be an haluciunation that lettuce, tomatos and other food items are cheaper and of better quality when plentiful. Why did ethenol use increase the price of corn so much? I wonder why when the fed threatened to start drilling when oil reached $150 per barrel and it dropped well below $100 a barrel.

At $150 a barrel I had sold the futures contract to another commodities investor which was a contract with him to guarantee me $150 a barrel at the agreed upon future date. Before that date oil dropped to just under $100 giving me a profit of about $50 a barrel and him a loss of that amount. How did we affect the price of oil. He was speculating it would go to $200 as some analyst had predicted and I was speculating it would go down not up. It did go down more and faster than I expected. Can you tell me how we had any affect on the price of oil? You can't buy or sell a futures contract unless the is a willing buyer and seller. One will make money the other will lose that amount with both paying the broker a commission for brokering the transaction.

February 22, 2012 at 6:24 p.m.

And what are you Miraweb? Why is anyone who disagrees and criticizes Obama a troll? It seems to me that the trolls on here are Democrats. You all sound the same. Who are the poodles?

February 22, 2012 at 6:41 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

*mountainlaurel said... “A real stoppage of 4 million barrels a day will send crude markets to at least $130,” *

Iran’s economy is already on the brink of collapse. If they made a significant cut in production it would be over for the current regime.

That is why the US needs to boost domestic production. The middle east is dependent on their oil sales. If we can threaten them with a price drop by stepping up our own production they will respond by boosting production to lower the cost of oil and increase the barriers to entry for our domestic production.

What we are doing right now is the absolute worst possible move for energy security. Domestic oil producers are maxing out extraction from existing well heads to sell at the current high price. Obama is impeding the drilling of new wells so current production is fast depleting active fields. We are going into a phase where additional capacity will depend on new exploration and drilling which is generally more expensive and slower than boosting production in existing fields. That is right where OPEC wants us to be.

What we should be doing is maximizing exploration and new drilling to lock in access to active reserves. The longer OPEC holds down oil production, the more exploration we open up. Eventually they would be force to boost production, lower prices, and stop additional US active reserves from coming on line.

Obama, the energy retard, does not understand these simple truths and is running the country into the ditch with his obstruction of affordable energy and his obsession with “renewables”.

February 22, 2012 at 7:06 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

So, after BB Bama strangles new oil production and drives up the price of crude, he should stand behind the gas pump and sing the blues about the pain caused by high gasoline prices… with a big, sinister grin on his narcissistic mug.

February 22, 2012 at 7:13 p.m.
conservative said...

Bulb --

You appear to need another hint, this from the liberal NPR:

OPEC Cuts Production To Stem Drop In Oil Prices http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=96070784

February 22, 2012 at 7:31 p.m.
fairmon said...

ML quoted an article written by a journalist...

Did he say higher prices were the result of speculation or that higher prices could be expected because speculators were predicting it with their purchasing of futures contracts. If he said they were the cause he is an idiot. You may notice Obama has never repeated that charge, he only said it once, it wasn't on the teleprompter. He added he was now instructing Eric Holder to investigate it but there has been nothing happen on that front since someone, maybe Holder who looked shocked, explained to him how the futures markets work and why the The Chicago Mercantile Exchange and other commodities brokers exist.

Did he mention who had sold those contracts, also hedge funds and money managers. A net long position are those buying futures contracts with a promise to pay a higher price in the month and date due. For each long position there is a short position which guarantees they can buy the oil at the agreed on price. If oil goes above the price promised by those holding a long position they make money If oil doesn't go up to that price or higher they lose the spread between what they committed to pay and the actual price while the seller makes the same amount they lost.The only thing driving oil up or down is supply and demand.

February 22, 2012 at 7:36 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

This is BB Bama belting out "The Price of Gas Blues"...

https://www.facebook.com/#!/photo.php?fbid=315007211890977&set=a.119506304774403.17273.114364638621903&type=1&theater

Not sure how many will be able to view that.

February 22, 2012 at 7:36 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

nooga,

Just curious, why are most of you leftists total jerks? It is going to be awful tempting to send you on down the road when you come begging during the obama economic collapse. Lucky thing for you, most of us conservatives have a soft spot for the pitiful and will help you out. That is, unless you try to take what is not yours, then all bets are off.

