DiabloWags said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

Well actually I have to own up to the math all by myself. Terrible mistake but +52% and +35% make the point very well. Were it cut and pasted the numbers would have been much better.

The point remains, no matter how bad the posters math (aka me), the rise is Biden's to own. Get over it. His watch. Well, I think it is, but probably more Klain and Rice.

---

Right.

Because in your mind the oil industry is nationalized and Biden has total control over when Refineries shut down for maintenance, flaring, or a fire.

I cant tell you how absolutely ridiculous that sounds. Your oversimplification of a multi-faceted GLOBAL industry speaks volumes.

Tell me, did you also blame Donald Trump for the GDP collapsing -33.3% in Q2 of 2020 because that happened on his watch?

---

Blame? No. But it happened on his watch so it was his to own.

---

Are you OdontoBear too?

---

See Harry Truman...the buck stops at the oval office.

tequila4kapp said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

Well actually I have to own up to the math all by myself. Terrible mistake but +52% and +35% make the point very well. Were it cut and pasted the numbers would have been much better.

The point remains, no matter how bad the posters math (aka me), the rise is Biden's to own. Get over it. His watch. Well, I think it is, but probably more Klain and Rice.

---

Right.

Because in your mind the oil industry is nationalized and Biden has total control over when Refineries shut down for maintenance, flaring, or a fire.

I cant tell you how absolutely ridiculous that sounds. Your oversimplification of a multi-faceted GLOBAL industry speaks volumes.

Tell me, did you also blame Donald Trump for the GDP collapsing -33.3% in Q2 of 2020 because that happened on his watch?

---

Blame? No. But it happened on his watch so it was his to own.

---

Are you OdontoBear too?

---

See Harry Truman...the buck stops at the oval office.

---

Exactly. Whether they directly control all the levels, the voters will hold them accountable. That is the way it works for the top leaders, whether President of the United States or CEO of a public company. Saying I had no control to solve these problems but vote for me again doesn't work.

dajo9 said:

---

Core PCE inflation down to 4.4% in the latest GDP report. This is a really good report as it has growth and core inflation weakening without crashing. The Fed is appropriately moving to a more data dependent approach without forward guidance of big rate increases. Seems silly to me that they don't meet monthly during times like these, but whatever. They next meet in September.

---

I think that the 60 day respite will wind up giving Powell more options.

The decrease in real GDP showed that businesses spent less on inventory and consumers spent less on their homes. In addition, federal, state and local government also lowered their outlays. Those were partly offset by increases in exports and personal consumption.

Personal consumption expenditures: +1.0% vs. +1.3% consensus and 1.8% prior.

PCE price index: +7.1% vs. +7.1% prior.
Core PCE prices: +4.4% vs. +4.5% consensus and +5.2% prior.

calbear93 said:

---

Exactly. Whether they directly control all the levels, the voters will hold them accountable. That is the way it works for the top leaders, whether President of the United States or CEO of a public company. Saying I had no control to solve these problems but vote for me again doesn't work.

---

And yet the majority of Americans are too dumb to know who Jerome Powell is or what the FED does.
These are the people that lap up everything that the pundits say on Faux News.
The financial literacy of this country is embarrassing.

Spend a few hours on Facebook threads and you'll see that much of America (especially the cult of Trumpanzees) actually believe that the President of the United States is in charge of setting the price of gasoline as well as interest rates.

Believe it or not, there are even House of Representatives who have no clue who gave the FED so much independent authority and their dual-mandate.

DiabloWags said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

Well actually I have to own up to the math all by myself. Terrible mistake but +52% and +35% make the point very well. Were it cut and pasted the numbers would have been much better.

The point remains, no matter how bad the posters math (aka me), the rise is Biden's to own. Get over it. His watch. Well, I think it is, but probably more Klain and Rice.

---

Right.

Because in your mind the oil industry is nationalized and Biden has total control over when Refineries shut down for maintenance, flaring, or a fire.

I cant tell you how absolutely ridiculous that sounds. Your oversimplification of a multi-faceted GLOBAL industry speaks volumes.

Tell me, did you also blame Donald Trump for the GDP collapsing -33.3% in Q2 of 2020 because that happened on his watch?

---

Blame? No. But it happened on his watch so it was his to own.

---

Are you OdontoBear too?
How many screen-names do you have here?

---

Tooth jockey doesn't do tequila...Bad, bad results in past.

DiabloWags said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

Exactly. Whether they directly control all the levels, the voters will hold them accountable. That is the way it works for the top leaders, whether President of the United States or CEO of a public company. Saying I had no control to solve these problems but vote for me again doesn't work.

---

And yet the majority of Americans are too dumb to know who Jerome Powell is or what the FED does.
These are the people that lap up everything that the pundits say on Faux News.
The financial literacy of this country is embarrassing.

Spend a few hours on Facebook threads and you'll see that much of America (especially the cult of Trumpanzees) actually believe that the President of the United States is in charge of setting the price of gasoline as well as interest rates.

Believe it or not, there are even House of Representatives who have no clue who gave the FED so much independent authority and their dual-mandate.

