Costly gasoline causing problems for Obama
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
U.N. observers warn of Syria civil war after massacre
( 7 )
-
Obama on the defensive over spending, debt
( 18 )
-
Egypt's top candidates try to broaden support
( 1 )
-
Queen marks diamond jubilee riding wave of popularity
( 0 )
-
Thousands take part in 'Slut Walks' in Brazil
( 10 )
-
- Business Teaching Positions - Part-time - Kanto Region
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥3,000 ~ ¥5,000 / Hour
-
- National Relief/Substitute Teacher - summer start
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥275,000 ~ ¥300,000 / Month
-
- 営業パーソン
- 加治金属工業株式会社, Tochigi
- Salary: ¥240,000 ~ ¥350,000 / Month Negotiable
Order by Time Order by Popularity
38 Comments
Login to comment
0
yanee
"When gas hit $3 a gallon in 2006, George W Bush launched a probe"
When gas hit $4 a gallon in 2010, Barak Obama told America to "buy a new car". As gas edges closer to $5 he wants to do something about it?
A bit late once again don't you think?
I think if he places a higher tax on Gasoline he would solve all of our problems.
0
Virtuoso
Americans deeply resent efforts to wean them away from their inefficient gas guzzlers, and their mentality toward fuel economy hasn't changed much since the days of tailfinned dinosaurs like the DeSotos and Plymouths of the 1950s.
0
Scrote
I suppose printing billions of dollars doesn't help. The Americans have been trying to devalue their currency for the past year or two. They have succeeded and one result is higher oil prices.
0
sfjp330
Yes. When Obama was in Facebook Headquarters in Palo Alto last week, he said "Do not buy a house, instead rent". What a brilliant idea.
Yes. When Obama was in Facebook Headquarters in Palo Alto for a speech last week, he said "do not buy a house, instead rent".
0
warnerbro
It's Obama's fault that oil companies are gouging the public and Americans are too fat to get out of their cars and walk, ride a bike, or take public transportation? It's Obama's fault that American infrastructure has been designed for the convenience of oil companies and auto companies? I visited an American family several months ago. There's a shopping mall 100 meters from their house. There are no footpaths for pedestrians to walk on and no crosswalks at the intersections. So people who live 100 meters away get in their cars and drive to the shopping mall. This is Obama's fault?
0
sf2k
Hmm... So the whiners want the world to adopt a market economy, but now that that economy prices gas too high because the currency printing presses it's suddenly a problem! Haha. I wonder if Fox News would explode?
It's your market economy. You don't like that, nationalize your oil companies (like other countries do) or have a local economy like China that can afford it. Asia is driving the price. America hasn't for years. They don't make enough
0
Laguna
Rising gas prices are not related to oil prices, which have been somewhat stable; they are related to refining capacity. For example, California has some of the toughest refining plant emissions standards in the world, and also the highest gasoline prices in America.
This means that gasoline prices are a function of state, not federal, legislation. It also means that those who demand lower gasoline prices will have to accept environmental degradation thus accompanied, and this degradation will lead to significant health costs.
There is no such thing as a free lunch. Look at Iran, which has converted unsuitable facilities to gasoline production and is now in Tehran suffering from a host of bronchial illnesses.
0
Molenir
Sorry, but it is Obamas fault. It wasn't the oil companies that banned all new drilling in the gulf for a year. It wasn't the oil companies that refused to issue permits, in defiance of court orders. Sorry, but though I know to you partisans out there, Obama can do no wrong, to those of us living in the real world, Obama is an incompetent idiot. And thats being nice.
Not really true. Or rather theres some elements of truth to what you are saying, but its not really the case. You are both overstating the problem with the states, and completely disregarding the problem with the federal government. First, rising oil prices do impact the price at the pump. It generally doesn't happen right away, but it does happen. 2nd, there is a reason there hasn't been any new refineries built in the US in more then 20 years. No, thats not directly related to Obama, but it is to the federal government. You are also completely disregarding the influence of alt-fuels, and required additives such as ethanol. All of these things contribute to the cost consumers pay. Remove some of the more burdensome federal regulations, allow drilling in the US, and the cost of energy would drop like a rock.
