• 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!

Oil rises above $90 amid US crude supply drop

And which of us is bitching about the price of gas? Laugh baby laugh!!!


Who's bitching? The P/U is a 6cyl. and the big truck, well, I just pass that price along to....Ahem....You...heheheh


j-mac
 
I hope we last two more years.
Have no worries, j-mac, if we can survive George Bush (and we did ... barely), we can survive anyone.
 
No record unemployment ???? You really need to read up a little on the late 1970s.
What's your recollection of when the unemployment rate was higher -- during the late 70's or during the early 80's?

Don't you remember reading that unemployment under Obama is the worst it's been since the early 1980s. That's the recession that Carter started and Reagan ended.
Umm, that recession began in late 1981. GDP in Q4-1980 was 7.6% and 8.6% in Q1-1981. If you're going to blame a president for that recession, it's at the feet of Reaagan, not Carter.
 
Last edited:
What's your recollection of when the unemployment rate was higher -- during the late 70's or during the early 80's?


Umm, that recession began in late 1981. GDP in Q4-1980 was 7.6% and 8.6% in Q1-1981. If you're going to blame a president for that recession, it's at the feet of Reaagan, not Carter.

Bwaaaaa, you've got to be kidding. The economy was in the toilet when Reagan took office.

Go read a history book because it's obvious you weren't alive then.
 
Bwaaaaa, you've got to be kidding. The economy was in the toilet when Reagan took office.

Go read a history book because it's obvious you weren't alive then.
GDP in consecutive quarters of +7.6% and +8.6% respectively is your definition of "in the toilet??" Wow,
 
GDP in consecutive quarters of +7.6% and +8.6% respectively is your definition of "in the toilet??" Wow,

Yep, I was right and you weren't even a gleam in your old pop's eye then. The Misery Index was over 20 in Carter's last year in office, the highest ever. Then it went steadily down after Reagan took office. It was just about impossible to buy a house back then because of the interest rates. It took Reagan a couple years to bring them down and I bought my first house in 1983.

But, I guess the people did really hate Reagan. After all he only won 49 out of 50 states in 1984. If they'd really liked him, maybe he would have won Mondale's Minnesota.
 
from pbs' suggested lesson plans for slow learners:

The poor economic record of the Carter years -- and in particular, the unusual combination of high inflation and high unemployment -- was an important reason for Carter's loss of popularity and his 1980 defeat. Using the data in the table below, draw a graph with two lines: one representing the change in inflation between 1973 and 1980, and the other representing the change in unemployment during that period. Be sure to label both lines. Then draw another graph representing the change in the "misery index" for the period. (The misery index is the sum of the inflation rate and unemployment rate for a given year.) What do these graphs suggest about the success of Carter's economic policies?

WGBH American Experience . Jimmy Carter . Teacher's Guide | PBS
 
Last edited:
j-mac said:
GAWD, you guy's just can't help but be dishonest can you? From your own link....


The number of rigs currently drilling for gas is 61 less than last year's level of 941.

Yes, there is dishonesty in this thread and I think it has been shown to all just where that dishonesty lies.

The title of this thread:
Oil rises above $90 amid US crude supply drop
Oil, not natural gas. Oil is whats been primarily talked about this whole thread. Some (including you) have mentioned energy and natural gas as part of the flow of conversation, but the focus has been on oil.

Although I didn't quote you, the following post prompted mine. As a matter of fact the lead on my post was this question - "Obama stopping drilling?. So unless you can show where Obama has denied natural gas drilling your comments were directed toward drilling for oil and Obama denying those permits. I showed you where the oil rig count is up.

j-mac said:
In Bakkan alone it is estimated that if we were allowed to explore, on land already owned by the oil companies, but not allowed to gain permits to drill by Obama, we would have centuries of oil from that formation alone.




StillBallin75 said:
I wasn't disputing the fact that it's all energy, I was disputing your claim that BWG was being dishonest.
j-mac said:
He is in a manner of speaking. By trying to promote numbers that are questionable as to the overall outlook on energy exploration, and extraction in this country, he is being at the least disingenuous when he tries to say that drilling is up.

Let's move those goalposts.

Facts pain the extreme partisans.
There are 362 more rigs targeting oil than last year.

Rig Count: Rotary Rig Count and Workover Rig Count
 
Gill said:
The same way the Dems can't run roughshod over Republicans any more like they did last year. Takes a super majority to get anything done in the Senate.

Scott Brown became the 41st Republican member of the Senate 2-4-10.

As far as the 'Super Majority'. All four months of it. Franken's victory was held up by Coleman's lawsuit, Kennedy's illness preventing him from voting and then his death and his temporary replacement (Kirk) on 9-24-09. That left approx. four months of 'Super Majority' in which congress was mostly in recess due to the holidays.
 
Yep, I was right and you weren't even a gleam in your old pop's eye then.

Actually, you're wrong about that too.