---

Yeah, this board is as much junk food as I can handle. No desire to go to a place where the least informed types from this board from each side gather where they write about things without any knowledge but solely on their conviction on conspiracy theories and how their side is good and other side is evil. No thanks.

….although it is a tough closing argument that there is a "good" to anyone who would vote for tRump thrice, especially in light of the fact he has fully revealed himself even to the intellectually challenged.

bearister said:

---

….although it is a tough closing argument that there is a "good" to anyone who would vote for tRump thrice, especially in light of the fact he has fully revealed himself even to the intellectually challenged.

---

I don't know if it's good or evil. Most likely brainwashed. We stopped listening to each other and have started calling each good or evil based on party affiliation. I suspect most here know an otherwise decent person who has been fooled into supporting Trump when there are so many better potential candidates in the Republican Party. How many here on this board actually listen with an open mind to counterarguments by the other side? Maybe a handful? We are all brainwashed, not helped by the social engineering done by algorithms. So, people come with conviction of the righteousness of their party and will discount anything that counters that conviction, including Trump's lack of intelligence. Sad state of our country, largely reflected here as well.

calbear93 said:

---

bearister said:

---

….although it is a tough closing argument that there is a "good" to anyone who would vote for tRump thrice, especially in light of the fact he has fully revealed himself even to the intellectually challenged.

---

I don't know if it's good or evil. Most likely brainwashed. We stopped listening to each other and have started calling each good or evil based on party affiliation. I suspect most here know an otherwise decent person who has been fooled into supporting Trump when there are so many better potential candidates in the Republican Party. How many here on this board actually listen with an open mind to counterarguments by the other side? Maybe a handful? We are all brainwashed, not helped by the social engineering done by algorithms. So, people come with conviction of the righteousness of their party and will discount anything that counters that conviction, including Trump's lack of intelligence. Sad state of our country, largely reflected here as well.

---

Republicans tend to vote for an "R" across the entire Party.

It doesnt really matter what their policy's are, how they've voted in the past, etc.
All that matters to an entire generation (or two) of people is that there is an "R" next to the candidate's name.
That certainly is not the case on the other side of the aisle.

I've had fairly smart friends of mine and their family members (parents) vote for Trump not once, but twice. It's just part of voting for a guy with an "R" next to his name . . . and then mindlessly defending him at all costs, even though it's gonna wind up costing you losing friendships with the closest of friends.

To hear an educated person tell me that I heard Trump "incorrectly" when he discussed INJECTING DISINFECTANT as a remedy for Covid, was the last thing that I ever thought I'd hear from a good friend of mine. That, and claiming that I had "so much hate in my heart, that I wasnt able to see Trump clearly."

The carnage and polarization that this narcissist has left behind is unfathomable.
I doubt that the "genie" will ever go back into the bottle in my lifetime.

The Political Typology: In polarized era, deep divisions persist within coalitions of both Democrats and Republicans | Pew Research Center

DiabloWags said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

bearister said:

---

….although it is a tough closing argument that there is a "good" to anyone who would vote for tRump thrice, especially in light of the fact he has fully revealed himself even to the intellectually challenged.

---

I don't know if it's good or evil. Most likely brainwashed. We stopped listening to each other and have started calling each good or evil based on party affiliation. I suspect most here know an otherwise decent person who has been fooled into supporting Trump when there are so many better potential candidates in the Republican Party. How many here on this board actually listen with an open mind to counterarguments by the other side? Maybe a handful? We are all brainwashed, not helped by the social engineering done by algorithms. So, people come with conviction of the righteousness of their party and will discount anything that counters that conviction, including Trump's lack of intelligence. Sad state of our country, largely reflected here as well.

---

Republicans tend to vote for an "R" across the entire Party.

It doesnt really matter what their policy's are, how they've voted in the past, etc.
All that matters to an entire generation (or two) of people is that there is an "R" next to the candidate's name.
That certainly is not the case on the other side of the aisle.

I've had fairly smart friends of mine and their family members (parents) vote for Trump not once, but twice. It's just part of voting for a guy with an "R" next to his name . . . and then mindlessly defending him at all costs, even though it's gonna wind up costing you losing friendships with the closest of friends.

The carnage that this narcissist has left behind is unfathomable.

---

I don't disagree with you on Trump.

However, I suspect there a lot more Republicans here who voted for Democrats than Democrats who have voted for Republicans. Party allegiance goes both ways. What is stupid is an allegiance to such an undeserving and flawed man by the Republicans.

calbear93 said:

---

I don't disagree with you on Trump.

However, I suspect there a lot more Republicans here who voted for Democrats than Democrats who have voted for Republicans. Party allegiance goes both ways. What is stupid is an allegiance to such an undeserving and flawed man by the Republicans.

---

True.

The Pew Research Center has had some interesting studies over the years regarding the lack of shared values and the deep divisions in both partisan coalitions. Here is one such study from Nov. 2021

The Political Typology: In polarized era, deep divisions persist within coalitions of both Democrats and Republicans | Pew Research Center

calbear93 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

bearister said:

---

….although it is a tough closing argument that there is a "good" to anyone who would vote for tRump thrice, especially in light of the fact he has fully revealed himself even to the intellectually challenged.