February 22, 2012 at 7:50 p.m.

conservative, hint at what? Please be explicit at what you're saying and how it contrasts with what I said. If you just wanted to say "I see you are correct" then you really expressed yourself poorly.

BigRidgePatriot, so what you're saying is that Obama should restrict domestic production instead?

February 22, 2012 at 7:56 p.m.
MTJohn said...

conservative said...When you used the word "crisis", I took that to mean something in line with the above definition and that is why I put "crisis" in quotes.

Do you remember the gas lines during the '70's? That was a crisis, as your dictionary defines it. Yes, we did get through it. However, that crisis was a pretty good indicator of things to come, i.e. higher energy prices, fuel shortages, secondary effects that ripple throughout our economy and potential for global conflicts. I'd suggest that energy meets your definition of crisis and that longer we ignore it, the worse the crisis when it comes to full maturity.

conservative said...My jaw droped over your "Virtually everything about the lifestyle of humans, at least since the transition from a hunter/gatherer to an agrarian economy has compromised the integrity of God's creation" statement.

Good. I hope that it encouraged to think about the impacts that humans have on God's creation. I know it was a very sweeping statement. But, if you do think about it, I'd predict that you would be hard pressed to serve up factual information to refute it. Short of leaving the planet, it would be difficult/impossible to live with a zero-footprint. But, we all have the opportunity to make choices and we all have the capacity to reduce our footprint.

conservative said...If you would carefully read MTJohn, you would have to conclude he is opposed to drilling for more oil. Is that what you want?

Conservative - I think you over simplified what I posted. I'm not necessarily opposed to increased production. I am opposed to increased production of domestic resources for the purpose of exporting much of that production. Doesn't it strike you as a bit peculiar that we are dependent on imported oil, yet we continue to export much of our domestic production? I am opposed to increased production without sufficient mitigation to protect clean water, clean air, soil fertility, native vegetation and wildlife. I am opposed to increased production without ensuring the integrity of the communities where that production occurs. E.g. have you checked out the sociologically consequences that have occurred in the communities in the Williston Basin? I'm opposed to thinking that we can drill our way out of the pending crisis. In short, I am opposed to making decisions with heads stuck in places where the sun don't shine.

February 22, 2012 at 8:05 p.m.

And if you think Human beings have changed the world only for the better, I would beg to differ. We are human, and we do make mistakes.

February 22, 2012 at 8:10 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

happywithnewbulbs said... "so what you're saying is that Obama should restrict domestic production instead?"

No, Happybulbs. Obama is already doing everything he can to restrict domestic production by effecting what he has control of, new drilling and exploration. There is not a mechanism readily at hand to restrict production out of existing wells or he would probably be using it.

Why is this so hard to understand? All the US has to do is start demonstrating a willingness to expand capacity and the Middle East will respond by increasing production to bring down prices to a point that it does not make economic sense to bring new capacity on line. Sure, it also helps to reduce consumption. I am all for that. I even support Obama’s ridiculously stringent CAFÉ standards. If it was not for the threat of that standard the market would have oil prices even higher.

February 22, 2012 at 8:12 p.m.

BRP: I'm not sure how you think that'll work. Do you believe that such exploration and development will indefinitely prolong domestic production? All actually expanding capacity would do would be to deplete US reserves faster, and the OPEC countries would shrug, and wait till the future when they'd really have us over a barrel, without even the threat of potential US reserves to access. Oil doesn't spoil that easily, and I do not think that the available reserves the US has would enable us to drop the price low enough that the regimes you're concerned about would be unable to sustain themselves.

Or do you believe that the President should just engage in some empty posturing, and merely threaten to do it, while keeping reserves untapped so the actual potential remains?

Seems like a lot of poker-playing. A nice bluff can work. But sometimes you need to change the cards you have to keep in the game.

Oil isn't the only possible trump the US has, let's use some others as well. I can support your desire to have options, but I don't see your plan as sufficiently multi-faceted. Throw in some nuclear, hydro, solar, wind and geothermal investment.

February 22, 2012 at 8:36 p.m.
conservative said...

Bulb --

I Illustrated how a increase in the supply of oil lowerd the price of oil. This principle works with tomatoes and it works with just about every product.