The Misery Index was over 20 in Carter's last year in office, the highest ever.
Do I take this to mean you believe the misery index is a greater indicator of the economy than the GDP? Is that really what you're saying?

Also, while the misery index did peak under Carter, it also began falling under Carter.


It was just about impossible to buy a house back then because of the interest rates. It took Reagan a couple years to bring them down and I bought my first house in 1983.
Perhaps you missed it when another poster rightfully pointed out that it's the federal reserve (and banks) and not the president which control interest rates. So why are you blaming Carter or crediting Reagan when that belongs to Paul Volker?

But, I guess the people did really hate Reagan. After all he only won 49 out of 50 states in 1984. If they'd really liked him, maybe he would have won Mondale's Minnesota.
Well at this same point in Reagan's first term, Gallup's JAR poll recorded Reagan at 41% approval; compared with Obama where Gallup currently records him at 48% approval. Seems that more people approve of the job Obama is doing now than Reagan was doing during his 27th month in office.
 
from pbs' suggested lesson plans for slow learners:



WGBH American Experience . Jimmy Carter . Teacher's Guide | PBS
The high misery index certaintly hurt, but even that was primarily due to interest rates (which are out of the president's control) as the unemployment rate was the same during the election as it was when Carter became president. Carter's biggest hurdle was the Iranian hostage crisis, in which he was weak and ineffective.
 
The high misery index certaintly hurt


you can say that again

LOL!

in fact, the index was so inimical it was practically INVENTED during the carter years

any disputation of jimmy carter's economic legacy is preposterous

ie, a joke

party on, pupil of pbs
 
you can say that again

LOL!
Your own link states that it was the Iranian hostage crisis that was Carter's "most damaging problem" in terms of the 1980 election.

in fact, the index was so inimical it was practically INVENTED during the carter years
By Conservatives and Republicans, no doubt, but in reality, it was almost as high under Ford.

The peak under Carter was: 21.98; the peak under Ford was 19.9
 
"The report, Strategic Energy Policy Challenges For The 21st Century, concludes: "The United States remains a prisoner of its energy dilemma. Iraq remains a de-stabilising influence to the flow of oil to international markets from the Middle East. Saddam Hussein has also demonstrated a willingness to threaten to use the oil weapon and to use his own export programme to manipulate oil markets. Therefore the US should conduct an immediate policy review toward Iraq including military, energy, economic and political/ diplomatic assessments.
"The United States should then develop an integrated strategy with key allies in Europe and Asia, and with key countries in the Middle East, to restate goals with respect to Iraqi policy and to restore a cohesive coalition of key allies."

Baker who delivered the recommendations to Cheney, the former chief executive of Texas oil firm Halliburton, was advised by Kenneth Lay, the disgraced former chief executive of Enron, the US energy giant which went bankrupt after carrying out massive accountancy fraud.
The other advisers to Baker were: Luis Giusti, a Shell non- executive director; John Manzoni, regional president of BP and David O'Reilly, chief executive of ChevronTexaco. Another name linked to the document is Sheikh Saud Al Nasser Al Sabah, the former Kuwaiti oil minister and a fellow of the Baker Institute.


Official: US oil at the heart of Iraq crisis | Sunday Herald, The Newspaper | Find Articles at BNET
 
Bush was a hell of a lot better than this cream puff.

By what measures?

All applicable.

j-mac
Ok, let's go with unemployment then.

The U3 unemployment rate under Bush for his first 26 months increased by a whopping 41%, under Obama, the U3 unemployment rate has increased only 14%.

So by that measure, Obama is doing better than Bush.

Damn, proving you wrong couldn't have been easier.
:2razz:
 
doing better than bush---LOL!

most house seats LOST since 1938, most state reps and assemblies in history, 10 gubs, 6 senators...
 
Your own link states that it was the Iranian hostage crisis that was Carter's "most damaging problem" in terms of the 1980 election.

I would be wary of using contemporary interpretations in the place of actual data from the 1980 election that is available. The hostage crisis certainly contributed to the outcome, but the leading issue was the economy. From the November 5, 1980 edition of The New York Times:

A New York Times/CBS News poll of more than 10,000 voters as they left the polls indicated that the predominant motivation among voters was the conviction that it was time for a change. The biggest issue in their minds was the nation's economy, especially inflation.
 
The high misery index certaintly hurt, but even that was primarily due to interest rates (which are out of the president's control) as the unemployment rate was the same during the election as it was when Carter became president. Carter's biggest hurdle was the Iranian hostage crisis, in which he was weak and ineffective.

The Misery Index = Unemployment Rate + Inflation Rate. It does not consider interest rates. Although the unemployment rate was 7.5% when President Carter took office and 7.5% in October 1980 (the November figure wasn't available until after the election), the annual inflation rate was 5.2% when President Carter took office and 12.6% by October 1980. Not surprisingly, the poll cited in the post above specifically cited inflation when referencing voter dissatisfaction with the economy.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom