Mr. President, are you paying attention?

[rn79870]

Supply and demand sets prices. Oil companies are just businesses that most of us who have mutual funds are invested in. We need to waste less gas, that's all.

And don't dis Dana - she is like my favorite Presidential Spokesperson EVAR!

Keith, substitute "manipulates" for "sets" in your first sentence and I will agree with you in respect to oil companies. They skillfully manipulate supply and demand as well as the Opeckers skillfully manipulate supply and demand by slowing the flow of oil. The supply isn't the problem, it is the artificial manipulation of that supply that is the problem.

[audtatious]

Last refinery was built in 1976. Environmentalists bury every move for more expoloration. Shale oil, anwar drilling, more refineries, etc. are constantly tied up in courts until it's defeated. It's not like the industry had not tried.

[rn79870]

Yes, I do think PRESIDENT Bush is listening; however, I'm in 100% agreement with AZhitman, free enterprise without government interference. I have earned my personal right to drive my 6000# SUV and my 4000# gas belching pickup and my G35 WOT; however, for the 300 million other Americans who have not earned that right, they are GIVEN that right without interference from government.

If the $4 or even $5 Gallon of gas bothers anyone, besides cutting into your weekly "healthy" McDonalds trips, well, then ride the bus.

(yea, I'm a Republican/Libertarian and YES, I have great respect for PRESIDENT Bush and his administration)

Sorry, I disagree with your ascertain that President Bush is listening. In fact, I think he missed the boat here as indicated by his surprise at the forecast of 4 dollar a gallon gas.

You, like the rest of us, have earned your vehicle(s), and the privilege to drive them. I assume you did it the same way the rest of us did it, hard work and attention to responsibility.

If you choose to spend a larger percent of your disposable income in operating those vehicles, that is your right. I'm not proposing that the government tells you what type/style/color of vehicle to drive.

If $4 or $5 dollar a gallon gas doesn't bother you, then fine. I too can afford gasoline, but far too many won't be able to. To many it won't be a matter of foregoing a movie once in a while, it will be a matter of choosing between a prescription or a tank of gas.

Even your cliche about McDonalds rings of the problem. Do you know that 1 in 12 Americans have worked at one time or another for McDonalds. you can see where this is headed right?

Take the bus? I would if I could. the sweet little old lady across the street can't. She walks slowly, and unsteadily. She goes to dialysis a couple times a week, and needs her car. I understand that her Social Security check went up a whopping 2.3% this year. I don't think she is alone.

And finally, by referring to driving your G at WOT (wide open throttle) I certainly hope you're not referring to (driving) irresponsibly, because that right has never been earned short of holding a NASCAR license.

Thank you.

[J-Owner]

It would cost between $1 and $2 Billion to build a new refinery and likely two years to get operational.

Building one would do nothing to ease the situation in the short term and the oil companies have no intention of diverting $2 billion of their profits out of their pocket towards anything to ease the supply issue.

Things/ prices are going to get much worse in the future as other countries like China expand their infrastructure and use more cars which in turn uses more oil.

We are already systematically plundering all of this countries wealth and advantage by sending jobs offshore and allowing countries like China to surpass us in technology and skill.

We have far worse potential problems than $4 a gallon for gas. Too bad more people don't focus on the bigger picture.

[nismofly]

2 things:

He must not know that California is part of the nation.

when did that happen?

and

But, if you had purchased $1,000.00 worth of beer instead, and drank all the beer, then turned in the cans for the aluminum recycling REFUND you would have $214.00.

what in the hell horrible cheap *** beer is that youd have to drink to get that much back

even with cali's 10 cent deposits the most youd ever get back would be under $200

[rn79870]

Ok time for my $0.02. All I am going to say is PREACH ON AZ........I couldn't agree with you more.

Further, Bush does not care what oil prices do, why would he?? His own family, along with the Bin Laden family and some of the Saudi Royal family all have oil interests in a consordium called the Carlyle Group. (and doing even voice your opinion that I am making that up because it is pure fact....so save your breath)

Bush wants high oil prices because it makes him richer. He is also out of the White House in 9 months so why worry about it.

Did you know that it costs more to pump water out of the ground over there than it does oil. I personally do not know what the best solutions is and I can promise you none of the candidates do either, especially Obama. Everytime he speaks it makes me throw up a little in my mouth. The only thing Obama is good at is telling you exactly what you want to hear and then blowing smoke up your a$$.

All I know is I can afford $4 a gallon and I have more important things to worry about at the moment. Again, just my $0.02.

AZ Hitman for PRESIDENT

I'm pretty much in agreement with you in this. Except for your last comment that is. I'm not ready for a monarchy.

Too many people dismiss the $4/gallon thing with the "I can afford it" comment. Look deeper into the issue. Everything which moves on wheels uses fuel. Everything in the stores get there via wheels. Even the beer truck uses fuel. Higher fuel will push the country closer to the recession they say we aren't in. Not only that, but the dollar will continue to devalue, which will further increase the cost of a barrel of oil which will increase the cost of fuel which will... The circle is complete.

Thanks for your response.

[rn79870]

I'm re-registering as an Independent this week, in fact... The two-party system is broken.

Wow, that's news. It just proves that the further you go to the right, the closer you get to the left...
Modified by rn79870 at 9:22 AM 3/4/2008

[rn79870]

Last refinery was built in 1976. Environmentalists bury every move for more expoloration. Shale oil, anwar drilling, more refineries, etc. are constantly tied up in courts until it's defeated. It's not like the industry had not tried.

Agreed. It wasn't that long ago that the coastal city of Santa Barbara (I believe) voted against off shore drilling because they would have to see oil rigs when they looked seaward (probably with binoculars). It never dawned on them that when the oil dried up, the rigs could be removed.

Perhaps if we had a governmental agency to facilitate the implementation of new exploration and new refineries , with the power of veto over the tree huggers, we wouldn't be in the problem we are in. (I'm not against tree hugging, it just needs to be regulated... )

[smockers83]

Supply and demand sets prices.

To a certain point that is true, however there is a lot of speculation in the price of oil. Any news that could be remotely related to oil causes speculation. If oil wasn't traded by traders and priced solely on supply and demand, I wonder how much the price would fall when speculation is taken out.

$1000 in beer and $200 back in deposits at 10 cents a can, you would have to buy cases of 30s at $15--so we're talking the likes of Busch and Natty. I'll stick to my $10 12 packs of Killians.



Anyone remember like 6 years ago we told people we wouldn't buy gasoline if it went above $2?

[etschell]

i really don't get why you would complain about gas prices because:

A. you consciously bought a sports car with horrible gas mileage.B. you chose to live in California, a state notoriously known for above average gas prices.C. bush doesn't control gas prices.

[gwoods]

i really don't get why you would complain about gas prices because:

A. you consciously bought a sports car with horrible gas mileage.B. you chose to live in California, a state notoriously known for above average gas prices.C. bush doesn't control ANYTHING.

Fixed that for you

Oh and if you think your (neighbors) Prius is saving the enviornment read this link

http://clubs.ccsu.edu/recorder...D=188

[Temple240]

Yes, I do think PRESIDENT Bush is listening; however, I'm in 100% agreement with AZhitman, free enterprise without government interference. I have earned my personal right to drive my 6000# SUV and my 4000# gas belching pickup and my G35 WOT; however, for the 300 million other Americans who have not earned that right, they are GIVEN that right without interference from government.

If the $4 or even $5 Gallon of gas bothers anyone, besides cutting into your weekly "healthy" McDonalds trips, well, then ride the bus.

(yea, I'm a Republican/Libertarian and YES, I have great respect for PRESIDENT Bush and his administration)

You're as greedy as the oil companies. You feel like you have enough money to not have to care about your impact on the rest of the world. Cool.

The rest of you saying that we need to drill more and pollute more aren't doing anyone any favors either. Hooray we have cheaper fuel! Screw this planet I'm going out with a bang!

[rn79870]

i really don't get why you would complain about gas prices because:

A. you consciously bought a sports car with horrible gas mileage.B. you chose to live in California, a state notoriously known for above average gas prices.C. bush doesn't control gas prices.