You wrote this: Unfortunately for you conservative, economics are complex, and you're ignoring the influence of an oligopoly. OPEC has a price which they want to get for their products, and they cooperate to keep prices high

I then wrote: Though your comment is "complex",you seem to have stumbled onto something there with your - "OPEC has a price which they want to get for their products, and they cooperate to keep prices high."

I'll check back in a while to see if you have discovered that the OPEC cooperation that you brought up makes my point.-

That "cooperation" you brought up is simply that OPEC would cut production which would drive up the price of oil, making my point. I then gave you titles of articles which pointed out what OPEC did and would do to affect the supply of oil on the world market and thus affect the price.

Here are the two titles, I gave you: "OPEC Cuts Oil Production to Drive Up Prices" and "OPEC Cuts Production To Stem Drop In Oil Prices".

Now Harp, and BigRidgePatriot then made the same point-twice. You disagreed with me when you wrote : Unfortunately for you conservative.....so, if YOU were agreeing with me then YOU were the one who expressed himself poorly. Remember, You were responding to my comment about how supply affected the price of oil.

February 22, 2012 at 8:38 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

happywithnewbulbs said... “ I'm not sure how you think that'll work. Do you believe that such exploration and development will indefinitely prolong domestic production? All actually expanding capacity would do would be to deplete US reserves faster, and the OPEC countries would shrug, and wait till the future when they'd really have us over a barrel, without even the threat of potential US reserves to access”

Reagan pulled it off in the 80’s. It will work because OPEC cannot afford to lose control of the market. They will drive prices as low as they need to in order to deter new capacity. Once new oil is discovered and tapped into we can use those reserves to play the market just like OPEC does.

The Middle East is completely dependent on income from oil. They will sacrifice short term income for protecting a longer term market position. If we were capable of coming up with a comprehensive plan that included both aggressive conservation and expansion of domestic production we could control the world energy market instead of the other way around.

”Oil doesn't spoil that easily, and I do not think that the available reserves the US has would enable us to drop the price low enough that the regimes you're concerned about would be unable to sustain themselves.”

All we have to do is play the oil game until cost effective alternatives become available. All it would take would be a game changing technique to crack water into hydrogen and oxygen, or an efficient biofuel that was based on human waste instead of competing for crop lands.

”Or do you believe that the President should just engage in some empty posturing, and merely threaten to do it, while keeping reserves untapped so the actual potential remains?”

Develop the reserves and use them if we have to. They WILL be used eventually, if not for fuel, as a raw material for plastics and the like.

“Oil isn't the only possible trump the US has, let's use some others as well. I can support your desire to have options, but I don't see your plan as sufficiently multi-faceted. Throw in some nuclear, hydro, solar, wind and geothermal investment.”

Nuclear yes. More hydro has too many environmental negatives, wind is a joke, geothermal is good where it is practical. I think we need to focus on conservation to buy time for alternatives to develop. If I could retire right now I would be a) building an off-the-grid earth-sheltered home and b) building a 100 mpg commuter car that could run circles around most of the cars we drive today.

February 22, 2012 at 8:59 p.m.

conservative: And what do you think my disagreement with you was? Could you please express your understanding in your own words, since copying a quote does not demonstrate what your understanding is, and that's what I want to know.

I know what I said. I want to know what you think I said.

BRP: Well, it's good that you prefer looking for options besides just your exploration plan. So how much do you think developing that game-changing alternative will cost? The same with developing that commuter car. It will cost significant money and infrastructure investments, including some from the government. Oh you might be able to put something together for yourself, there are folks who have converted vehicles to use batteries, but that's not feasible for society as a whole, so you'd not be making it a consumer product without being prepared to get people to spend the money to change the game.

And if you want to build an off the grid home, unless you pick a location that's totally unsuitable(which would be as possible for solar or geothermal, so you don't have to do it), you will want a wind turbine, they work quite well. Don't believe the fear-mongering. Go to the home show, there may be somebody there who can set one up for you, see how a small one might benefit you.

Especially since you have to hope for the plan to work and not come out worse for the country.

February 22, 2012 at 9:04 p.m.
conservative said...

MTJohn--

So you feel we have had an energy "crisis" for over 30yrs. I have noticed that the "crisis" word comes up only when there are spikes in gas prices and then the mess media, Lieberals and Demoncrats seek political gain.

