Gasoline prices pose problems for Obama

[NickyJ]

I would recommend bicycles and public buses if you can't afford a car. If there isn't a proper public transport system, the state ought to implement one. Salus populi est suprema lex. "The good of the people is the supreme law."

I live out in the country, so I must strongly disagree with you there. The closest factories are 30-45 minutes away by car. No buses or taxis nearby. That is a rather long distance to travel by bicycle, especially with groceries that take up nearly the whole trunk of a minivan. Where would you put all those groceries on a bicycle?

 

[Arakhor]

I live in the country too, you know, but obviously not quite to the extent that you might do. You could get some friends together in a car pool and do a collective shop, you could petition your local government to institute a weekly bus service or you could move closer to the city when you need a job. Anybody without a car has those same options.

 

[AL_DA_GREAT]

I have commuted to school and work that is 13 kilometers from home for many years by bicycle. During rush hour it is actually faster than by car. In Stockholm only 30% of the population commutes by car. The USA needs structural change. Take away some of the roads, build bicycle paths, trams and subway lines.

 

[NickyJ]

I live in the country too, you know, but obviously not quite to the extent that you might do. You could get some friends together in a car pool and do a collective shop, you could petition your local government to institute a weekly bus service or you could move closer to the city when you need a job. Anybody without a car has those same options.

Car pooling is rather unlikely, and a weekly bus service wouldn't work well since the people around here are spread out rather far. And it would still be hard to carry a lot of groceries in a bus. Same with car pooling. Moving closer to the city wouldn't work because people are living at ends meet, and the housing market is in ruins, which means nobody would be likely to buy your house to provide you with the money to move. Added on to that is that prices for groceries would go up due to rising prices for transporting those goods.

 

[GinandTonic]

It is probably unpractical and limits peoples freedom of choice also.

Spent most of today in jams in London, wishing I had taken the tube or the river-bus. Public transport is far from impractical. I simply made the wrong choice. I could have been having pimms in greenwich park, but I had to leave early before the meter ran out so I spent a half hour trying to get onto tower bridge with the tunnel shut for works and the bridge having to open for shipping.

Public transport and cycle lanes are more freedom of choice.

 

[NickyJ]

I have commuted to school and work that is 13 kilometers from home for many years by bicycle. During rush hour it is actually faster than by car. In Stockholm only 30% of the population commutes by car. The USA needs structural change. Take away some of the roads, build bicycle paths, trams and subway lines.

But did you have to bicycle over hills that were on winding roads? Taking away roads would be a very bad idea, and building bicycle paths wouldn't work well either for common transportation. Trams and subway lines wouldn't work for spread out rural areas.

 

[Arakhor]

Then if petrol prices are also increasing at a ferocious rate, you're rather up the proverbial creek without a paddle.

 

[LucyDuke]

Eh, considering we used to have gas at roughly three dollars flat at the beginning of the year, now we're getting close to four dollars and some places five dollars, all in the period of four months, I would be rather upset too. Also, take into account predictions of six dollars by June. That's roughly a three dollar jump in six months. People just don't really like spending twice as much for necessary transportation than they did at the beginning of the year.

I looked, I can't find anywhere in the continental US that's close to five dollars. Hawaii's average is just barely over $4.50, it only got there in the last three days, but that's not "some places". Please, where are you getting your numbers from?

It isn't that the US has artificially low prices. It is that nations with more foresight have artificially high prices. Other developed nations have high taxes on gas that encourage higher fuel efficiency and alternatives. The US encourages the opposite.

Artificially high by what metric?

In Europe penis and truck size are negatively correlated.

Did you do a study or something?

Yes, necessary. They need to commute to work to be able to make the money needed to live and pay for the fuel needed for that commute, you know.

Maybe they shouldn't live so damn far away from where they work.

It is probably unpractical and limits peoples freedom of choice also.

Public transit does not limit people's freedom of choice.

 

[Bill3000]

But did you have to bicycle over hills that were on winding roads? Taking away roads would be a very bad idea, and building bicycle paths wouldn't work well either for common transportation. Trams and subway lines wouldn't work for spread out rural areas.

You could always move out of the middle of nowhere and live in civilized places instead.

 

[NickyJ]

I looked, I can't find anywhere in the continental US that's close to five dollars. Hawaii's average is just barely over $4.50, it only got there in the last three days, but that's not "some places". Please, where are you getting your numbers from?

Link

Maybe they shouldn't live so damn far away from where they work.

Maybe they didn't expect the price of gasoline to get this high? Your argument hardly addresses the problem.

You could always move out of the middle of nowhere and live in civilized places instead.

Again:

Moving closer to the city wouldn't work because people are living at ends meet, and the housing market is in ruins, which means nobody would be likely to buy your house to provide you with the money to move.

 

[Bill3000]

Moving closer to the city wouldn't work because people are living at ends meet, and the housing market is in ruins, which means nobody would be likely to buy your house to provide you with the money to move.

Well it' s not the government's job to peddle welfare for people who are irresponsible enough to live in the middle of nowhere where no one ought to want to live. If you're struggling to make ends meet, then get smarter and a better education and find a high-skilled job in demand, such as an engineer, scientist, network systems analyst, or doctor. If you can't, then I have no sympathy for you.

 

[NickyJ]

Well it' s not the government's job to peddle welfare for people who are irresponsible enough to live in the middle of nowhere where no one ought to want to live. If you're struggling to make ends meet, then get smarter and a better education and find a high-skilled job. If you can't, then I have no sympathy for you.

In case you didn't know, it's rather hard to get jobs these days. And who said anything about welfare?

 

[Bill3000]

In case you didn't know, it's rather hard to get jobs these days. And who said anything about welfare?

It's not hard to get a job if you're an intelligent, highly skilled, and economically productive worker. Most physics PhDs get a job by the time they graduate; in nanotechnology, up to 36 months before they graduate in industry, and can be six figure starting salaries. You're bringing up welfare by expecting that it's the government's job to do anything about this by intervening in the economy to bring oil prices lower.

 

[BasketCase]

You have to love American politics where the president is judged on factors which are largely completely out of his control.

Happened to Bush Jr. during the 2008 elections. So don't act all surprised when the same happens to Obama.

Nationalize the oil industry.
There's your control.

You can't nationalize them. Almost all oil companies are international. How do you think other countries are going to react when you start taking away pieces of their companies??

In an international market, the only way to get prices down is to increase the supply (you have no control over demand, because most of that demand comes from other countries you can't control without dropping bombs on them). Yes, any additional oil we drill domestically will go to the international market--so the only way to reduce gasoline prices in the U.S. is to increase the supply of oil in the international market.

Side note: gas prices aren't only going up in the U.S., they're setting records in Europe as well.

 

[JollyRoger]

I live out in the country, so I must strongly disagree with you there. The closest factories are 30-45 minutes away by car. No buses or taxis nearby. That is a rather long distance to travel by bicycle, especially with groceries that take up nearly the whole trunk of a minivan. Where would you put all those groceries on a bicycle?

If gas prices are a killer, then you should reconsider your situation. Move closer to where the things you need are. You are lucky us high end taxpayers are subsidizing your gas use to the extent we are.

 

[GinandTonic]

Happened to Bush Jr. during the 2008 elections. So don't act all surprised when the same happens to Obama.


You can't nationalize them. Almost all oil companies are international. How do you think other countries are going to react when you start taking away pieces of their companies??

In an international market, the only way to get prices down is to increase the supply (you have no control over demand, because most of that demand comes from other countries you can't control without dropping bombs on them). Yes, any additional oil we drill domestically will go to the international market--so the only way to reduce gasoline prices in the U.S. is to increase the supply of oil in the international market.

Side note: gas prices aren't only going up in the U.S., they're setting records in Europe as well.

An analysis that doesnt even consider consumption?

 

[NickyJ]

It's not hard to get a job if you're an intelligent, highly skilled, and economically productive worker. Most physics PhDs get a job by the time they graduate; in nanotechnology, up to 36 months before they graduate in industry, and can be six figure starting salaries.

It is when there aren't many jobs catered for especially "intelligent, highly skilled, and economically productive worker." Also, it's kind of hard to out and tell Joe Sixpack "Get a PhD in physics so you can work in nanotechnology, you loser." I wonder how common it is to see people in there seventies working in nanotechnology?

As for welfare,

You're bringing up welfare by expecting that it's the government's job to do anything about this by intervening in the economy to bring oil prices lower.

I said that the government should use welfare to do something about this? I'm sorry, but that's an out-and-out lie. I never said any such thing. And if you are so sure, then please do provide a link.

If gas prices are a killer, then you should reconsider your situation. Move closer to where the things you need are. You are lucky us high end taxpayers are subsidizing your gas use to the extent we are.

*Yawn* Yet again (I should start keeping tally of this):

Moving closer to the city wouldn't work because people are living at ends meet, and the housing market is in ruins, which means nobody would be likely to buy your house to provide you with the money to move.

Subsidizing. Yeah, right.

 

[LucyDuke]

Link

DC average is in the low four-dollar range (and has been below $4 for most of a month), so I'm comfortable dismissing that as a localized aberration.

Maybe they didn't expect the price of gasoline to get this high? Your argument hardly addresses the problem.

I didn't really make an argument. I just said it's dumb for people (and nations for that matter) to build their lives around energy prices staying artificially low until they're finished burning it. Anyone with half a brain can tell that the price of a finite resource will inexorably rise as demand outpaces supply. And no, electric cars are not going to save the day.

 

[NickyJ]

DC average is in the low four-dollar range (and has been below $4 for most of a month), so I'm comfortable dismissing that as a localized aberration.

It's still there, and it's still $5.

I didn't really make an argument. I just said it's dumb for people (and nations for that matter) to build their lives around energy prices staying artificially low until they're finished burning it. Anyone with half a brain can tell that the price of a finite resource will inexorably rise as demand outpaces supply.

Interesting thing, though. The price of oil rising has nothing to do with supply and demand. It's because of the unrest in the Middle East. Know how to reduce that effect? Drill, baby, drill.

And no, electric cars are not going to save the day.

Electric cars are the biggest scam this side of Alpha Centauri.

 

[timtofly]

Spent most of today in jams in London, wishing I had taken the tube or the river-bus. Public transport is far from impractical. I simply made the wrong choice. I could have been having pimms in greenwich park, but I had to leave early before the meter ran out so I spent a half hour trying to get onto tower bridge with the tunnel shut for works and the bridge having to open for shipping.

Public transport and cycle lanes are more freedom of choice.

I would say that they add to the choices. If you had not chosen the car, you would not have more choices, but one less choice. Was there a bus behind you also waiting in traffic? That would have made 2 choices unpractical. If you did not have a car full of groceries, then your choice was also unpractical. Eliminating two choices does not mean they are practical or unpractical. It also depends on the need.

There are people that take the "red-eye" flight thousands of miles for work. How practical is that?