---

I don't know if it's good or evil. Most likely brainwashed. We stopped listening to each other and have started calling each good or evil based on party affiliation. I suspect most here know an otherwise decent person who has been fooled into supporting Trump when there are so many better potential candidates in the Republican Party. How many here on this board actually listen with an open mind to counterarguments by the other side? Maybe a handful? We are all brainwashed, not helped by the social engineering done by algorithms. So, people come with conviction of the righteousness of their party and will discount anything that counters that conviction, including Trump's lack of intelligence. Sad state of our country, largely reflected here as well.

---

Republicans tend to vote for an "R" across the entire Party.

It doesnt really matter what their policy's are, how they've voted in the past, etc.
All that matters to an entire generation (or two) of people is that there is an "R" next to the candidate's name.
That certainly is not the case on the other side of the aisle.

I've had fairly smart friends of mine and their family members (parents) vote for Trump not once, but twice. It's just part of voting for a guy with an "R" next to his name . . . and then mindlessly defending him at all costs, even though it's gonna wind up costing you losing friendships with the closest of friends.

The carnage that this narcissist has left behind is unfathomable.

---

I don't disagree with you on Trump.

However, I suspect there a lot more Republicans here who voted for Democrats than Democrats who have voted for Republicans. Party allegiance goes both ways. What is stupid is an allegiance to such an undeserving and flawed man by the Republicans.

---

The Republican Party has gone fascist so it's good Dems here aren't switching. Twice I have voted for a Republican and both times I regretted it. I have never regretted a vote for a Democrat. That's a pretty strong track record for my personal views.

"I don't know if it's good or evil. Most likely brainwashed."

History is going to make that call for those unwilling to make it, like it made it against the Germans that claimed they were brainwashed. At some point accountability for who you vote for and support kicks in and no excuse in the world will save you from the moral stain.

I watched this movie recently. It shows how pathetic someone can look on the witness stand engaging in quadruple talk to dodge personal accountability.

calbear93 said:

---

bearister said:

---

….although it is a tough closing argument that there is a "good" to anyone who would vote for tRump thrice, especially in light of the fact he has fully revealed himself even to the intellectually challenged.

---

I don't know if it's good or evil. Most likely brainwashed. We stopped listening to each other and have started calling each good or evil based on party affiliation. I suspect most here know an otherwise decent person who has been fooled into supporting Trump when there are so many better potential candidates in the Republican Party. How many here on this board actually listen with an open mind to counterarguments by the other side? Maybe a handful? We are all brainwashed, not helped by the social engineering done by algorithms. So, people come with conviction of the righteousness of their party and will discount anything that counters that conviction, including Trump's lack of intelligence. Sad state of our country, largely reflected here as well.

---

..

tequila4kapp said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

bearister said:

---

….although it is a tough closing argument that there is a "good" to anyone who would vote for tRump thrice, especially in light of the fact he has fully revealed himself even to the intellectually challenged.

---

I don't know if it's good or evil. Most likely brainwashed. We stopped listening to each other and have started calling each good or evil based on party affiliation. I suspect most here know an otherwise decent person who has been fooled into supporting Trump when there are so many better potential candidates in the Republican Party. How many here on this board actually listen with an open mind to counterarguments by the other side? Maybe a handful? We are all brainwashed, not helped by the social engineering done by algorithms. So, people come with conviction of the righteousness of their party and will discount anything that counters that conviction, including Trump's lack of intelligence. Sad state of our country, largely reflected here as well.

---

..

---

Yeah, my vote does not matter either in national elections. Matters from a local and House of Representative perspective but a Republican would never be taken seriously in even a local election where I live. It is about who is more grounded in reality among the liberals.

MUST WATCH: Two minutes of Democrats LYING about inflation pic.twitter.com/xd8uDqv5yK

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) July 28, 2022

Gonna keep making this point: At this point, gas isn't expensive by historical standards. Adjusting for average wages, it's high relative to the late 2010s, when money-losing fracking was all the rage. But it's normal in longer perspective pic.twitter.com/HI2kPa5k7t

— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) July 30, 2022

dajo9 said:

---

Gonna keep making this point: At this point, gas isn't expensive by historical standards. Adjusting for average wages, it's high relative to the late 2010s, when money-losing fracking was all the rage. But it's normal in longer perspective pic.twitter.com/HI2kPa5k7t

— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) July 30, 2022

---

One can always find favorable stats to pad one's point, and in many ways what Krugman says makes a lot of sense. The big problem is that gas prices jumped tremendously from January of 2021 to present, first with policies of the Biden administration posturing for complete elimination of fossil fuels and America's energy independence to favor a scorched earth (love the verbiage) move to alt energy. Then it became exaggerated by Russia's invasion of Ukraine---How much just that or that coupled with Biden's advisors shutting the nozzle on fossil fuels we can debate forever. Now those prices have come down a bit in the last month, so if we give him blame for one, give him credit for the recent drop.