Now GOD gave us those natural resources to use and I thank GOD for the progress, comfort,the saving of lives, the increase in our standard of living to name a few benefits that oil, gas and coal has brought to the world. Of this I am quite certain, the vast majority of the world would agree with me on this. You are in a small minority.

Now you are against drilling for more oil or we wouldn't be having this discussion. You agree with and support Obamination or we wouldn't be having this discussion. It is oil, and coal for quite a long time to come, simply because it is cheap. You need to come to that knowledge.

February 22, 2012 at 9:06 p.m.

Don't worry conservative, the energy companies, conservatives, and Republicans also sought political...and financial gain exploiting those crises.

BTW, they also use the word crisis to describe illegal immigration, education, the debt, taxes, and foreign trade.

But God did not give us natural resources and desire for us to use them without prudence. Especially since you think it'll be for quite a long time to come.

A lack of prudence would change that very quickly.

February 22, 2012 at 9:28 p.m.
patriot1 said...

Chet....I really enjoy reading your posts...you articulate liberalism with such clarity.

February 22, 2012 at 9:29 p.m.
conservative said...

Bulb --

After I made the point that increased production of oil would reduce the price of oil, you wrote the words : "Unfortunately for you conservative, economics are complex, and you're ignoring the influence of an oligopoly. OPEC has a price which they want to get for their products, and they cooperate to keep prices high"

Now those were YOUR words and any reasonable person could see you were disagreeing with me. Why else are we having this dance? Also Harp and BigRidgePatriot also made the point about the price of oil being affected by the supply of oil. You can't be that obtuse, can you?

Don't stay up too late.

February 22, 2012 at 9:29 p.m.

I know what I wrote conservative, now write your understanding of what you think I said.

Don't keep dodging it. You'll run out of net. Just say exactly what you think my disagreement was. Using nothing but your own words.

February 22, 2012 at 9:43 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

happywithnewbulbs said... “So how much do you think developing that game-changing alternative will cost?”

Much less if the government keeps their inept hands out of it.

“ The same with developing that commuter car. It will cost significant money and infrastructure investments, including some from the government. “

I think it would be pretty easy to build a fun, super-efficient car. The powertrains exist; the rest is just mass and wind resistance. The federal government has hurt progress on this front immensely with their mandated crash testing, which has been driving up the weight and height of vehicles. I never crash my vehicles so I am absolutely not interested in giving up fuel economy for crash worthiness. I don’t even insure my vehicles, except for mandatory liability. Instead I save the money and pay cash for slightly used cars when the time comes. You may be right that my efforts will mostly affect me and my family and not be a real game changer. Or maybe a conservative outlook is becoming more popular and similar independent efforts will become a movement. If our economy collapses under the boot heel of Obama it may become a necessity.

”And if you want to build an off the grid home, unless you pick a location that's totally unsuitable(which would be as possible for solar or geothermal, so you don't have to do it), you will want a wind turbine, they work quite well“

Where I want to build, wind is too sporadic. A tiny bit of wood heat, passive solar hot water, and photovoltaic solar for a very small electricity demand will do it. The plans are mostly complete, I just need the time to build it.

February 22, 2012 at 9:53 p.m.

BRP, well, it will have less money involved, since almost nobody will spend any money on it. Unfortunately, it'll also be less successful. Miracle science does not happen except in the story books.

And I think you mistook my point, since you didn't quote the most important part. Building such a car is easy for an individual. Now get it in the hands of 10,000 citizens, or 100,000. No? Then you won't change much.

For example, great, so you don't crash your vehicle. Too bad the other people on the road don't. And yes, they are driving bigger and heavier vehicles, but not because of safety. I'm chuckling at the thought, those vehicles actually do WORSE on the crash testing. But still, they're going to be on the road with you. That means you're going to risk yourself far more.

Which gets us back to the problem, you the individual might be ok, but you're not living alone away from everybody else, and what they do will effect you. Which is why different solutions are warranted than just the rugged individualist approach.

Good luck with your house idea, but I'd really suggest considering alternative locations to take advantage of wind power, you might be surprised at how much less maintenance wind is compared to solar panels. It also have the advantage of being something you can construct from scrap should the economy collapse as you fear. They can also be more readily re-purposed to mechanical uses should your batteries fail.

