WEATHER »

Are you paying $5 for a gallon of gas yet?

Almost, and it's killing my budget. 42% 58 votes
Not quite, but how else will we reduce our dependence on oil? 18% 25 votes
Regardless, me and my big SUV are here to stay. 10% 15 votes
Nope, I bike, walk, and take alternative transit practically everywhere. 18% 26 votes
Happily! I'm an Exxon Mobil shareholder! 9% 13 votes
137 total votes

Comments

Independent Discussion Guidelines

Chicken and egg problem ... consumers are accustomed to subsidized oil. For alternative energy sources to have a chance to make it in our market economy, the oil subsidies need to be removed, and even transferred to technologies with longer-term potential. But that may give oil companies a reason to raise prices even more in the short term.

Ironically, Energy Secretary Steven Chu was probably right when he said higher gas prices would spur development of other energy sources. But politics being what it is, he got skewered for being plain-spoken (he made his statement before he was appointed).

Wonder what things will be like 100 years from now ...

EastBeach (anonymous profile)
March 15, 2012 at 1:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"For alternative energy sources to have a chance to make it in our market economy, the oil subsidies need to be removed, and even transferred to technologies with longer-term potential."

Like Solyndra? Let the markets determine their own price levels. Governments picking winners and losers is a sure loser for the taxpayer.

Botany (anonymous profile)
March 16, 2012 at 1:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Like Solyndra? Let the markets determine their own price levels. Governments picking winners and losers is a sure loser for the taxpayer," says "Botany."

No, I think EastBeach suggests treatment more like the oil-industry "winners," the chosen market via subsidies, tax breaks and credits, and research and exploration funding from U.S. and state governments for 95% of the past 50 years.

binky (anonymous profile)
March 16, 2012 at 3:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

They already chose a winner. Ask the folks up in South Dakota what it is.

AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
March 19, 2012 at 5:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Don't worry. President Gingrich will hold his breath and huff and puff until the gasoline price per gallon drops to $2.50!

He said it so it must be true.

John_Adams (anonymous profile)
March 20, 2012 at 7:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)

With profits at an all time high, it's a wonder why the Obama Administration won't seem to call the Securities Exchange Commission over these artificial gas prices !

SantaNa (anonymous profile)
March 20, 2012 at 7:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Gasoline is still cheaper in adjusted dollars than it was in the 1980's. Quit whining.

JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2012 at 9:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Thank you JohnLocke, once and a while you contribute an important point.

Yes, gasoline prices have fluctuated not as much because of the supply and demand of oil, but due to the supply and demand of the dollar.

Inflation is the real culprit, but what people don't realize is that inflation doesn't always affect ALL prices. Sometimes it only affects a segment of the market.

So while Bernanke is talking about how "low" inflation is, he is talking about a VERY limited segment of the market that was picked specifically by the Federal Reserve criminal organization to make people think they are doing their job. So next time you see a high energy bill, high gas prices, high prices for health care, high prices for higher education and if you're wondering why housing prices were so high to begin with, remember Ben Bernanke at the Federal Reserve talking about how "low" inflation is at the moment.

Next, consider these added expenses just one more government tax, on top of income taxes, sales taxes, capital gains taxes and taxes your employer's business pays, remember that these price increases are a direct result of government increasing the money supply and handing it out to their best buddies in the big banking and corporate dominated political structure.

Stop letting the government pick winners and losers, that is the consumer's job. Government is supposed to protect our rights and our property from theft, destruction, pollution, etc. In a REAL free market, if somebody pollutes someone else's land, that person has to repair the land and pay damages. Today, the EPA protects corporations from liability. If we went back to property rights and abolished the EPA, we would have less pollution and would be closer to a free market where goods and services become highly available and affordable. We would reduce the need for welfare, and where it is needed it could be implemented very easily on the local level.

loonpt (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2012 at 3:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If gas were suddenly ten cents a gallon we'd still be wiser (maybe even more so) to be developing renewable sources of energy. The combination of a finite amount of oil and the damage oil based energy consumption causes to the human body and the environment alone is reason enough to be looking to switch over asap.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
March 21, 2012 at 6:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I don't know what you 99% are complaining about, I just cashed my check this month from Exxon/Mobil for my Quarterly review of my Shareholders Stock and BOY, it sure is sweet!
Being one of the 1% sure makes me love the President and all you Peon's, your vote doesn't matter anyway unless your like me and can afford a speaking point on the Electorial College's 'America Votes' panel, we always choose the President that you worker-bees will pay taxes too!
In the words of a great President, "Quit your complaining and get back to WORK"!

dou4now (anonymous profile)
April 12, 2012 at 5:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Jennifer Koh, Violin, Part III

Intrepid violinist Jennifer Koh’s adventurous exploration of Bach’s influence on ... Read More