The problem is people's perception. Gas prices which were in the mid $2.00 range are what now. Under Biden's watch. The proverbial turd is in his pocket as the consumer perceives. So let Paul Krugman say and graph whatever he wishes right now, the drop is not big enough, the perception is gas is "too high" still. Three months and counting.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Gonna keep making this point: At this point, gas isn't expensive by historical standards. Adjusting for average wages, it's high relative to the late 2010s, when money-losing fracking was all the rage. But it's normal in longer perspective pic.twitter.com/HI2kPa5k7t

— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) July 30, 2022

---

One can always find favorable stats to pad one's point, and in many ways what Krugman says makes a lot of sense. The big problem is that gas prices jumped tremendously from January of 2021 to present, first with policies of the Biden administration posturing for complete elimination of fossil fuels and America's energy independence to favor a scorched earth (love the verbiage) move to alt energy. Then it became exaggerated by Russia's invasion of Ukraine---How much just that or that coupled with Biden's advisors shutting the nozzle on fossil fuels we can debate forever. Now those prices have come down a bit in the last month, so if we give him blame for one, give him credit for the recent drop.

The problem is people's perception. Gas prices which were in the mid $2.00 range are what now. Under Biden's watch. The proverbial turd is in his pocket as the consumer perceives. So let Paul Krugman say and graph whatever he wishes right now, the drop is not big enough, the perception is gas is "too high" still. Three months and counting.

---

It is silly to think Biden's views on green energy would have a real, immediate impact on gas prices. That is just politics talking.

The point of showing the truth about gas prices, like Krugman is doing, is to show the truth rather than the perception, which is frequently wrong.

dajo9 said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Gonna keep making this point: At this point, gas isn't expensive by historical standards. Adjusting for average wages, it's high relative to the late 2010s, when money-losing fracking was all the rage. But it's normal in longer perspective pic.twitter.com/HI2kPa5k7t

— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) July 30, 2022

---

One can always find favorable stats to pad one's point, and in many ways what Krugman says makes a lot of sense. The big problem is that gas prices jumped tremendously from January of 2021 to present, first with policies of the Biden administration posturing for complete elimination of fossil fuels and America's energy independence to favor a scorched earth (love the verbiage) move to alt energy. Then it became exaggerated by Russia's invasion of Ukraine---How much just that or that coupled with Biden's advisors shutting the nozzle on fossil fuels we can debate forever. Now those prices have come down a bit in the last month, so if we give him blame for one, give him credit for the recent drop.

The problem is people's perception. Gas prices which were in the mid $2.00 range are what now. Under Biden's watch. The proverbial turd is in his pocket as the consumer perceives. So let Paul Krugman say and graph whatever he wishes right now, the drop is not big enough, the perception is gas is "too high" still. Three months and counting.

---

It is silly to think Biden's views on green energy would have a real, immediate impact on gas prices. That is just politics talking.

The point of showing the truth about gas prices, like Krugman is doing, is to show the truth rather than the perception, which is frequently wrong.

---

And yours is but your opinion. What Krugman points out is the truth, especially of the last month. But the BIG truth is that in most voters minds gas prices have risen on Biden's watch from Jan 2021 to present. It will play out, however you wish it be different. Now, it they came down to mid $2.00 by November there may be an adjustment in mass thinking.

Truth and facts are the price of gas Jan. 21, 2021 and gas prices today. Pretty simple.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

The big problem is that gas prices jumped tremendously from January of 2021 to present, first with policies of the Biden administration posturing for complete elimination of fossil fuels and America's energy independence to favor a scorched earth (love the verbiage) move to alt energy. Then it became exaggerated by Russia's invasion of Ukraine---How much just that or that coupled with Biden's advisors shutting the nozzle on fossil fuels we can debate forever. Now those prices have come down a bit in the last month, so if we give him blame for one, give him credit for the recent drop.

---

You literally sound like a pundit on FAUX NEWS repeating the same thing over and over again as if it is true, when I have presented data here that has repeatedly proven you wrong.

Over 1.2 million barrels per day of processing capacity at Gulf Coast REFINERIES went off-line for MAINTENANCE in early 2021. That's why gas prices were heading up well before the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

That's a Fact that you just refuse to accept.
Your knowledge base when it comes to the energy markets is extremely poor.

MinotStateBeav said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

So the oil companies conspired to screw the entire nation with historic gas prices starting Jan 7, 2020? They didn't do it to Clinton or Obama but there was something about Joe that set them off?

---

That's clearly NOT what I'm saying.

What I am saying is that oil companies, and oil companies alone, are responsible for the prices they charge for their product.

NOT the President, and NOT the President's political party.

---

Come on. Policy impacts how people act. People and companies do not exist in a vacuum.

---

Agree 100%!

So if you can be as specific as possible, what Democratic Party or Biden admin policies are contributing directly to higher gasoline prices in the U.S.?

---

Being Pro-lockdown f'd us. This administration was tooting that horn for the entire first year

---

Okay, I've been going through this thread and this is really a doozy.

1. There's no way the US had more lockdowns during the Biden administration than during Trump. It's not Trump's fault that Covid initially hit us on his watch, but that is what happened.

2. Lockdown policies in the US were mostly set at the state and local level, not by the federal government.

3. Is there some way lockdown policies in the US were harsher than other large countries around the world? They definitely weren't harsher than the large East Asian economies (China, Japan, Korea). Why aren't they to blame? Oil is a global market, right?

4. How would "lockdowns" drive inflation anyway? If a country is locked down there should be LESS demand for gas, right? If anything it would be the opposite: opening up the economy drives inflation.

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around how anyone makes this claim.

DiabloWags said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

The big problem is that gas prices jumped tremendously from January of 2021 to present, first with policies of the Biden administration posturing for complete elimination of fossil fuels and America's energy independence to favor a scorched earth (love the verbiage) move to alt energy. Then it became exaggerated by Russia's invasion of Ukraine---How much just that or that coupled with Biden's advisors shutting the nozzle on fossil fuels we can debate forever. Now those prices have come down a bit in the last month, so if we give him blame for one, give him credit for the recent drop.

---

You literally sound like a pundit on FAUX NEWS repeating the same thing over and over again as if it is true, when I have presented data here that has repeatedly proven you wrong.

Over 1.2 million barrels per day of processing capacity at Gulf Coast REFINERIES went off-line for MAINTENANCE in early 2021. That's why gas prices were heading up well before the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

That's a Fact that you just refuse to accept.
Your knowledge base when it comes to the energy markets is extremely poor.

---

When will said maintenance be completed?

OdontoBear66 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Gonna keep making this point: At this point, gas isn't expensive by historical standards. Adjusting for average wages, it's high relative to the late 2010s, when money-losing fracking was all the rage. But it's normal in longer perspective pic.twitter.com/HI2kPa5k7t

— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) July 30, 2022

---

One can always find favorable stats to pad one's point, and in many ways what Krugman says makes a lot of sense. The big problem is that gas prices jumped tremendously from January of 2021 to present, first with policies of the Biden administration posturing for complete elimination of fossil fuels and America's energy independence to favor a scorched earth (love the verbiage) move to alt energy. Then it became exaggerated by Russia's invasion of Ukraine---How much just that or that coupled with Biden's advisors shutting the nozzle on fossil fuels we can debate forever. Now those prices have come down a bit in the last month, so if we give him blame for one, give him credit for the recent drop.

The problem is people's perception. Gas prices which were in the mid $2.00 range are what now. Under Biden's watch. The proverbial turd is in his pocket as the consumer perceives. So let Paul Krugman say and graph whatever he wishes right now, the drop is not big enough, the perception is gas is "too high" still. Three months and counting.

---

It is silly to think Biden's views on green energy would have a real, immediate impact on gas prices. That is just politics talking.

The point of showing the truth about gas prices, like Krugman is doing, is to show the truth rather than the perception, which is frequently wrong.

---

And yours is but your opinion. What Krugman points out is the truth, especially of the last month. But the BIG truth is that in most voters minds gas prices have risen on Biden's watch from Jan 2021 to present. It will play out, however you wish it be different. Now, it they came down to mid $2.00 by November there may be an adjustment in mass thinking.

Truth and facts are the price of gas Jan. 21, 2021 and gas prices today. Pretty simple.

---

Gas prices have risen to normal levels. Glad we agree.

dajo9 said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Gonna keep making this point: At this point, gas isn't expensive by historical standards. Adjusting for average wages, it's high relative to the late 2010s, when money-losing fracking was all the rage. But it's normal in longer perspective pic.twitter.com/HI2kPa5k7t

— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) July 30, 2022

---

One can always find favorable stats to pad one's point, and in many ways what Krugman says makes a lot of sense. The big problem is that gas prices jumped tremendously from January of 2021 to present, first with policies of the Biden administration posturing for complete elimination of fossil fuels and America's energy independence to favor a scorched earth (love the verbiage) move to alt energy. Then it became exaggerated by Russia's invasion of Ukraine---How much just that or that coupled with Biden's advisors shutting the nozzle on fossil fuels we can debate forever. Now those prices have come down a bit in the last month, so if we give him blame for one, give him credit for the recent drop.

The problem is people's perception. Gas prices which were in the mid $2.00 range are what now. Under Biden's watch. The proverbial turd is in his pocket as the consumer perceives. So let Paul Krugman say and graph whatever he wishes right now, the drop is not big enough, the perception is gas is "too high" still. Three months and counting.

---

It is silly to think Biden's views on green energy would have a real, immediate impact on gas prices. That is just politics talking.

The point of showing the truth about gas prices, like Krugman is doing, is to show the truth rather than the perception, which is frequently wrong.

---

And yours is but your opinion. What Krugman points out is the truth, especially of the last month. But the BIG truth is that in most voters minds gas prices have risen on Biden's watch from Jan 2021 to present. It will play out, however you wish it be different. Now, it they came down to mid $2.00 by November there may be an adjustment in mass thinking.