February 22, 2012 at 10:13 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Harp3339 said: “ML quoted an article written by a journalist.... Did he say higher prices were the result of speculation or that higher prices could be expected because speculators were predicting it with their purchasing of futures contracts. If he said they were the cause he is an idiot."

I believe the main intent of the Bloomberg BusinessWeek article was to point out that rising gas costs is not demand driven, Harp3339. I posted the quotes by Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst for the Oil Price Information Service, because some analysts are arguing that speculative hedge fund money is a contributing factor in driving up the cost of gas, and I was curious to see if any of our TFP posters had any additional thoughts and/or information about this.

But why do I have to explain all of this to you Harp3339? Why don’t you just read the article? Although it does not answer your question, you may still find it interesting. It also discusses refineries being squeezed by higher crude prices, and points out that as the U.S. refining capacity has decreased, prices have begun to rise. Anyway, I’ve already posted the Bloomberg link for anyone that might want to read more, but I’ll do it again just for you, Harp3339.

http://www.businessweek.com/finance/rising-gas-prices-not-demand-driven-02142012.html

February 22, 2012 at 10:35 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

I am driving a Civic these days. The thing is too heavy! I am perfectly happy riding a motorcycle so I cannot relate to your notion that a lightweight car is too dangerous. The idea of buying more car to act as a crash shield does not make any sense.

If Obama's CAFE standards are not overturned the weight and frontal area af all vehicles is going to have to come WAY down. SUV'S and vans will give way to station wagons. Cars are going to be much lighter. Trust me.

February 22, 2012 at 10:40 p.m.
rolando said...

Welllll. This cartoon has gone viral or something.

As if Dear Leader's avowed war against American oil independence isn't enough, here's a little something to start teeth a-gnashin' and the spin-meisters to start their engines...er-r-r...dynamos or whatever they call those things that are supposed to make a Volt move.

Be sure to read the update.....

http://www.maggiesnotebook.com/2012/02/obama-gives-7-oil-rich-islands-to-russia-secret-giveaway-alaska-not-consulted/

February 22, 2012 at 10:50 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

BigRidgePatriot said: “Iran’s economy is already on the brink of collapse. If they made a significant cut in production it would be over for the current regime. That is why the US needs to boost domestic production.”

It seems to me that there are multiple factors involved in the price increase of gas, BigRidgePatriot. Clearly, the political situation involving Iran is one of these factors, but the shut down of so many refineries in the U.S is obviously another:

“Fadel Gheit, senior energy analyst at the investment firm Oppenheimer and Co., says there's an even bigger reason than Iran.

"The supply of gasoline has been declining," Gheit says. "We have 700,000 barrels of refining capacity [that were shut down] in the last three months. That is almost 5 percent of U.S. gasoline production ... now offline."

Energy analyst Phil Verleger says that's an amazing drop in refining capacity.

"I've been following the industry since 1971," he says, "and never in my life have I seen so many refineries close all at once."

Sunoco, Conoco and Hess have all retired outmoded, unprofitable refineries in the eastern U.S. and Caribbean. The shuttered refineries were not retrofitted to meet the requirements for removing sulfur from high-sulfur crude. As the supplies of "sweet" low-sulfur crude that they could refine have contracted and become more expensive, they became money losers.

And, according to Verleger, a big European refinery that sent gasoline to the U.S. has also closed"

http://www.npr.org/2012/02/22/147261788/whats-behind-the-recent-hike-in-gas-prices

February 22, 2012 at 11:10 p.m.

BigRidgePatriot, they aren't buying it as a crash shield, not entirely even for those who do think of it. Bigger cars are bought for a variety of reasons, including ego, but also sometimes access.

rolando, it's an electric motor, a dynamo is a producer of electric power, specifically DC from some mechanical effect. A motor converts electrical power into mechanical effect. It could be called an engine, but I've rarely seen that terminology used with an electric source.

Though technically that doesn't make the Volt move, since what's causing the volt to move is friction on the wheels, if I recall my physics correctly.

As for those Alaskan islands, it's older than you think.

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/6/16/153807.shtml

You might also want to look where the islands are.

February 22, 2012 at 11:17 p.m.
MTJohn said...

conservative said...

MTJohn--

So you feel we have had an energy "crisis" for over 30yrs. I have noticed that the "crisis" word comes up only when there are spikes in gas prices and then the mess media, Lieberals and Demoncrats seek political gain.

Now GOD gave us those natural resources to use and I thank GOD for the progress, comfort,the saving of lives, the increase in our standard of living to name a few benefits that oil, gas and coal has brought to the world. Of this I am quite certain, the vast majority of the world would agree with me on this. You are in a small minority.

Now you are against drilling for more oil or we wouldn't be having this discussion. You agree with and support Obamination or we wouldn't be having this discussion. It is oil, and coal for quite a long time to come, simply because it is cheap. You need to come to that knowledge.

  1. I explained my use of the word, "crisis". I think we have been in crisis since the oil shortages of the '70's. The real crisis is that 40 years ago, the need to transition to transition to diversified energy sources. We could also see that we still had the opportunity to make that transition relatively painlessly. But, we were too selfish and too short-sighted and we were content to let the petroleum industry dictate the agenda.

  2. God gave us His creation to steward. Yes, we may use it. We may not abuse it. I don't disagree with you that the use of natural resources for humanitarian purposes has been a good thing. But, who are you kidding to suggest that philanthropy has been the driver for energy development in this country? For some reason, were he alive today, I don't think the prophet, Amos, would have kind words for 21st Century Americans.

  3. I am in favor of responsible petroleum development. The advocates for drilling consider responsibility to be an unnecessary impediment.

February 22, 2012 at 11:44 p.m.

Simply "human" would fit better, I think, than "humanitarian" since the latter does have a bit more emotional loading to its meaning.

Or perhaps even "humano-centric" might work.

February 23, 2012 at 12:05 a.m.
fairmon said...

ML said...

But why do I have to explain all of this to you Harp3339? Why don’t you just read the article? Although it does not answer your question, you may still find it interesting. It also discusses refineries being squeezed by higher crude prices, and points out that as the U.S. refining capacity has decreased, prices have begun to rise. Anyway, I’ve already posted the Bloomberg link for anyone that might want to read more, but I’ll do it again just for you.

Less refining capacity may result in a shortage of gas with an excess of oil ready to be refined can and probably will cause rising gas prices. Refineries are not profitable and more capacity loss is likely. This is a totally different reason than blaming people that buy futures contracts to lock in oil prices that are less than what they think they will be in the future. Airlines do this to lessen the impact on their business and if they guess wrong they can lose a lot of money along with others speculating that prices will increase.

Why would the DOE not include in new leases for drilling to stipulate in the lease that the oil will be for U.S. consumption unless there is an excess beyond storage capacity. Could it be the lease fees and royalties that generate millions in revenue to the government may be less. The administration and congress avoid this subject because very few people are aware of the money going to the treasury from lease and oil royalties in addition to taxes that are higher when gas is higher.

February 23, 2012 at 4:54 a.m.
fairmon said...

Oil/gas prices are based on anticipated replacement cost.

February 23, 2012 at 5:02 a.m.
MTJohn said...

BigRidgePatriot said...I am driving a Civic these days. The thing is too heavy! I am perfectly happy riding a motorcycle so I cannot relate to your notion that a lightweight car is too dangerous.

Riding a bicycle or walking leaves a smaller footprint. It's also good exercise.

February 23, 2012 at 7:28 a.m.
fairmon said...

How serious are we about energy independence lower cost and environmental excellence? Extreme would be scrap every 18 wheeler. No locomotive moves until it is maximum length and load. Return to steam locomotives with natural gas boilers. Only electrical powered vehicles or pedal power allowed for personal travel on hi-ways and roads. Mandate natural gas as the fuel for emergency and other public vehicles and local product movement or delivery. Mass transit electrical powered trains and buses with fees sufficient to recover the investment over time plus an annual profit.

Future possibility; magnetically powered speed controlled programmable vehicles with no driver required. Don't worry about the affect on the economy and unemployment, the government will provide. Remember Pelosi assured us unemployment is one of the best economic stimulus available. This is my forward looking liberal view.

February 23, 2012 at 8:40 a.m.
mymy said...

The "Treehuggers" are killing us. Research the number of different blends because of them. With the stroke of a pin the O could drop gas price at least a dollar by changing the number of blends.

