Fox explains why presidents don't controll gas prices :palm:

Poor PiMP.

Bereft of facts, reduced to baseless accusations and repeated references to alleged non-existent rebuttals he never made.

Hilarious.

The U.S., according to the CIA World Factbook, is the third-largest oil producer with an estimated output of 9.688 billion barrels in 2010, behind Russia and Saudi Arabia.


However, according to Daily Finance, Americans were the single greatest users of oil, consuming 18.8 million barrels per day in early 2011.

That is more than the top four consumers below American consumption combined.

http://personalmoneynetwork.com/moneyblog/2012/03/22/domestic-oil-production/

The market drives gas prices....not Obama, not Bush.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
why do you deny that both Bush and Obama have taken action that impacts the market?.....
Click to expand...

When prices went up during Bush's administration, Fox explained that presidents don't control gas prices.

Now, it seems they do?

Which is it?
 
\\(())// said:
When prices went up during Bush's administration, Fox explained that presidents don't control gas prices.

Now, it seems they do?

Which is it?
Click to expand...

did you notice that the price went down when Bush removed the restrictions on drilling?.....you tell me which it is......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
did you notice that the price went down when Bush removed the restrictions on drilling?.....you tell me which it is......
Click to expand...

I noticed that the price went up even though supply increased in 2010...so your theory doesn't work, does it?
 
You don't know "better" if you think US production is going to satisfy our own thirst for oil, much less the emerging nations that are the source of the rise in demand.


Every day, U.S. drivers pay a price determined by forces all over the world that are hard to understand and harder for the United States to control.

Even if we invested in better refineries and exploited every possible energy source, from the Keystone pipeline to the Alaskan wilderness, the impact could be minimal.

It could eventually lower prices at the pump — but only if nothing else affects them, like OPEC lowering its production to drive prices back up again. The price of oil is, of course, affected by hundreds of interrelated factors.

“The folks on the right say: ‘Drill here! Drill, drill, drill!’ But that will not impact the global price of oil,” says Gal Luft, co-director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security.

“How do I know? Because we had this great experiment for seven years where our dependence on oil declined from 60 percent to 45 percent. We import much less percentage-wise than we did 10 years ago. What happened to the price of oil? It doubled.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/m...-actually-affect-americans-behavior.html?_r=1
 
\\(())// said:
‘Drill here! Drill, drill, drill!’ But that will not impact the global price of oil,” says Gal Luft, co-director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security.
Click to expand...

so apart from the fact he's as dumb as you are, what makes him think that increasing production won't have an impact on the price of oil?....increasing the supply of anything effects it's price......
 
\\(())// said:
You don't know "better" if you think US production is going to satisfy our own thirst for oil, much less the emerging nations that are the source of the rise in demand.
Click to expand...

uh, dude.....you seem to forget that trying to solve the problem by damping consumption is the liberal solution.......the exact opposite of "drill baby, drill".....the fact that YOUR plan didn't work doesn't mean you disproved ours.......
 
\\(())// said:
Even if we invested in better refineries and exploited every possible energy source, from the Keystone pipeline to the Alaskan wilderness, the impact could be minimal.
Click to expand...

and yet, in 2008 the price dropped by over $100 a barrel after the president said we could.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
and yet, in 2008 the price dropped by over $100 a barrel after the president said we could.....
Click to expand...

The price of oil dropped from $148 to around $32 due to demand destruction and the economic meltdown that followed. While additional refining capacity and plans for future oil site developments can indeed affect price. That is not the primary cause of the collapse in oil prices in 2008.
 
Superfreak said:
The price of oil dropped from $148 to around $32 due to demand destruction and the economic meltdown that followed. While additional refining capacity and plans for future oil site developments can indeed affect price. That is not the primary cause of the collapse in oil prices in 2008.
Click to expand...

it is more likely that the economic meltdown was caused by oil prices of $145 a barrel, than by it dropping thereafter....be that as it may, I think the highest contributing factor to the price drop was the realization by speculators that they would not be able to count on the price remaining high if domestic production wasn't restricted........that is why prices began to drop within days of the announcement and kept dropping......
 
If you folks don't agree, we could always try an experiment.....Obama could lift restrictions and we could see what happens......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
it is more likely that the economic meltdown was caused by oil prices of $145 a barrel, than by it dropping thereafter....be that as it may, I think the highest contributing factor to the price drop was the realization by speculators that they would not be able to count on the price remaining high if domestic production wasn't restricted........that is why prices began to drop within days of the announcement and kept dropping......
Click to expand...

Yes, that would be the demand destruction that I mentioned. The cost was too high and the economy began to contract. That exacerbated the downturn within the economy and especially the financial sector. It then snowballed into the collapse. Domestic production had little to do with why speculators reversed. They reversed hard because they saw the demand destruction (hence prices would not be sustainable)... so they bailed and went short.
 
Superfreak said:
Yes, that would be the demand destruction that I mentioned. The cost was too high and the economy began to contract. That exacerbated the downturn within the economy and especially the financial sector. It then snowballed into the collapse. Domestic production had little to do with why speculators reversed. They reversed hard because they saw the demand destruction (hence prices would not be sustainable)... so they bailed and went short.
Click to expand...

I don't include speculators within the concept of "demand".......they create a false market......

I would not agree that the dissipation of that false market had anything to do with causing the 2008 recession.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top