Truth and facts are the price of gas Jan. 21, 2021 and gas prices today. Pretty simple.

---

Gas prices have risen to normal levels. Glad we agree.

---

Gas prices spiked in 2012. Gas prices have risen 50% in 10 years but so have wages. For example, California minimum wage increased from $8 in 2012 to $15 in 2022. Therefore, these are normal gas prices. Did I get it right?

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

So the oil companies conspired to screw the entire nation with historic gas prices starting Jan 7, 2020? They didn't do it to Clinton or Obama but there was something about Joe that set them off?

---

That's clearly NOT what I'm saying.

What I am saying is that oil companies, and oil companies alone, are responsible for the prices they charge for their product.

NOT the President, and NOT the President's political party.

---

Come on. Policy impacts how people act. People and companies do not exist in a vacuum.

---

Agree 100%!

So if you can be as specific as possible, what Democratic Party or Biden admin policies are contributing directly to higher gasoline prices in the U.S.?

---

Being Pro-lockdown f'd us. This administration was tooting that horn for the entire first year

---

Okay, I've been going through this thread and this is really a doozy.

1. There's no way the US had more lockdowns during the Biden administration than during Trump. It's not Trump's fault that Covid initially hit us on his watch, but that is what happened.

2. Lockdown policies in the US were mostly set at the state and local level, not by the federal government.

3. Is there some way lockdown policies in the US were harsher than other large countries around the world? They definitely weren't harsher than the large East Asian economies (China, Japan, Korea). Why aren't they to blame? Oil is a global market, right?

4. How would "lockdowns" drive inflation anyway? If a country is locked down there should be LESS demand for gas, right? If anything it would be the opposite: opening up the economy drives inflation.

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around how anyone makes this claim.

---

Lockdown policies were set by state and local...but the federal government was urging them to do so under Biden..see the difference? Johns Hopkins came out with study that said lockdowns did more harm than good. I know you like to play dumb in order to defend the insane policies of this admin, but please...stop already."HUrr durr how does lockdown drive inflation..hurrr durrrrrrrrrrrrrr"

sycasey said:

---

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around how anyone makes this claim.

---

Do you understand how now that he's made his eloquent response?

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Lockdown policies were set by state and local...but the federal government was urging them to do so under Biden..see the difference? Johns Hopkins came out with study that said lockdowns did more harm than good. I know you like to play dumb in order to defend the insane policies of this admin, but please...stop already."HUrr durr how does lockdown drive inflation..hurrr durrrrrrrrrrrrrr"

---

Serious question: Don't you ever get embarrassed? This is pathetic.

WalterSobchak said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Lockdown policies were set by state and local...but the federal government was urging them to do so under Biden..see the difference? Johns Hopkins came out with study that said lockdowns did more harm than good. I know you like to play dumb in order to defend the insane policies of this admin, but please...stop already."HUrr durr how does lockdown drive inflation..hurrr durrrrrrrrrrrrrr"

---

Serious question: Don't you ever get embarrassed? This is pathetic.

---

He just moves on to the next misunderstanding. Sadly he is posting in good faith, even if painfully misguided.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

WalterSobchak said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Lockdown policies were set by state and local...but the federal government was urging them to do so under Biden..see the difference? Johns Hopkins came out with study that said lockdowns did more harm than good. I know you like to play dumb in order to defend the insane policies of this admin, but please...stop already."HUrr durr how does lockdown drive inflation..hurrr durrrrrrrrrrrrrr"

---

Serious question: Don't you ever get embarrassed? This is pathetic.

---

He just moves on to the next misunderstanding. Sadly he is posting in good faith, even if painfully misguided.

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

So the oil companies conspired to screw the entire nation with historic gas prices starting Jan 7, 2020? They didn't do it to Clinton or Obama but there was something about Joe that set them off?

---

That's clearly NOT what I'm saying.

What I am saying is that oil companies, and oil companies alone, are responsible for the prices they charge for their product.

NOT the President, and NOT the President's political party.

---

Come on. Policy impacts how people act. People and companies do not exist in a vacuum.

---

Agree 100%!

So if you can be as specific as possible, what Democratic Party or Biden admin policies are contributing directly to higher gasoline prices in the U.S.?

---

Being Pro-lockdown f'd us. This administration was tooting that horn for the entire first year

---

Okay, I've been going through this thread and this is really a doozy.

1. There's no way the US had more lockdowns during the Biden administration than during Trump. It's not Trump's fault that Covid initially hit us on his watch, but that is what happened.

2. Lockdown policies in the US were mostly set at the state and local level, not by the federal government.

3. Is there some way lockdown policies in the US were harsher than other large countries around the world? They definitely weren't harsher than the large East Asian economies (China, Japan, Korea). Why aren't they to blame? Oil is a global market, right?

4. How would "lockdowns" drive inflation anyway? If a country is locked down there should be LESS demand for gas, right? If anything it would be the opposite: opening up the economy drives inflation.

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around how anyone makes this claim.

