• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gas prices are highest ever for this time of year

Blue_State said:
Due to the price of fuel doubling, I would say they are making twice the amount on taxes.
Click to expand...

maybe....but people do slow down their consumption when prices get high.
 
Blue_State said:
And since we are talking about renewable fuels, and how bipartisan this is, look up wind powered plants in MA and CT. There are billboards and flyers everywhere saying not in my backyard. Enviromentally friendly renewable energy is only a good thing if it isn't in your backyard. Just like a cell phone tower. It doesn't matter what party. People go nuts seeing these things.
Click to expand...

Well if you don't want a windmill in your backyard, how about a nuclear plant? Gotta go somewhere.
 
liblady said:
maybe....but people do slow down their consumption when prices get high.
Click to expand...

I believe they try too, but there are somethings that you can't slow down consumption on. Fuel to get to work, fuel to get your food to the store. Driving to the shore for vacation is gone though. I blame Nascar (kidding).
 
rocket88 said:
Well if you don't want a windmill in your backyard, how about a nuclear plant? Gotta go somewhere.
Click to expand...

I am fine with it. I am saying the general concensus of the people who live around me. I watched them stone wall a highway and a railway. Now they are stonewalling renewable energy. I agree'd with your comment before about a good plan can really benefit the community. It just turns out, in my New England perspective, that people don't want these things in their backyard.
 
Blue_State said:
And since we are talking about renewable fuels, and how bipartisan this is, look up wind powered plants in MA and CT. There are billboards and flyers everywhere saying not in my backyard. Enviromentally friendly renewable energy is only a good thing if it isn't in your backyard. Just like a cell phone tower. It doesn't matter what party. People go nuts seeing these things.
Click to expand...

Doesn't change the fact that Democrats are generally pro renewable and Republicans are generally against it.

Republicans are all for oil drilling, but they for-damned-sure don't want to live next door to a refinery.
 
Blue_State said:
I am fine with it. I am saying the general concensus of the people who live around me. I watched them stone wall a highway and a railway. Now they are stonewalling renewable energy. I agree'd with your comment before about a good plan can really benefit the community. It just turns out, in my New England perspective, that people don't want these things in their backyard.
Click to expand...

Not saying you particularly, but the general "you" to everybody who doesn't want that.
 
1Perry said:
I wouldn't fight either.
Click to expand...

I probably wouldn't have a problem with a windmill. I'd be concerned about traffic going to and from a nuclear plant, but depending on how close it'd probably be OK.

I definitely don't want a coal plant across the street. I like breathing.
 
rocket88 said:
I probably wouldn't have a problem with a windmill. I'd be concerned about traffic going to and from a nuclear plant, but depending on how close it'd probably be OK.

I definitely don't want a coal plant across the street. I like breathing.
Click to expand...

My town had a coal plant, converted it to oil. Much cleaner now...
 
Blue_State said:
Gas prices will cripple this economy. Cripple. No tax cut or holiday is going to help. If fuel prices continue to increase, the recession will return.
Click to expand...

Its not like this news has just slipped up on us. Carter warned us in the 70s, the US military warned us in 2010:

"The US military has warned that surplus oil production capacity could disappear within two years and there could be serious shortages by 2015 with a significant economic and political impact.

The energy crisis outlined in a Joint Operating Environment report from the US Joint Forces Command, comes as the price of petrol in Britain reaches record levels and the cost of crude is predicted to soon top $100 a barrel.

"By 2012, surplus oil production capacity could entirely disappear, and as early as 2015, the shortfall in output could reach nearly 10 million barrels per day," says the report, which has a foreword by a senior commander, General James N Mattis."

US military warns oil output may dip causing massive shortages by 2015 | Business | The Guardian
 
Peter King said:
In Europe the prices are much higher but still the economy works, gas prices in the US are a problem because a lot of people don't have cars with good fuel economy compared to other countries.

With lower fuel consumption prices might be contained and not rise too much further.
Click to expand...