0
sailwind
The article seems to be falling all over itself in getting out the word that we shouldn't be so hard on the President. Even gives Bush and Nixon a pass.......Funny it left Carter completely out though.
0
goddog
If gasoline causes someone to lose an election, then the managers of the election were useless.
0
Lieberman2012
What companies are 'gouging' the public? Most serious economists dismiss the possiblity.
That sounds like they live in the mall parking lot. Can we have the name of the mall and the city - that way we can check google maps and you can prove your point.
0
Lieberman2012
Candidate Obama said energy prices would "necessarily skyrocket" under his plan of cap and trade. At the time he singled out coal, but his base knew full well what he meant.
0
Laguna
C'mon, Molenir:
Nope. They would not. There would be, in most likelihood, a great impact on the environment, but for the reasons stated above, absolutely no impact at the pump.
Good try, though.
0
Wolfpack
@Laguna:
I am well aware that those on the far political Left do not believe in the law of supply and demand but despite this misguided Socialist view, supply and demand and the corresponding effect on prices is a fundamental economic reality.
It is President Obama's goal to cause gas prices to go up - everyone on the Left knows and agrees with this way of thinking. He has said it himself though you will see hardly see any news organization report on this fact. They will not because they - and Obama - know that it will hurt his chances for re-election. Obama will continue to attempt to use the bureaucracy to hinder the development of America's natural resources and then turn right around and go on a PR offensive to convince the public that he is doing all he can to bring prices down.
As for the impact on the environment, yes increased use of fossil fuels has an impact on the environment. Every and all energy sources have an impact on the environment even the so-called "clean" energy sources. Increased ethanol production for example, is causing a great deal of damage to the environment. What the enviro-extremists always overlook is the fact that increased fuel costs also have a direct and immediate impact on poverty and human suffering - something they apparently are not too concerned about.
0
Molenir
Sad but true. I find it irritating in the extreme, that the Presidents response to higher gas prices was to say, well, inflate your tires, and get a tune up. The man is such an idiot, and this is the guy those on the left revere? Very sad.
0
sfjp330
The increase in oil prices are related to China and other emerging countries bidding for from the same source. This is all U.S. consumers fault for buying larger gas guzzling car then necessary for everyday use. If U.S. goverment truly wants to reduce oil imports, they can demand all the auto manufacturer to limit the new passenger car engine to 2000 cc (122 cid), with around 150hp by 2015. This will reduce U.S. oil consumption by 20 percent in ten years. In most cases, this is all you need for everyday driving and you can average over 30-40 miles per gallon. Unless it's a commercial vehicle, you do not need larger V6 or V8 cars or SUV's with 4000 to 6000 pounds of weight and there should be a weight limitations for new vehicles. Anything beyond 2000 cc, on a tax scale, goverment should tax buyers 25 to 50 percent of the purchase price for those who wants to buy a gas guzzler vehicles and are willing to pay the heavy penalty. This will force alot of buyers who were thinking of V6 or V8 to buy smaller 4 cylinder cars and SUV's. Time to change habits for American drivers.
0
Molenir
Yes, it has absolutely nothing to do with Obama and his moronic secretary of the interior. I mean, no drilling in the gulf, no new permits issued for a year... Yeah, no co-relation at all. Are you a complete idiot? Do you think we are?
You blame China, then turn around and blame consumers for buying cars that you have decided, use too much gas. So, like our incompetent President, your solution to the problem is not to increase supply by drilling where we know there is oil, but rather to force a decrease in demand. In other words, you want to lower the standard of living so that it meets your vision of what is 'fair'. May I simply suggest that you really do belong in Soviet Russia. This communist utopian ideal is precisely why Obama is having problems. Because Americans aren't communist, and don't subscribe to its idiotic philosophy, unfortunately Obama does, and his efforts to move the US towards this is whats getting him in trouble.
0
sfjp330
What a joke. Consumers live only for today and they have much to blame for lack of their own future planning. Facts are the Goverment cannot do much. However, you can control things around you and adjust to the changing economic climate. Even if Obama approves the new drilling, there will be no immediate impact for five to ten years. So what does it matter? Regardless, the cost of the gas will not decrease to the consumers. Facts are U.S. no longer has the monoply to the source of oil and they have to adjust and develop a new technology for other source of energy.
0
Molenir
You mean apart from instituting a ban on drilling? Apart from costly regulations, apart from not issuing any permits for a year? How about not permitting any refineries to be built? Apart from those things? What about the gas tax, can they do that?
Dems have been saying this for years. If drilling in Anwar was first approved when it was brought up, rather then being repeatedly blocked by Dems, we would have oil flowing from there by now. Something else to consider, even the mention of allowing new drilling reduces the price of oil, as speculators then begin to take that into consideration. Sure other factors may cause it to go back up again, but that is a downward pressure on price. Thats an immediate impact.
US never had a monopoloy on the source of oil. They have been importing oil for more then 50 years. This is not news. And while developing new technology can be encouraged by government, it cannot be forced. Thats the problem.
0
sfjp330
Problem in the U.S. is the weak dollar. In the short-term, weak dollar depreciation does not affect supply and demand, but it does affect speculation and investment in oil futures markets. However, investing in futures becomes both a hedge against a weakening dollar and an investment vehicle that could yield substantial profit, especially in a climate of vanishing excess oil production capacity and increasing demand. In the long run, however, a weaker dollar affects supply by reducing production, regardless of whether oil is owned and produced by national or international oil companies. A weak dollar also affects demand by increasing consumption.
The lower dollar also reduces the purchasing power of oil exporters. If nominal oil prices remain constant while the dollar declines, the real income of the oil-producing countries declines, resulting in less investment in additional capacity and maintenance. The same is true of oil companies. Consequently, oil prices increase.
Lowering the standard of living? There will be no change. The next generation of new cars and trucks will need to meet a fleet average of around 32 miles per gallon by 2015. You can still get comparable luxury vehicle such as Audi A4 with smalller 2 litre turbo, Lexus Hybrid 2.5 hatchback, smaller BMW, Ford,or Mercedes with over 200 hp with good gas milage. The new generation vehicles will be lighter and use of smaller engines, but will have similar performance.
0
Molenir
Finally you say something intelligent. I was starting to wonder about that.
And then you go and screw it up by saying something nonsensical again. No, a weak dollar has little to no impact on supply. Nor does it really affect demand. How do you come up with this stuff?
A weaker dollar does impact imports. Everything imported, including oil becomes more expensive. Everything exported becomes more competitive.
Excuse me? Just what do you think the effects will be from what you and your buddy Obama are proposing? Do you think the only impact will be more fuel efficient cars? I'll tell you what just some of the unintended consequences will be. Lighter cars means an increase in mortality rates in accidents. A weaker dollar means you can buy less. These are just 2 of the consequences and there are a lot more. The standard of living will decline with your suggestions.
0
sfjp330
Where have you been? Don't you know anything about what is in production planning for next generation cars? Today's cars weigh so much because many of them are made from steel parts and larger engines. Ultralight future cars will be made of lightweight products including plastics, aluminum and metal composites and other hybrid materials. By adjusting the weight of the car parts, companies don't have to sacrifice size and can also use smaller engines.
Regarding safety, the ultralight car made from carbon fiber composites can absorb 12 times the energy per kilogram as steel. By adding these materials, it reinforces them and forms a strengthened network for incredible durability. They have more safety features and less rollover problems of the past. You probably still think old and heavy 2000 Ford Explorer is much safer than current generation of cars.
0
manfromamerica
I thought Obama's "diplomacy" with the middle east and OPEC was supposed to reduce gas prices. Didn't he use "diplomacy"?? What happened?
Oh, BO happened.
0
Lieberman2012
6 bucks a gallon by summer. 95 percent of the oil on the world market is held and managed by nationalized concerns, i.e. state-run companies. Most people don't know this, so the class war rhetoric that Obama resorts to will work for a while, until voters educate themselves, or get educated by events.
0
Lieberman2012
More to worry about:food prices have climbed 6.5 percent since the beginning of January(Consumer Growth Partners).I say it all comes to a head this summer.
0
Molenir
Price of gas impacts the price of food. You notice also that today the EPA decided to shut down drilling off the coast of Alaska? Isn't the Obama administration wonderful!
0
arrestpaul
$5.00 per gallon gasoline and diesel will insure that Obama is a one term President. Increasing fuel cost drive up the price of everything that has to be delivered. Food, clothing, building supplies, furniture, appliances, vehicles, batteries, solar panels, sporting goods, medical supplies, lawn mowers, snow blowers, shovels and rakes. Everything.
The taxpaying voters in the U.S. will walk miles to vote for "anyone but Obama".
0
sf2k
It's a world price though. Americans are not in charge of the world. Sorry to burst your bubble.
If it's such a burden, nationalize
0
sf2k
Rising food prices are hardly a concern considering the massive weight gain of Americans. People eat too much to begin with. I have friends in the US now, and all they can talk about is the insane food portions.
Probably the best thing that ever happened. Maybe people will actually eat real food? Get off the HFCS? BTW, a portion is about fist sized, not pizza sized.
I miss Japan :( Food was awesome and made one feel full at even small portions.
0
Molenir
Thank you. Is there anything else you feel the government should mandate? Maybe our population is out of control, we should have less fat in our foods, perhaps transplants are too expensive so they shouldn't be permitted? Perhaps the government should just send people who don't agree with it to forced labor camps. What fits your vision of what our society should be under your marxist philosophy?
Here in America we believe in freedom. To do the things you don't like, as well as the things that are bad for you. Its far better then the nanny state idea where everything is strictly controlled. People take responsibility for their own actions, and rise or fall based upon their choices.
0
sfjp330
It just shows that people in the U.S. are more comfortable with their weight than the rest of the world, and and would rather live their lives unhinged by society's norms. Now I fully understand the dangers that come with obesity, but that's their risk to take. People are who they want to be, and their weight is really nobody else's business but their own. When governments try to interfere and force healthy living on people, though, that's overstepping the boundaries of what a government is intended to do. If you compare the obesity of U.S. at around 30 percent to Japan's 3 percent, U.S. has ten times more obesity rate and health problems.
0
sf2k
Molenir,
No, the high prices will make the food more expensive a la free market. So people will have to eat less junk and more real food to make their dollar last longer. No nanny required.
Also rejoice that gas will be $5 a gallon soon if not already. Celebrate the workings of the market. China is pushing the market energy prices because it sure isn't the US "economy" or what's left of it.
Expect to see Americans and high end companies demanding subsidies soon. These will be the losers that are "too big to fail". The longer they are propped up and not allowed to go out of business, the longer the problems will continue.
Good luck
0
sf2k
I expect this cycle to repeat a few more times every 3-4 years as we descend the energy stairs due to Peak Oil. There's some reallocation of resources by market forces towards only to those who can afford it. Increasingly it won't be the USA, who will not be able to afford the market price of oil and will likely take oil by force in the Middle East, as Trump suggests. Maybe not this energy step, but a lower one might tip over what's left of sanity.
Unless, y'know, there's a plan to get off oil and save local resources for non incendiary applications.
Otherwise the events are pretty predictable. Just not when exactly.
0
Frenchy92
In France regular unleaded gas is currently sold 7.8$ a gallon ! In which more than 60% taxes... We are just driving smaller cars.
0
sf2k
@Frenchy92 in France, any growth in electric cars? And how would you characterize public transportation in comparison to Japan? I would think higher prices just ensures public services but not being there I don't have first hand knowledge.
0
Lieberman2012
"It's a world price though. Americans are not in charge of the world. Sorry to burst your bubble."
Hence the necessity of tapping what we are in charge of - our massive domestic supplies.
Sorry to burst yours.
0
sf2k
How can I put this... If the prices today are not enough to put these "massive domestic supplies" online then why do you think a lower price will?
Infusion of new energy can't happen without government subsidies, an oil healthcare if you will. Weird that Americans fear taking care of themselves, but would rather take care of their cars instead. What an odd juxtaposition of priorities.
In actual domestic supplies of energy though, you are correct but not oil. Natural (fossil) gas has a way to go before it also dwindles and there's sun, wind, hydro-helio-geothermal and grid connected vehicles with local and regional transit are all possible, are scalable, and can start small.
These will be ignored sadly.
0
sf2k
peakoil dot net theoildrum dot net energybulletin dot net
If there were "massive domestic supplies" it would be noted here and celebrated.
Go to youtube and look up the video Arithmetic Population and Energy. Realize that at the scale of something used at a certain rate, as that rate changes, an available resource decreases.
Good luck.
Back to top