---

Lockdown policies were set by state and local...but the federal government was urging them to do so under Biden..see the difference? Johns Hopkins came out with study that said lockdowns did more harm than good. I know you like to play dumb in order to defend the insane policies of this admin, but please...stop already."HUrr durr how does lockdown drive inflation..hurrr durrrrrrrrrrrrrr"

---

Did the Johns Hopkins study say that lockdowns caused inflation? Can you link me to your source?

I'm not playing dumb. I understand that there can be harms from lockdowns. I don't understand why they would cause INFLATION. If anything it's coming OUT of lockdown that might drive inflation: a sudden spike in demand when suppliers aren't ready for it, so the prices go up. When everyone is staying home all the time then demand should be low.

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

So the oil companies conspired to screw the entire nation with historic gas prices starting Jan 7, 2020? They didn't do it to Clinton or Obama but there was something about Joe that set them off?

---

That's clearly NOT what I'm saying.

What I am saying is that oil companies, and oil companies alone, are responsible for the prices they charge for their product.

NOT the President, and NOT the President's political party.

---

Come on. Policy impacts how people act. People and companies do not exist in a vacuum.

---

Agree 100%!

So if you can be as specific as possible, what Democratic Party or Biden admin policies are contributing directly to higher gasoline prices in the U.S.?

---

Being Pro-lockdown f'd us. This administration was tooting that horn for the entire first year

---

Okay, I've been going through this thread and this is really a doozy.

1. There's no way the US had more lockdowns during the Biden administration than during Trump. It's not Trump's fault that Covid initially hit us on his watch, but that is what happened.

2. Lockdown policies in the US were mostly set at the state and local level, not by the federal government.

3. Is there some way lockdown policies in the US were harsher than other large countries around the world? They definitely weren't harsher than the large East Asian economies (China, Japan, Korea). Why aren't they to blame? Oil is a global market, right?

4. How would "lockdowns" drive inflation anyway? If a country is locked down there should be LESS demand for gas, right? If anything it would be the opposite: opening up the economy drives inflation.

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around how anyone makes this claim.

---

Lockdown policies were set by state and local...but the federal government was urging them to do so under Biden..see the difference? Johns Hopkins came out with study that said lockdowns did more harm than good. I know you like to play dumb in order to defend the insane policies of this admin, but please...stop already."HUrr durr how does lockdown drive inflation..hurrr durrrrrrrrrrrrrr"

---

Did the Johns Hopkins study say that lockdowns caused inflation? Can you link me to your source?

I'm not playing dumb. I understand that there can be harms from lockdowns. I don't understand why they would cause INFLATION. If anything it's coming OUT of lockdown that might drive inflation: a sudden spike in demand when suppliers aren't ready for it, so the prices go up. When everyone is staying home all the time then demand should be low.

---

Have you been to the grocery store at all? Do you notice a lot of goods missing or really expensive? Well when you can't produce enough goods for the overprinted amount of money...you have inflation.

Example: Imagine the only good in the economy is corn and corn costs $1 a pound, and imagine you and all others earn $100 a month. Each month you buy 100 lbs of corn exchanging $1 for 1 lb of corn; so the real value of $1 is 1 lb of corn. Now suppose the government simply prints more dollar bills and gives you (and imagine everyone else) an additional hundred dollars. If you want to eat more than 100 lbs of corn a month, now you can do so but presumably, since others like you also want to do the same, the demand for corn in the economy would go up and very likely its price as well. Now you would have to give up, say $1.50 for each lb of corn. This, roughly speaking, is inflation, and it is eroding the real value of your dollars -- you are getting less corn for every dollar that you used to.

edit: Hopkins study is included in here. https://brownstone.org/articles/lockdowns-did-not-save-lives-concludes-meta-analysis/

MinotStateBeav said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

So the oil companies conspired to screw the entire nation with historic gas prices starting Jan 7, 2020? They didn't do it to Clinton or Obama but there was something about Joe that set them off?

---

That's clearly NOT what I'm saying.

What I am saying is that oil companies, and oil companies alone, are responsible for the prices they charge for their product.

NOT the President, and NOT the President's political party.

---

Come on. Policy impacts how people act. People and companies do not exist in a vacuum.

---

Agree 100%!

So if you can be as specific as possible, what Democratic Party or Biden admin policies are contributing directly to higher gasoline prices in the U.S.?

---

Being Pro-lockdown f'd us. This administration was tooting that horn for the entire first year

---

Okay, I've been going through this thread and this is really a doozy.

1. There's no way the US had more lockdowns during the Biden administration than during Trump. It's not Trump's fault that Covid initially hit us on his watch, but that is what happened.

2. Lockdown policies in the US were mostly set at the state and local level, not by the federal government.

3. Is there some way lockdown policies in the US were harsher than other large countries around the world? They definitely weren't harsher than the large East Asian economies (China, Japan, Korea). Why aren't they to blame? Oil is a global market, right?

4. How would "lockdowns" drive inflation anyway? If a country is locked down there should be LESS demand for gas, right? If anything it would be the opposite: opening up the economy drives inflation.

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around how anyone makes this claim.

