Gas Prices

The Tariff King

The Tariff King

Trade War Deadline Winner
Staff member
Why has Biden not turned on the switch yet?

If Trump were still President, would Saudi Arabia be producing back to pre-COVID levels? OPEC stopped production for 2 years.

The idea we were somehow energy independent under Trump and that gas prices would still be $2 is non-sensical.

Oil companies and shareholders are making record profits now. But somehow the last few months I've seen nothing but anti-EV propaganda posted on social media.

The fact oil companies aren't producing and refining more despite having all the permits and contracts to do so, shows how much power they have over our country. Should that not be more incentive to invest in better public transit and elective vehicles?

Conservatives have all the answers. Let's hear it.

And why are electric vehicles worse for the environment than ICE vehicles (I can't wait to hear this one).
 
Not sure why there's anti EV propaganda but they aren't the silver bullet some think. First, the power grid is nowhere near ready for EVs to replace ICEs. We're struggling to keep up with hot and cold weather.

Next, getting the materials needed for them means some pretty nasty mining. Also, if your energy comes from a coal plant you still have a significant carbon footprint with an EV.

Finally, range and charging times still hamstring travel with EVs.

EVs are something to work towards but we're not really close to ending dependence on ICEs.

Biden needs to do everything he can to bring down gas prices but he seems to be struggling with both oil companies and the climate lobby.
 
The Chosen One said:
Why has Biden not turned on the switch yet?

If Trump were still President, would Saudi Arabia be producing back to pre-COVID levels? OPEC stopped production for 2 years.

The idea we were somehow energy independent under Trump and that gas prices would still be $2 is non-sensical.

Oil companies and shareholders are making record profits now. But somehow the last few months I've seen nothing but anti-EV propaganda posted on social media.

The fact oil companies aren't producing and refining more despite having all the permits and contracts to do so, shows how much power they have over our country. Should that not be more incentive to invest in better public transit and elective vehicles?

Conservatives have all the answers. Let's hear it.

And why are electric vehicles worse for the environment than ICE vehicles (I can't wait to hear this one).
Click to expand...

Your whole party ran against fossil fuels. The government sets up a regulatory environment that companies respond to in their future planning. That’s why additional drilling is not happening. Watch what happens when trump or desabtis rolls in on 1/21/24.

You’ll be no where to be found on this issue.
 
striker42 said:
Not sure why there's anti EV propaganda but they aren't the silver bullet some think. First, the power grid is nowhere near ready for EVs to replace ICEs. We're struggling to keep up with hot and cold weather.

Next, getting the materials needed for them means some pretty nasty mining. Also, if your energy comes from a coal plant you still have a significant carbon footprint with an EV.

Finally, range and charging times still hamstring travel with EVs.

EVs are something to work towards but we're not really close to ending dependence on ICEs.

Biden needs to do everything he can to bring down gas prices but he seems to be struggling with both oil companies and the climate lobby.
Click to expand...

The left loves to ignore the mining aspects for batteries.

Also, Putin specifically funded EV groups to push an EV agenda. You get the message?
 
[tw]1528751959376805894[/tw]

They are literally telling their voters it’s their agenda and the voters are still too dumb to understand we are getting screwed at the pump (trickling to all other goods) because of it.

So so so dumb.
 
I said it in another thread and I’ll say it again here - I wish Biden and (D) would just own high gas prices since it’s what they want. Higher prices accelerate the transition to substitutes. Stop blaming Putin and oil company profits and embrace it.
 
acesfull86 said:
I said it in another thread and I’ll say it again here - I wish Biden and (D) would just own high gas prices since it’s what they want. Higher prices accelerate the transition to substitutes. Stop blaming Putin and oil company profits and embrace it.
Click to expand...

They know their stooges will eat it up.

But yeah I agree.
 
acesfull86 said:
I said it in another thread and I’ll say it again here - I wish Biden and (D) would just own high gas prices since it’s what they want. Higher prices accelerate the transition to substitutes. Stop blaming Putin and oil company profits and embrace it.
Click to expand...

Now that there is massive political push back they have to mask their true motives.

Dishonest pricks.
 
https://www.aei.org/articles/does-the-biden-administration-deserve-blame-for-high-gasoline-prices/

Suppose that the market rate of interest relevant for evaluation of oil-industry investments (or for shareholders’ investment opportunities with dividend payouts) is, say, 5 percent. Revenues from the current sales of oil can be reinvested in a market portfolio with an expectation of a 5 percent rate of return.

Suppose also that the market expects crude-oil prices to rise over time at a rate greater than 5 percent because of the anticipated investment decline. Owners of crude-oil resources have a choice: They can produce the oil today, invest the revenues in some fashion (or pay dividends), and expect to earn 5 percent on a risk-adjusted basis. Or they can reduce production during the current time period, shifting it into a future time period, and expect in effect to earn more than 5 percent in the form of rising crude-oil prices. But that reduction in output today raises current prices, and the shift in production into the future reduces expected future prices, so that at any given moment the market equilibrium expected price path slopes upward at the market rate of interest.

Accordingly, an expectation that future investment will be constrained artificially has the effect of raising prices today. Why might the market expect such constraints on future investment? Look no further than the Biden administration’s policies for the answer. The “net-zero” crusade against fossil fuels is an obvious attempt to force a sharp decline in current and future production. There are the various decisions to constrain or disallow investments in pipelines and other such infrastructure, both by the administration directly and by such “independent” regulatory agencies as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. There are efforts to reduce the fossil industry’s access to capital, new fuel-economy rules based on a preposterous analytic framework, efforts to force a substitution of wind and solar electricity (which cannot work simply as a matter of electrical engineering) in place of conventional power generation, the newly tightened methane-emissions rule that will impose significant costs while providing a temperature reduction of five one-thousandths of one degree C, the de facto moratorium on lease sales on federal lands, and on and on.

And there is the newly emerging proposal for a “windfall profits” tax on crude oil. Like the crude-oil windfall-profits tax from the Carter era, this one has nothing to do with “profits.” It would instead be an excise tax on the difference between current prices and some historical average. Any such excise tax would reduce current output, obviously, but what has not been noticed widely is that any such tax reduces upside price potential for the fossil producers while doing nothing about downside price risks. In other words, it would shift the statistical distribution of expected prices to the left — that is, toward lower prices systematically — and thus would reduce the expected returns to investment in exploration and all the rest.

Global crude-oil output is approximately 100 mmbd; U.S. output has declined from about 12.3 mmbd in 2019 to 11.2 mmbd in 2021. It is hard to estimate potential U.S. production capacity, but a conservative assumption is 13.5 mmbd; and a second is that the market expects the net effect of Biden-administration policies to be a decline in long-run annual U.S. production from that to 8.5 mmbd, which was the approximate average annual U.S. production for 2010 through 2019. (Whether or not overseas output would increase as a response is highly speculative, in part because some of the same political pressures observed in the U.S. would exist elsewhere, at least in the West.)

Under reasonable assumptions about market conditions, the decline in long-run U.S. output — 5 mmbd, or 5 percent of global output — would result in a long-run global price increase of at least 25 percent. This market expectation would create the intertemporal shift discussed above, and thus an immediate price increase. The short-run price effect must be substantially greater than the long-run impact, in that the ability of the demand side of the market to adjust to rising prices grows with time. Accordingly, it should surprise no one that the immediate price effect that we have observed — 50 percent — is much larger.
 
The problem is the communists are either too stupid to understand this or too evil to want it to stop.

They are celebrating this pain behind closed doors because then they can lecture us about how bad fossil fuels are
 
Rep. Ro Khanna (D) in the Fall of 2021

“Are you embarrassed as an American company that your production is going up while European counterparts are going down?” Khanna asked Chevron CEO Michael Wirth.
The Chevron boss responded by pointing out that demand for energy is going up around the world.

Khanna cited calls from the United Nations and the International Energy Agency to cut oil and gas production to save the planet.

When Khanna asked if Chevron would commit to lowering production, Wirth declined to do so.

-------------

Rep. Ro Khanna (D) in the Spring of 2022:

Here's what I find unfair...why are Americans being asked to pay $6 for gas and oil companies won't increase production!
 
sturg33 said:
Straight from the horse's mouth. Watch til the end.

We need more voter suppression

[Tw]1535667434912464897[/tw]
Click to expand...

I can’t for the life of me understand why oil companies are not increasing production.

You can’t create dumber voters in a lab.
 
acesfull86 said:
Rep. Ro Khanna (D) in the Fall of 2021

“Are you embarrassed as an American company that your production is going up while European counterparts are going down?” Khanna asked Chevron CEO Michael Wirth.
The Chevron boss responded by pointing out that demand for energy is going up around the world.

Khanna cited calls from the United Nations and the International Energy Agency to cut oil and gas production to save the planet.

When Khanna asked if Chevron would commit to lowering production, Wirth declined to do so.

-------------

Rep. Ro Khanna (D) in the Spring of 2022:

Here's what I find unfair...why are Americans being asked to pay $6 for gas and oil companies won't increase production!
Click to expand...

It’s been the case for a while.

The left stands for nothing other than accumulation of power.
 
(D) wants what it perceives as the long-term benefits from transitioning away from fossil fuels without absorbing the short/medium-term pain felt from the higher prices that drive the transition. So here comes the deflections and the dodges and the boogeymen. Sorry, but the pain is part of it. Just ****in' own it, (D)…enough with the incoherent, contradictory takes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top