US gasoline rises above $4 a gallon for first time

[mcpapa]

I distinctly remember Rush (yes, I do occasionally listen for the comic relief) stating a couple of years ago, "Hydrogen cars and conservation aren't the answer." His point was that we should be ramping up in ANWR to get that extra 3 percent, I guess. He seemed to be saying that we should be producing and consuming at more rapid rates, rather than what seems to be obvious - developing alternate energy sources. Solar, wind, nuclear.

[mcpapa]

My (and thankfully others or I'd feel really alone. :lol:) theory is that they struck the WTC for a reason-symbolism for one (they can get us financially), loss of life another (obviously), and to strike fear in us (which they did). I'm pretty certain they were expecting retaliation. No one attacks the US without retaliation. We did retaliate, sending troops into Afghanistan and beginning an offesive there. Now, I think all of that is sort of "routine". However, we then strike Iraq. That, IMO, was irrational. But, when we did, we got ourselves into a mess, one from which we cannot hope to realistically extricate ourselves for many years. We have tied up enormous resources militarily and monetarily there, and we're not even really close to the day when we will no longer be militarily or monetarily obligated to Iraq. At this point, though, the average American is being directly affected by our actions in Iraq....economically. Maybe you haven't really started to feel the squeeze. Those with decent jobs are usually the last to feel the effects, unless there are huge losses in the stock market, IMO. But for those working and barely making it, the strain is really becoming a problem.

 

Economically, we are in a steady decline. No one wants to call it a recession, so I'll say "decline". People are losing their jobs. Automakers are scaling back production. Gas prices are at a high that I don't think anyone could have dreamed of pre-911. The cost of goods and food are rising. Companies continue to cut back, and that includes raises and revisions in benefits that put more on the employee financially. Even some people who could afford health insurance before are faced with the decision to keep it or to consider it a luxury.

 

When I say they have us where they want us, I think we've played into their hands to an outcome that was far better than they could have hoped, and far longer lasting....and they haven't had to attack us even one more time.

 

Despite any progress we make in Iraq, we will still be trillions of dollars in debt, and continuing to spend because of our obligations to the Iraqi people.

 

Milk at $4.00 per gallon, eggs at $2.00 per dozen, bread at $2.00+ a loaf. Pretty soon we're all going to be subsisting on college diets - cheap mac&cheese and Ramen noodles. The cost of staple food items is rising at an alarming rate. I don't see how people on fixed incomes can get by for much longer at this rate. Food prices are forecast to rise anywhere between 4% (US Dept of Agriculture) to 7 or 8 percent per year. Apply the rule of 72 and see how fast food proces will double, if the predictions hold true.

[John Anthony]

The only thing we have going for us is either McCain or Obama has 4 years to fix this stuff or adios amigo. They won't have the cushion like Bush has.

[cch5432]

One thing about drilling in ANWR. Some people say that it isn't a long-term solution, but in now way can drilling in ANWR help. As Hearsay mentioned in another thread, prices could drop if drilling ANWR began because of the (possible) increase in supply, since the prices are based on speculation anyways.

[75center]

My (and thankfully others or I'd feel really alone. :lol:) theory is that they struck the WTC for a reason-symbolism for one (they can get us financially), loss of life another (obviously), and to strike fear in us (which they did). I'm pretty certain they were expecting retaliation. No one attacks the US without retaliation. We did retaliate, sending troops into Afghanistan and beginning an offesive there. Now, I think all of that is sort of "routine". However, we then strike Iraq. That, IMO, was irrational. But, when we did, we got ourselves into a mess, one from which we cannot hope to realistically extricate ourselves for many years. We have tied up enormous resources militarily and monetarily there, and we're not even really close to the day when we will no longer be militarily or monetarily obligated to Iraq. At this point, though, the average American is being directly affected by our actions in Iraq....economically. Maybe you haven't really started to feel the squeeze. Those with decent jobs are usually the last to feel the effects, unless there are huge losses in the stock market, IMO. But for those working and barely making it, the strain is really becoming a problem.

 

Economically, we are in a steady decline. No one wants to call it a recession, so I'll say "decline". People are losing their jobs. Automakers are scaling back production. Gas prices are at a high that I don't think anyone could have dreamed of pre-911. The cost of goods and food are rising. Companies continue to cut back, and that includes raises and revisions in benefits that put more on the employee financially. Even some people who could afford health insurance before are faced with the decision to keep it or to consider it a luxury.