---

Lockdown policies were set by state and local...but the federal government was urging them to do so under Biden..see the difference? Johns Hopkins came out with study that said lockdowns did more harm than good. I know you like to play dumb in order to defend the insane policies of this admin, but please...stop already."HUrr durr how does lockdown drive inflation..hurrr durrrrrrrrrrrrrr"

---

Did the Johns Hopkins study say that lockdowns caused inflation? Can you link me to your source?

I'm not playing dumb. I understand that there can be harms from lockdowns. I don't understand why they would cause INFLATION. If anything it's coming OUT of lockdown that might drive inflation: a sudden spike in demand when suppliers aren't ready for it, so the prices go up. When everyone is staying home all the time then demand should be low.

---

Have you been to the grocery store at all? Do you notice a lot of goods missing or really expensive? Well when you can't produce enough goods for the overprinted amount of money...you have inflation.

Example: Imagine the only good in the economy is corn and corn costs $1 a pound, and imagine you and all others earn $100 a month. Each month you buy 100 lbs of corn exchanging $1 for 1 lb of corn; so the real value of $1 is 1 lb of corn. Now suppose the government simply prints more dollar bills and gives you (and imagine everyone else) an additional hundred dollars. If you want to eat more than 100 lbs of corn a month, now you can do so but presumably, since others like you also want to do the same, the demand for corn in the economy would go up and very likely its price as well. Now you would have to give up, say $1.50 for each lb of corn. This, roughly speaking, is inflation, and it is eroding the real value of your dollars -- you are getting less corn for every dollar that you used to.

edit: Hopkins study is included in here. https://brownstone.org/articles/lockdowns-did-not-save-lives-concludes-meta-analysis/

---

1. This Hopkins study seems to be about COVID mortality, not inflation.

2. This discussion was originally about the causes of oil/gasoline inflation, not corn. It seems pretty likely to me that demand for oil would be way down during a lockdown, but much higher once you're out of lockdown.

3. This still looks to me like it's coming OUT of lockdown (which has people going out and spending more money) that would actually drive inflation, not STAYING in lockdown. My reason for thinking so? The government basically "printed money" during the Trump administration (direct payments to citizens) and the initial phase of the pandemic too, and this did not cause inflation. Why not? Because a lot of places were still locked down; people stayed home in the time before vaccines were available. The round of stimulus payments under Biden coincided with the vaccines rolling out and places starting to open up. That seems like the key scenario that would create inflation: more natural demand for products and more money injected into the system, but the supply chain hasn't had time to rev itself up to meet that demand yet.

I'm fine if people want to criticize Biden for actions that may have driven the current inflationary problems. There probably is stuff to criticize. But your original point about "lockdowns = inflation" was dumb.

DiabloWags said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

The big problem is that gas prices jumped tremendously from January of 2021 to present, first with policies of the Biden administration posturing for complete elimination of fossil fuels and America's energy independence to favor a scorched earth (love the verbiage) move to alt energy. Then it became exaggerated by Russia's invasion of Ukraine---How much just that or that coupled with Biden's advisors shutting the nozzle on fossil fuels we can debate forever. Now those prices have come down a bit in the last month, so if we give him blame for one, give him credit for the recent drop.

---

You literally sound like a pundit on FAUX NEWS repeating the same thing over and over again as if it is true, when I have presented data here that has repeatedly proven you wrong.

Over 1.2 million barrels per day of processing capacity at Gulf Coast REFINERIES went off-line for MAINTENANCE in early 2021. That's why gas prices were heading up well before the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

That's a Fact that you just refuse to accept.
Your knowledge base when it comes to the energy markets is extremely poor.

---

You have proven nothing wrong that I have written. You continue wishing to make excuses for the current administration in your reference to refineries as "the" cause. I choose to believe that the implied progressive policy intent of the Biden administration has been to move to complete green energy too quickly and away from fossil fuels much too rapidly such that the reduced output has been responsible for increased pricing.

From the start none of my information was from Fox News as I find there bias one way is similar to the other networks bias in the opposite. My info from the start came from the US Energy Information (eia) charts.
Let me repeat:

Jan 2021 $2.42
Jun 2022 $5.032
Jul 2022 $4.668.......This demonstrating the last month drop per dajo.

But the remainder of the data confirms the monstrous rise in gas prices as felt by all consumers. With three months left till November I suggest perception will win out unless there is a monstrous change. You can get causal with whomever, but I suggest the man at the gas pump is not looking at blaming refineries. My concern is the fact of the matter (Biden policy intent) and the result (doubled plus gas prices) together with proximity to election.

Along with your fellow libs, your personal attacks are laughable. Always attack the messenger when not liking the message. Additionally you put one in a position of arguing against alt energy when I agree with it, but until it can satisfy our energy needs other sources must be used. Fossil fuels, nuclear. Then as alt comes up to realistic speed bring it on.

Meantime what I don't accept is your rational to society's perception. There has been expression by Biden's Transportation Secretary that high gas prices will help the electric automobile industry. Intent?

Might I suggest your taking look at XLE CVX XOM OXY in this era of inflation. Some health care and utilities might be good at this time too.