A. I'm not complaining about the mileage of my car. I would like it to be better, but it is what it is. I'm complaining about the current administration failing, for whatever reason, to remain abreast of the current condition. I'm complaining about the lack of direction with respect to the ultimate problem that this will create.

B. I choose to live in California. True. However, what starts in California more likely than not will be in your backyard sooner than later. That 4 bucks is not limited to gas in my tank, it will soon spread to everything transported by truck, train or plane.

C. Bush doesn't control gas prices. Correct, apparently he doesn't even know what they are.

[audtatious]

I'm complaining about the current administration failing, for whatever reason, to remain abreast of the current condition.

All Administrations have failed. It's not just Bush regardless of how some wish that to be the truth.

[Sentientbydesign]

Bush may not be controling the prices, but he sure as hell hasn't helped things either.

I'm still questioning why so many good presidents have been or had attempted assasinations, but not this *******.

[rn79870]

All Administrations have failed. It's not just Bush regardless of how some wish that to be the truth.

True, but unfortunately this is GW's watch. Unlike a good captain, Bush isn't planning on going down with the ship, he's content with leaving it floundering on the rocky shoals of recession.

In all fairness, no one may have been able to prevent that. Not even a good Democrat.

[smockers83]

I think the word failed when coupled with Bush administration is used to loosely. For one, if an administration failed, we would no longer be free, we would no longer be our own country, we would no longer be America.

He's told us to conserve. Can anyone on this forum honestly say they have started to conserve their energy, mainly fuel for their cars? I would guess maybe max 2% could say so. I know I can't. He's even tried to get Congress to build new refineries on old military bases, but they turned that one down. When you can't change supply and demand keeps going up (here and around the world, you have to remember EMEs like China and India), price goes up. So to say that Bush has failed us, I'd like to change that statement to Congress has failed us. The Democratic Congress has done absolutely nothing besides pass bills that Bush wants and waste time and money creating bills to get troops out of Iraq. Pulling troops out of Iraq is the most insensible idea I've heard in the past 8 years. Do I agree with the reason we're there, no, there's definitely a better policy that no one seems to talk about--containment. Modify our policy from the Cold War and this wouldn't be happening, at all. Democrats also said they were going to cut down on the pork barrel, its now at an all time high I think.

[J-Owner]

I agree with you and I am not dismissing the $4 a gallon argument but the only way to change that is to change the government. Change congress through the elimination of lobbyists, which would change and force new ways for Detroit to do business and focus more on alternative fuels that what they have been . They say we will focus more on the issue but then no one slaps their hand to force them to.

The price per barrel of oil is tied to the US dollar. The weaker the dollar the more everyone but Americans benefit. While the price of gas is a big issue it is not the most important issue that we have to deal with. Our continual borrowing of money to finance the frivolous **** that the Bush Administration has gotten us into bed with is seriously railroading us for decades down the road. We are financing ourselves to the point of financial destruction!

Look at what prime was back in the late 80's, double digits. If you had that high of rates in this day and time, and by the way we are already in a recession, gas prices would be the least of the average americans worries.

My point is everyone wants to focus on "oh my god gas went up $.20. That is NOT the big picture. Too many people are missing the big picture. If gas goes up, then you cut back on car washes, starbucks, dry cleaning, booze, cigarettes, etc. Imagine if rates are so high you can't buy a home or subprime and housing fluctuations start to loom in on appreciation rates and suddenly the value of your home and potential equity is down 10%. Or how about credit dard rates skyrocket to 40-45% and people stop paying or people continue to walk away from their homes instead of curing their late pays. the average American taxpayer pays for all of this s*&t. that is not counting all of the government programs we sponsor for illegals and welfare recipients.

Ok I will stop rambling. It is just people need to focus more on the overall picture and consider these things when voting. You can only scream hope hope hope change change change America America so many times. At some point you have to be the politician that can make change and we have rats among us. Blowing smoke and preaching change is much different than actually changing. My grandfather use to say that a smart person believes only half what they hear and a smarter persons knows which half to believe. This is entirely appropriate when considering who to vote for in November.

[audtatious]

True, but unfortunately this is GW's watch. Unlike a good captain, Bush isn't planning on going down with the ship, he's content with leaving it floundering on the rocky shoals of recession.

In all fairness, no one may have been able to prevent that. Not even a good Democrat.

I'm not a Bush nut-sack rider but I'm kinda in with Greg in that the system is broken. Everything is partisan politics and special interests groups. Nothing gets done. The Left has migrated to the far left and the right has migrated to utilizing the old lefts spending habits. I like none of it. There are a large number of long-term opportunities in regards to alternative transportation but they are not here nor ready for prime time. Oil companies have spent billions upon billions making gas more environmentally friendly and dino-products are the only thing we have right now to keep us afloat. We should have started weaning ourselves away from OPEC and others 20 years ago but instead we floundered and flopped around bending over and kissing the butt of the environmentalist groups who solely want their way and only their way.

We have been cutting off our nose to spite our face.

[audtatious]

Ok I will stop rambling. It is just people need to focus more on the overall picture and consider these things when voting. You can only scream hope hope hope change change change America America so many times. At some point you have to be the politician that can make change and we have rats among us. Blowing smoke and preaching change is much different than actually changing. My grandfather use to say that a smart person believes only half what they hear and a smarter persons knows which half to believe. This is entirely appropriate when considering who to vote for in November.

I'm afraid we have 3 lame ducks going for the presidency. All three have the capability to make things worse from a "big picture" perspective.

[smockers83]

Environmentalist groups don't even like environmentally friendly ideas. Interest groups have ruined Capitol Hill. There's too much money going around up there. Our government and even the people of this country are starting to look like the Roman empire that collapsed thousands of years ago.

[audtatious]

I agree. The groups simply want everything to stop and those that are binding things up in the courts will never relent. You can't work with a group that see's things in 2 colors.

[nismofly]

$1000 in beer and $200 back in deposits at 10 cents a can, you would have to buy cases of 30s at $15--so we're talking the likes of Busch and Natty. I'll stick to my $10 12 packs of Killians.

thats what i was getting at...hell i got a 6 pack of Guinness bottles last night for $9 and i was happy at that deal

[Sentientbydesign]

I still think the administration failed.

We have gays and lesbians fighting for the right to wed, but we have lost more civil liberties. Important one.

Our freedoms are waning and our wonderful government is to blame.

[smockers83]

There are worse cases of giving up liberties in times of war than we see today. World War II--Japanese were sent to detainment camps, the economy was put on rations. Those 2 alone are much bigger problems than we have ever experienced in the past 8 years combined.

[telcoman]

I think the word failed when coupled with Bush administration is used to loosely. For one, if an administration failed, we would no longer be free, we would no longer be our own country, we would no longer be America.

He's told us to conserve. Can anyone on this forum honestly say they have started to conserve their energy, mainly fuel for their cars? I would guess maybe max 2% could say so. I know I can't. He's even tried to get Congress to build new refineries on old military bases, but they turned that one down. When you can't change supply and demand keeps going up (here and around the world, you have to remember EMEs like China and India), price goes up. So to say that Bush has failed us, I'd like to change that statement to Congress has failed us. The Democratic Congress has done absolutely nothing besides pass bills that Bush wants and waste time and money creating bills to get troops out of Iraq. Pulling troops out of Iraq is the most insensible idea I've heard in the past 8 years. Do I agree with the reason we're there, no, there's definitely a better policy that no one seems to talk about--containment. Modify our policy from the Cold War and this wouldn't be happening, at all. Democrats also said they were going to cut down on the pork barrel, its now at an all time high I think.

smockers83

I disagree!

Shame on you for supporting that $sshole in the white house. Your state along with others in the midwest have lost many manufacturing jobs. We have wasted over a trillion dollars fighting a useless war in Irag while millions of Americans have no healthcare, our infastructure is falling apart. and our schools suffer from a lack of funding. We had a balanced budget and no debt when Bill turned over the whitehouse to George

[Sentientbydesign]

It doesn't matter if times have been worse.

There is NO reason we should be in the situation we're in. Bush has contributed to the downfall of the US.

Are we going the way of the Romans? Eh, not yet, but the point is, there were no catalysts that sent us whirling into high gas prices, pointless wars, and debt.