 

When I say they have us where they want us, I think we've played into their hands to an outcome that was far better than they could have hoped, and far longer lasting....and they haven't had to attack us even one more time.

 

Despite any progress we make in Iraq, we will still be trillions of dollars in debt, and continuing to spend because of our obligations to the Iraqi people.

 

I see what you're saying. I just happen to disagree. You seem to attribute much more of the US situation to Iraq than I and many others do. I don't believe the Iraq war caused the housing crises, for instance. That is a huge part of the current situation. Iraq has contributed to the rise in gas prices but doesn't account by itself for the increases we've seen. I also believe they haven't attacked us because we have prevented it, not because they felt they didn't need to. I think they are regretting now following the US into Iraq as things turn sour for them.

[rockmom]

I see what you're saying. I just happen to disagree. You seem to attribute much more of the US situation to Iraq than I and many others do. I don't believe the Iraq war caused the housing crises, for instance. That is a huge part of the current situation. Iraq has contributed to the rise in gas prices but doesn't account by itself for the increases we've seen. I also believe they haven't attacked us because we have prevented it, not because they felt they didn't need to. I think they are regretting now following the US into Iraq as things turn sour for them.

 

 

I don't think that the situation in Iraq directly caused the housing crisis either. But, as a country, Americans have seen rising costs across the board, and as costs have gotten higher on other areas, alot of that is attributable to the sharp rise in fuel costs. Obviously, people who took out sub-prime mortgages had a lot to worry about even if the fuel costs hadn't risen, once their mortgage payments jumped. But, I do feel there most likely were people who would have been able to still find it easier to pay their new mortgage payments if their other costs hadn't sharply risne as well. You said it's a huge part of the current situation, and I agree. But, looking down the road, I see that that situation will right itself, but the oil situation is not going to be solved anytime soon. The amount of debt the county continues to incur will continue to rise and rise and rise.

 

The people at the bottom of the economic scale, espcially in rural areas, are already having to choose between paying for gas to get to work 10-20 or more miles away, and quitting working altogether. As things continue to decline, this scenario will inch it's way up the economic scale. Those at the top may never feel a thing until all is righted. But in the meantime, we sacrifice millions of "average" Americans, those without retirement accounts, investments, health insurance.

 

As to them not fighting us here because we've engaged them over there....I find that to be a subjective conclusion. Not just by you, but everyone who subscribes to that theory. I honestly believe it they could have attacked us the last time, they can find the way to do it again on our own soil. I definitely don't feel safer here at home because we're fighting in Iraq.

[HHSDad]

More oil isn't necessarily the fix to high gas prices. A major part of our high oil prices has to do with a weak dollar. As the dollar drops in value, the price of oil and every other import goes up. Since Jan 1, 2001, the value of the dollar has dropped 40% against the Euro. So I don't think its unreasonable to believe that with a strong dollar, we'd be paying less that $3 a gallon for gas. If the dollar was as strong as it was at the beginning of 2001, oil would only be $83 a barrel instead of $138.

 

In case you're doubting this, have you heard many complaints from other nations about high oil prices?

[75center]

I don't think that the situation in Iraq directly caused the housing crisis either. But, as a country, Americans have seen rising costs across the board, and as costs have gotten higher on other areas, alot of that is attributable to the sharp rise in fuel costs. Obviously, people who took out sub-prime mortgages had a lot to worry about even if the fuel costs hadn't risen, once their mortgage payments jumped. But, I do feel there most likely were people who would have been able to still find it easier to pay their new mortgage payments if their other costs hadn't sharply risne as well. You said it's a huge part of the current situation, and I agree. But, looking down the road, I see that that situation will right itself, but the oil situation is not going to be solved anytime soon. The amount of debt the county continues to incur will continue to rise and rise and rise.

 

The people at the bottom of the economic scale, espcially in rural areas, are already having to choose between paying for gas to get to work 10-20 or more miles away, and quitting working altogether. As things continue to decline, this scenario will inch it's way up the economic scale. Those at the top may never feel a thing until all is righted. But in the meantime, we sacrifice millions of "average" Americans, those without retirement accounts, investments, health insurance.

 

As to them not fighting us here because we've engaged them over there....I find that to be a subjective conclusion. Not just by you, but everyone who subscribes to that theory. I honestly believe it they could have attacked us the last time, they can find the way to do it again on our own soil. I definitely don't feel safer here at home because we're fighting in Iraq.

 

 

Again, I simply disagree. Much of our rising costs would have occurred whether or not we were in Iraq. I also do not think it is coincidence that there has not been an attack here. They concentrated their resources in Iraq and are now seeing those resources and their propoganda edge vanish. I feel much safer here while we have them tied up in Iraq. Does that mean we won't be attacked again? Of course not. All it takes is one person.

[rockmom]

Again, I simply disagree. Much of our rising costs would have occurred whether or not we were in Iraq. I also do not think it is coincidence that there has not been an attack here. They concentrated their resources in Iraq and are now seeing those resources and their propoganda edge vanish. I feel much safer here while we have them tied up in Iraq. Does that mean we won't be attacked again? Of course not. All it takes is one person.

 

The last part, we could argue till we're blue in our faces and we won't agree, so I'll agree to disagree (but I think you're wrong. )

 

Now, the first part. Setting aside the mortgage debacle, I don't think oil prices would have risen the way they have. Then, the costs to transport food wouldn't have risen, causing rises in food costs. Then people would have kept buying SUV's, which would have kept Automakers rolling along. Then some of the automaker jobs wouldn't have been cut. Then some of the suppliers to the automakers wouldn't have had to cut jobs. Then some of these workers wouldn't be unemployed, without benefits, etc.

 

Near-poverty workers would be able to afford the gas to get to work, and not winding up on welfare rolls either. There have been several articles I've read about specific areas of the country hardest hit by the rise in the cost of gas. Do you realize that there are 3 counties in Kentucky where the residents (on average) pay over more than 15% of thier net income in gasoline?

[swamprat]

More oil isn't necessarily the fix to high gas prices. A major part of our high oil prices has to do with a weak dollar. As the dollar drops in value, the price of oil and every other import goes up. Since Jan 1, 2001, the value of the dollar has dropped 40% against the Euro. So I don't think its unreasonable to believe that with a strong dollar, we'd be paying less that $3 a gallon for gas. If the dollar was as strong as it was at the beginning of 2001, oil would only be $83 a barrel instead of $138.

 

In case you're doubting this, have you heard many complaints from other nations about high oil prices?

For most of the last year the price of gas has increased at almost the exactly same rate as the dollar has fallen against the Euro during the same time period.

[H]

Again, I simply disagree. Much of our rising costs would have occurred whether or not we were in Iraq. I also do not think it is coincidence that there has not been an attack here. They concentrated their resources in Iraq and are now seeing those resources and their propoganda edge vanish. I feel much safer here while we have them tied up in Iraq. Does that mean we won't be attacked again? Of course not. All it takes is one person.

 

 

There is far from unanimity of belief that we are primarily fighting al Qaeda in Iraq (or that al Qaeda ever really constituted much of a cohesive force there). I have become more and more skeptical of the "we're fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here" philosophy regarding Iraq. I found this recently published article from Time magazine interesting:

 

Perpetuating the al-Qaeda-Iraq Myth

 

We have been repeatedly fed falsehoods by the White House regarding the state of affairs in post-invasion Iraq (remember, these were the people who proclaimed that "the insurgency is in its last throes" in early 2005 and who stubbornly refused to acknowledge at the time that the country was sliding into sectarian chaos in late 2006). Therefore, it is difficult for me to take at face value the Administration's expedient assertions that al Qaeda is the primary foe our forces have been fighting there.

[John Anthony]

Depart of Energy says... 4.00 gas from this point on through 2009. That's gonna be a long recession.

[75center]

There is far from unanimity of belief that we are primarily fighting al Qaeda in Iraq (or that al Qaeda ever really constituted much of a cohesive force there). I have become more and more skeptical of the "we're fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here" philosophy regarding Iraq. I found this recently published article from Time magazine interesting:

 

Perpetuating the al-Qaeda-Iraq Myth

 

We have been repeatedly fed falsehoods by the White House regarding the state of affairs in post-invasion Iraq (remember, these were the people who proclaimed that "the insurgency is in its last throes" in early 2005 and who stubbornly refused to acknowledge at the time that the country was sliding into sectarian chaos in late 2006). Therefore, it is difficult for me to take at face value the Administration's expedient assertions that al Qaeda is the primary foe our forces have been fighting there.

 

Doesn't matter if they're our primary foe there. Al Queda has picked Iraq to focus their attention and it's cost them dearly in resources and following, thus leaving them unable to attack here.

[toppop]

I thought the price of gas was high until I filled up my tank and went inside and bought a bottle of water. - 16.9oz for $1.19.

[75center]

But we can live without water, can't live without gas.