February 23, 2012 at 8:47 a.m.
MTJohn said...

Isn't it curious that the loudest voices in support of free-market principles are also the first to complain about those principles at work in the price of gasoline?

February 23, 2012 at 8:56 a.m.

harp, I'm pretty sure it's the Republicans who have assured us that unemployment is a motivator to work, especially when it comes with no support. At least, that's what I get out of their opposition to extension of unemployment compensation. They believe people will be DRIVEN to succeed if you don't help them.

It's a Darwinian belief, I believe. Throw people in the ocean, make them learn to swim!

Whereas what Pelosi is talking about, was the availability of money and the desire to spend it as opposed to penury leading to greater economic activity. That is one of the fundamentals of economics. When everybody's hunkering down, hiding their money under the bed, doing nothing, just concerned about survival, it's worse for everybody since the money doesn't flow, and your labor gets you nothing more than another day older.

Still, if you want to make something pay for itself, try the highway system we have now. Last I heard it's paying for itself at about 60 cents on the dollar of cost. I think we'll have to raise gas taxes! Sure, electric vehicles are getting a free ride, and we could tax them to pay for their costs, but that's only a fraction of the business.

mymy, and then we'd pay in our lungs. Net loss, thank you, but no thank you. Just because you don't see anything but the price tag doesn't mean you won't regret the loss.

Which would you rather pay, a small premium at the pump, or live in a smog-choked land with your lungs burning?

I pick the former. If you wish to pick the latter, well, I think you're going to be outvoted.

February 23, 2012 at 9:55 a.m.
mymy said...

Happy: we don't need approx. 30 different blends.

February 23, 2012 at 10:37 a.m.

Well, I'm sure you're much more enlightened than the petro-chemists involved.

Please provide us a list of those blends, and tell us which ones you would eliminate and why.

Do remember, a lot of the reasons for different blends are performance issues. Gasoline in Colorado is blended differently because of the higher altitude. In Alaska due to the colder weather. In Arizona and Florida due to the heat.

But surely you can produce a list and explain which you would remove.

February 24, 2012 at 12:43 a.m.

NEW - COMPLETE COVERAGE OF EURO-CRISES(BUREAUCRAZY) vs 2012(2008) US ELECTIONS FRAUD(remember Kennedy!!?) !!! FIND OUT WHY HOPE DIES LAST https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtWCcCkBeYo

RECENT FLORIDA(will fluctuate, but same story elsewhere will repeat) VOTING POLES HAVE SHOWN MORMON ROMNEY AS LEADING CANDIDATE WITH 47% APPROVAL RATE(in reality 7% only), GINGRICH 32% (in reality 14%), SANATORUM 14% (reality 32%), AND RON PAUL WITH 7 % WHILE IN REALITY WAS THE HIGHEST AT 47% !!!

THE BIGGEST PROBLEM WHEN TAKING IN CONSIDERATION RON PAUL(chameleon), PRESENTS THIS http://www.chron.com/news/article/Paul-Immigration-not-solved-by-barbed-wire-guns-2918313.php FACT WHICH BECOMES EXTREMELY BOTHERING ISSUE INVOLVING http://notethicsbutbutchery.blogspot.com/

US government consist of Obama alike lawyers(liars), Ron Paul alike doctors, and Gingrich/Sanatorum alike family members of affected(brain disease) individuals who have helped pass CRIMINAL bill against target whites. CRIME NO DIFFERENT FROM ROMNEY(Bush screwed US for Obama and now it's Romney's turn) WHOSE FATHER EXCELLED AFTER GM WAS DELIBERATELY BANKRUPT = AMERICA TODAY(soon to be success based on previous sabotage) !!

UNITED STATES PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS 2012(2008) ARE FRAUD !!! VOID THEM AND DEMAND DAVID DUKE FOR USA PRESIDENT - NOW !!!

IT WILL BE FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE KENNEDY THAT YOU WILL ACTUALLY VOTE !!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtWCcCkBeYo

February 24, 2012 at 5:12 p.m.
stanleyyelnats said...

Gasoline prices started creeping up (like everything else) when George W Bush and Republicans took control of the country in 2000 and the prices ain't slowed since.

February 25, 2012 at 6:59 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.