Somebody had to allow the prices to rise, the troops to be deployed, and the money to be spent.

[smockers83]

Wow...telcoman. Settle down. I never said I was supporting him nor did I say was not supporting him. What I was trying to do was get across that Congress has done nothing either. In fact, I said I didn't agree with the reason we're over there and offered an idea that absolutely no one has ever mentioned besides the guy that wrote the book that I read a few months ago. I'd advise people to read it, its called Containment by Ian Shapiro.

I completely agree with what you just said. I don't see what there is to disagree with in what I said, unless I thought wrong about something like the pork barrel thing.

As for my state, its problems hopefully won't be mine anymore as I plan on moving out after graduation in April. The state has seen this problem before when factories moved to the South. In fact, where I'm from is one of the few areas in the whole country that has seen home values rise and the economy growing...we are pretty isolated from the fluctuations in the US economy (during the Depression, I've heard that the area was one of the richest areas in the world). Sure my family is still here, but they're safe and sound. I'm not a big fan of unions nowadays and this hogwash about no NAFTA, seriously? C'mon, I'm from the Midwest and disagree with that. NAFTA has opened up trade and reduced tariffs significantly between the 3 countries, which as an econ major, I'm in total favor of because the best way to make an economy grow is to open up trade. And the same goes for the free movement of capital. What's happening is making our country better off in the long run. Opening up to trade and reducing trade barriers and allowing movement of capital, countries begin to specialize in something. This makes it more profitable, prices fall, everyone's better off. There is something my state can be more efficient at, make more money off of, and not be reliant on one industry and diversify its portfolio of businesses. The state government is just as stupid as the federal government, giving all these tax breaks to businesses when we've ran deficits, funding for school has fallen, and our roads suck (granted we have a large state and weather that eats roads for breakfast), among other things.

Sure it sucks what's happening here in the Midwest, and call me narcissistic about it, but we're tough up here...we'll find a way to make it work but it would be nice to see some help. Millions of people moved up here for jobs from the South when unemployment was high there when manufacturing was booming back in the day, now people are leaving...that's what happens, its an economy. That's why the United States has free movement of people and capital between the states.

As for debt by the Bush administration...the tax break Bush put in place was to take the surplus that was created and give it back to the people. We weren't on schedule to be running a deficit until 9/11. And that's your catalyst for debt, pointless wars, and rising gas prices. Bush is not the man you want to decapitate because of high gas prices...he does not determine gas prices, I don't understand why you think its his fault. It just isn't. Some of the things he's done surely has led to the rise in price due to speculation, but so have people in Iran, Africa, China, and India. Every time oil prices rise and you read what traders are saying, you can sense the fear in the market due to some sort of speculation. Remove the speculation and you have fair market priced oil...or about as fair as you can get with a cartel in place.

[Sentientbydesign]

I won't even bother with the 9/11 drama.

Here is my universal answer to our problems WORLDWIDE. Stop having so many damned babies!!! Overpopulation has caused and continues to cause disasterous problems around the world. Especially since, the lower the IQ, the more children couples seem to have.

China got one thing right!

[smockers83]

As for babies, its a "natural" process. It can be seen in every country around the world. The US and the rest of the industrialized world used to be the same way. Every country follows this pattern. Birth and death rates are very high but there is little population growth as they are very close to each other. Medical advancements reduce the death rate but birth rates remain relatively high, causing a population boom. As death rates fall, birth rates fall but still out pace deaths, and as death rates stabilize so do birth rates and very little population growth again, or even contraction. This is where the industrialized world is at, at the replacement rate. The reason we have smaller families is because we don't have to worry about survival and we have lots of money so we can focus on the quality of our children. That's the relationship I think you're looking for.

Poor people and countries, which I'm assuming you're referring to very terribly as those with low IQs (which could be true, but that's a terrible way to put it), the chance of survival is small, so they reproduce like no other. There's also a lack of family planning. And yes some of it has to do with government policies. The reason these countries are poor is because their governments don't open their borders to trade and because of the West. We subsidize our agricultural and cotton businesses so heavily, it prices people out of the market worldwide by reducing prices to a point where they can't make a good profit. Again all economics and economics of population.