People will eventually learn to give up their worship of gas guzzlers for more economical cars. It may take some pain first however to get them to see the light.
 
rocket88 said:
You do pay for the highways that you don't use. I don't particularly use the highways between 2 suburbs, but I still pay for them.

Look, where the light rail runs here, a solution was needed. People tend not to like it when you run an interstate right down the middle of the neighborhood. On the other hand, people were taking that route from the airport to get downtown anyway, but city streets weren't designed to handle that kind of traffic. So what do you do? Light rail worked as a solution here. It won't work everywhere, just like highways won't work everywhere. Between fares and ad revenue, it breaks even. Sometimes a little more, sometimes a little less.

I know you're a conservative and basically against public transportation anyway, but a well planned light rail line can work if it's deployed properly. A poorly planned, poorly deployed line doesn't work. If you're thinking light rail from suburb to city, I can see that probably wouldn't work. Within an urbanized area, it works quite well.
Click to expand...

I'm not against public transportation at all and have never said I was. What I am against is wasting taxpayer dollars on feel good plans that aren't economically beneficial. Busses are much more practical and economically sound than trains. Once a train is built, you can't easily change its routes. Trains cost billions of dollars more than busses and routes can be altered as needed.

Thousands of busses could be bought and operated in a city for what a simple rail line cost.
 
Blue_State said:
Unlike Europe, we don't have a developed hub for mass transportation. Everyone here has a car. It is the primary means of conveyance. All of our goods move on trucks. Gas and fuel operate our entire economy.

I didn't own a car when I lived in Germany. Didn't need too. You couldn't survive in most of America (not all, some of the cities have decent transportation hubs) without a car or some means or transportation. Average commutes for workers exceed 45 minutes in some areas. That is one way. We need a better solution. Fuel economy is not our number one issue, that is a talking point. I am not saying that if we all drove 40 mpg cars that it wouldn't help, but that will not change the cost of food at the store.
Click to expand...

You are right I am not talking about transportation of goods, trucks are a necessary evil, I understand that as no one else because my trained occupation is transport, used to work for UPS-SCS, DHL and for a company that stored and transported to several european countries Jeep and Chrysler cars.

But I am talking about even in transport there is room for energy conservations, buy vegetables from a more local source, have more fuel economic trucks and make sure that the available room on truck so that less trucks are needed to transport the same volume of goods.

And ofcourse, there is a lot of fuel to be saved by less thirsty cars.
 
AdamT said:
Actually, once again, you are way wrong on the facts. Fuel taxes only pay for about 45-50% of highway costs, and falling.
Click to expand...

Nope:

About 70% of the construction and maintenance costs of highways in the U.S. are covered through user fees (net of collection costs), primarily fuel taxes collected by the federal government and state and local governments, and to a much lesser extent tolls collected on toll roads and bridges. The 1956 Highway Trust Fund, established by the Highway Revenue Act, mandated a three-cent-per-gallon tax, soon increased to 4.5 cents. In 1993 the tax reached 18.4 cents per gallon where it remains.
Click to expand...
Interstate Highway System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Catawba said:
Its not like this news has just slipped up on us. Carter warned us in the 70s, the US military warned us in 2010:

"The US military has warned that surplus oil production capacity could disappear within two years and there could be serious shortages by 2015 with a significant economic and political impact.

The energy crisis outlined in a Joint Operating Environment report from the US Joint Forces Command, comes as the price of petrol in Britain reaches record levels and the cost of crude is predicted to soon top $100 a barrel.

"By 2012, surplus oil production capacity could entirely disappear, and as early as 2015, the shortfall in output could reach nearly 10 million barrels per day," says the report, which has a foreword by a senior commander, General James N Mattis."

US military warns oil output may dip causing massive shortages by 2015 | Business | The Guardian
Click to expand...

Only problem is that the military was wrong. Oil production is growing rapidly in the U.S. and Canada. Many are predicting that we could soon be the number one oil producing country in the world, Brazil has found a vase oil field off their coast and are now oil self sufficient.
 
Gill said:
Only problem is that the military was wrong. Oil production is growing rapidly in the U.S. and Canada. Many are predicting that we could soon be the number one oil producing country in the world, Brazil has found a vase oil field off their coast and are now oil self sufficient.
Click to expand...

The problem remains as it was when we passed peak oil in this country in 1971. Our demand increases faster than our supply. Both the US and Canada consume more oil than each produces.

I suppose those like yourself that refuse to see this truth will forever be surprised with each increase in gas prices.
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
The problem remains as it was when we passed peak oil in this country in 1971. Our demand increases faster than our supply. Both the US and Canada consume more oil than each produces.

I suppose those like yourself that refuse to see this truth will forever be surprised with each increase in gas prices.
Click to expand...

We have enough coal and oil (in shale and tar sands) to last a good while, but burning it all would be an environmental disaster. Also, a lot of it is only economically viable when prices are high.
 
Catawba said:
The problem remains as it was when we passed peak oil in this country in 1971. Our demand increases faster than our supply. Both the US and Canada consume more oil than each produces.

I suppose those like yourself that refuse to see this truth will forever be surprised with each increase in gas prices.
Click to expand...

In the US, gasoline supplies are about 20% higher than demand.
 
AdamT said:
We have enough coal and oil (in shale and tar sands) to last a good while, but burning it all would be an environmental disaster. Also, a lot of it is only economically viable when prices are high.
Click to expand...

Exactly right, if we could produce enough cheaply ourselves there would not have been the need to acquire so much national debt for the military expense to keep the middle east oil flowing.
 
Samhain said:
In the US, gasoline supplies are about 20% higher than demand.
Click to expand...

Thank you for providing an example of why US gasoline supplies and demand has little effect on world oil prices.
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
The problem remains as it was when we passed peak oil in this country in 1971. Our demand increases faster than our supply. Both the US and Canada consume more oil than each produces.

I suppose those like yourself that refuse to see this truth will forever be surprised with each increase in gas prices.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the ole peak oil theory............. only problem is we just keep finding more and more.

I fully expect gas prices to increase as long as people like you push to block access to our resources. People like YOU are the reason prices are high.
 
Catawba said:
What's new??? Had no one noticed the upward trend before now?


RealGasolinePrices1990-2010_003.jpg




USD School of Law: EPIC: Data Center: Transportation Energy
Click to expand...


Your Chart from the lefty Marxists at UCSD is wrong....Gas price was lower than they show on the chart in 2008.


j-mac
 
Catawba said:
Thank you for providing an example of why US gasoline supplies and demand has little effect on world oil prices.
Click to expand...

And since the thread is about gas prices in the US......

But anyway, the reason gas prices are high is because we are closing refineries since the supply is outstripping demand, speculation on the oil market, supply disruptions in Africa, and Iranian sanctions on oil contracts.
 
Gill said:
Yeah, the ole peak oil theory............. only problem is we just keep finding more and more.
Click to expand...

But our demand keeps growing greater than affordable new supplies, which is why there has not been a single year since 1971 that we have produced more oil than we consume.

I fully expect gas prices to increase as long as people like you push to block access to our resources. People like YOU are the reason prices are high.
Click to expand...

Drill baby drill is simply a campaign slogan son. The GOP was in complete control of the WH and Congress from 2003 through 2005, and the only thing they could come up with to "drill our way out of our problem" was ANWR, which would result in a 1% reduction of oil prices by 2025. Even McCain said it was stupid idea, when he voted against drilling in ANWR.

Of course if you wish to keep your head buried in the sand, that is completely your choice.
 
Last edited:
j-mac said:
Your Chart from the lefty Marxists at UCSD is wrong....Gas price was lower than they show on the chart in 2008.


j-mac
Click to expand...


You think that might have anything to do with decreased production due to the Recession????
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom