Join us at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally for an evening of politics under the influence. We meet at 8:00 pm at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E, although some of us will show up a little early for dinner.
Tonight we will have double-header of theme songs by the Beatles: Birthday, in honor of Mr. Goldstein’s 45th and Tax Man, just to remind us of the $31,000 in deferred taxes we each owe on the $9.4 trillion dollar national debt. (Thanks kids and grandkids!)
If you find yourself in the Tri-Cities area this evening, check out McCranium for the local Drinking Liberally . Otherwise, check out the Drinking Liberally web site for dates and times of a chapter near you.
Yerh but ..
the dollar has fallen! So that $31,000 is now only worth 15,000
Roger Rabbit is sick. In addition, he’s nocturnal and sleeps all day. So, he won’t attend this afternoon.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzz. Zzzzzzzz. Zzzzz.
Gravatar!!!! Har har!!!
@1 You are correct, its not as bad as it looks. Fuel prices are causing most of the
“inflation”. Fuel is more expensive because
of all the needless tinkering the refineries
have to do it to make the environmentalists
happy. In doing so they have removed a big
chunk of the available energy and leaving
us with less mpg. This means we have to burn
more fuel to do the same work so, I would bet my ass that these improved mixtures probably
result in a net gain in pollution. It seems
I read somewhere the refineries have like 40
some different recipes they have to deal with.
High fuel prices are not George Bushs’ fault
blame your local democrats. Save the Earth!
so, I would bet my ass
Everything you wrote is pulled pretty much from your ass. Feel free to bet it.
It’s worthless. You’ve got nothing to lose.
5 Mark, if that tale were any taller, KING-TV could use it as a replacement for their tower.
@5 “Fuel is more expensive because
of all the needless tinkering the refineries
have to do it to make the environmentalists
happy.”
Of course; and the runup in crude prices on Bush’s watch from $23 to $113 adds only a penny or two to the pump price of gas.
Furthermore, Bill Clinton is an environmentalist.
It’s Clinton’s fault, it’s Clinton’s fault, it’s Clinton’s fault, it’s Clinton’s fault, it’s Clinton’s fault, it’s Clinton’s fault, it’s Clinton’s fault, it’s Clinton’s fault, it’s Clinton’s fault, it’s Clinton’s fault, it’s Clinton’s fault …
@5 “It seems I read somewhere the refineries have like 40 some different recipes they have to deal with.”
I would assume it’s more than that, given all the different grades, viscosities, sulfur content variations, etc. of crude they process — especially now that we’re digging deeper in the heavier and dirtier grades of crude to keep the energy coming.
@5 “High fuel prices are not George Bushs’ fault blame your local democrats.”
What’s next, blame the Tooth Fairy?
Truman
1946 $1.63 $17.26
1947 $2.16 $20.29
1948 $2.77 $24.21
1949 $2.77 $24.44
1950 $2.77 $24.18
1951 $2.77 $22.42
1952 $2.77 $21.91
Eisenhower
1953 $2.92 $22.88
1954 $2.99 $23.39
1955 $2.93 $22.94
1956 $2.94 $22.74
1957 $3.14 $23.46
1958 $3.00 $21.83
1959 $3.00 $21.62
1960 $2.91 $20.69
Kennedy
1961 $2.85 $20.03
1962 $2.85 $19.79
1963 $2.91 $19.97
Johnson
1964 $3.00 $20.32
1965 $3.01 $20.05
1966 $3.10 $20.06
1967 $3.12 $19.65
1968 $3.18 $19.17
Nixon
1969 $3.32 $19.02
1970 $3.39 $18.35
1971 $3.60 $18.68
1972 $3.60 $20.03
1973 $4.75 $22.29
1974 $9.35 $39.77
Ford
1975 $12.21 $47.63
1976 $13.10 $48.36
1977 $14.40 $49.88
1978 $14.95 $48.17
Carter
1979 $25.10 $71.96
1980 $37.42 $95.50
1981 $35.75 $82.70
1982 $31.83 $69.33
Reagan
1983 $29.08 $61.34
1984 $28.75 $58.14
1985 $26.92 $52.56
1986 $14.44 $27.66
1987 $17.75 $32.81
1988 $14.87 $26.45
Bush Sr.
1989 $18.33 $31.05
1990 $23.19 $37.17
1991 $20.20 $31.15
1992 $19.25 $28.81
Clinton
1993 $16.75 $24.36
1994 $15.66 $22.19
1995 $16.75 $23.09
1996 $20.46 $27.38
1997 $18.64 $24.40
1998 $11.91 $15.35
1999 $16.56 $20.83
2000 $27.39 $33.39
Bush Jr.
2001 $23.00 $27.29
2002 $22.81 $26.61
2003 $27.69 $31.62
2004 $37.66 $41.84
2005 $50.04 $53.77
2006 $58.30 $60.73
2007 $64.20 $64.92
(The first $ figure is nominal dollars per barrel; the second $ figure is inflation-adjusted price stated in 2007 dollars.)
Source: http://www.inflationdata.com/i....._Table.asp
Roger Rabbit Commentary: As you can see from this chart, inflation-adjusted crude prices were a bit elevated in the aftermath of WW2, then were stable in the low $20s (with occasional dips below $20) for many years, then abruptly doubled during the Nixon-Ford Inflation, and soared further when Mideast crude supplies were disrupted during the Iranian Revolution.
Crude prices then began to decline while Carter was still in office, abruptly fell in the aftermath of the Reagan Depression, and under Clinton declined further all the way back to 1950s levels … then exploded under George W. Bush.
Presidents don’t set the price of crude oil; but their policies do influence oil prices. At a minimum, there’s an interesting correlation between the fact George W. Bush staffed the top echelons of his administration (including the vice presidency) with oilmen, and Dick Cheney’s secret energy meetings chaired by Ken Lay, and the explosive runup in crude prices that occurred while this bunch governed the United States.
It should also be noted that, contrary to the assertions of anti-environment bullshitters, U.S. refining capacity rose steadily during the Clinton years after falling sharply during the Reagan-Bush administrations and then flattened out under George W. Bush (so much for the environmentalists-did-it argument!). See http://www.eoearth.org/image/U.....pacity.gif
If you look at the trendline of crude prices after 1985, you’ll understand why the industry disinvested in the 1980s and 1990s. Remember the economic depression in the oil patch? There was very little exploration or infrastructure building going on during that time because there was no profit in bringing new supplies to market.
This couldn’t last. Consumption has increased so much that, coupled with depletion of easy-to-get oil, we now depend for a major share of global crude supplies on arctic, deep-sea, tar sands, and other expensive sources that cost between $19 and $35 a barrel to extract (compared to about $1.50 for Saudi light crude). either prices were going to rise, or supply would be frozen at a level far below consumer demand.
A single offshore deepwater drilling platform can cost $1 billion. Without these rigs, you can’t access sources like the multibillion-barrel deepwater supergiant fields recently discovered in the South Atlantic off Brazil. It takes time and money to build them, and oil platform suppliers have multi-year order backlogs. Today’s high crude prices supply companies with the cash needed to pay for this expensive infrastructure. Now, a building boom is underway. Lease rates on offshore drilling platforms run as high as $600,000 a day and you pay for that at the pump. Obviously, the E & P (exploration and production) activity now underway didn’t occur when crude prices were low, and wouldn’t have occurred if prices had stayed at 1990s levels. Increasing consumption guaranteed prices would rise.
But a crude price of even $50 or $60 a barrel is sufficient to support production from all oil sources currently in production or contemplated, because even the world’s most expensive oil — arctic oil and tar sands — costs less than $40 a barrel to produce, so there’s enough profit margin at that price level to incentivize the industry.
I don’t believe there’s a broad industry conspiracy to jack up gas prices. (I won’t rule out a few little conspiracies among domestic refiners to hold refinery capacity off line, although there’s no real evidence of that.) If you want to know why crude prices have soared, simply look at the consumption graph.
But there’s little doubt that speculative oil futures trading has driven crude prices well above a level explainable by market fundamentals (i.e., supply and demand), which most experts peg at $50 to $60 a barrel, and government policies not only allow but encourage this speculation (e.g., by continuing to fill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and the Fed’s low interest rate policies that have reduced capital retursn to less than the inflation rate resulting in a flight of capital into commodities). So, yes, about $50 of the crude price is at least partly George W. Bush’s fault for allowing these policies, which translates into well over $1 a gallon at the gas pump (a barrel of crude contains 42 gallons and produces 28 gallons of gas).
Just look at the profits – the poor oil company called Exxon has had profits for two of the last four years that are higher than any other company in history – that includes Microsoft, IBM, GE – ANY company in history.
So Mark – you are full of crap that the “environmentalists” are casuing the price increase. If that was the case – why are the profits up so much?
Another limp-wristed republican facade argument – just wave the red flag and distract from the real problems – we have no energy policy (actually we have one: it was written by Enron and Dick Cheney in secret) and the oil companies have a monopoly.
Once again Pelletizer ventures away from the lawyer reservation and forgets something very important facts:
1) China
2) Korea
3) India
Pelletizer – A virtual oxygen tank to you. Your brain needs it.
These three countries appeared on the oil import event horizon and Pelletizer knows this. He wants to engage in his usual blame game. Puddy placed PuddyFacts of oil use many times here. All you need to do is perform the usual PuddySearch on world oil imports for 1980 – 2007 and become educated. Not in Pelletizer swill but real world knowledge.
Pelletizer – did you get the link from the compassion speech by the Dalai Lama?
Next point Pelletizer missed: When I dissected correctnotright’s analysis of Reagan stopping the alternative fuels project back in 1986 which he would so conveniently use in his worthless, factless attack, the price of oil was $37/barrel in 1979-1980. When OPEC dropped the price to $14/barrel in 1986 the alternative fuels project which had cost the US Government $88 BMM (that’s Billion clueless idiot) and climbing was costing more to make a gallon of AF than it was worth.
When you know the facts, facts clear the air. Trust PuddyFacts – I give you the links, you decide if it’s true unless of course you are a clueless idiot.
RR @ 10: The years and the prices are correct, but you’ve got the division between the Ford/Carter/Reagan years off a bit. But it doesn’t affect your conclusion.
Mark @ 5: You don’t know shit about the oil business. Take a look at all the oil companies in the Seattle area, and look at their advertising. You’ve got basic ARCO, then Shell which advertises their “special mixture”, and Chevron which advertises a slightly special mixture, etc., etc.
Guess where they all get their gas? Answer: the refinery at Anacortes. That refinery handles 85% of all gasoline sold in the Pacific Northwest, and does multiple formulations for each oil company grade, etc. Since they are capable of doing that on a routine basis simply for marketing purposes, it is nonsense to say that requiring the switch-over from summer to winter formulations is any significant factor in the price of gasoline.
Puddy @ 14: The comparison of the cost of alternative fuel resources to the price of gasoline is a specious argument. Why?
First of all, all research & development costs more money up front. The bigger the industry and the more technology involved, the more it costs. Eventually, if everythign works well, it pays off at the end. If your argument was correct, all drug companies would have halted all research and development into painkillers, because it costs more than does an aspirin.
Secondly, (and here we go again) energy demand is not “elastic”, it can’t easily swing from one source to another as the price fluctuates. Those who bought cars two years ago can’t sell them immediatly and buy a more fuel efficient one, especially if they are still making payments. People can’t switch to public transit which doesn’t yet exist. To some extent, you have to follow the “If you build it, they will come” philosophy.
Third, oil companies have some significant up-front investment and risk in creating and developing oil fields, but their cost of production afterwards is relatively small. If they see their market threatened by competition, they can pump more oil in the short term to lower the cost enough to kill off the competition, if you let them do so. So just because the price of oil declines temporarily, doesn’t mean you should stop inititives which will eventually reduce their hold on this country’s economy.
As for your “Puddyfacts” websites written by someone with a right-wing agenda, I’ll rely instead on my own past experience in working at the regional headquarters of a major oil company, thank you.
@13 Well, puddinghead, have you asked yourself why those countries suddenly can spend huge sums on imported oil?
Because you gave them the money, that’s why.
You gave them our American jobs. You sold them our public debt and you give them our tax revenues in the form of interest payments on the debt. You import and buy their products and send a flood of money to their countries in payment therefor. All of these trends accelerated enormously on Bush’s watch. If you voted for Bush and the GOP, you voted for giving China, India, and Korea the wherewithal to out-compete American consumers for global oil supplies.
Now bend over and kiss your own ass, because you have your stupid ass to thank for voting for this.
@15 In case anyone was wondering, nearly all the gasoline sold in Washington comes from Alaskan oil.
rhp6033: I provided the links for the argument which showed why Reagan stopped the program. If you choose to forget or not read the facts, I can’t help you. The $88 BMM was mostly up front money as I stated in my other post. Funny correctnotright hasn’t used this since… The oil price dropped to $14 as Pelletizer so proudly placed there, so my previously placed PuddyFact was correct. Gee, how did I know this beforehand?
Your drug company analogy makes no sense. Drug companies do research and development looking for the one money making drug which will line their pockets for 17 years with the patents. I was going to say killer drug and realized that was not “politically correct” for you.
Pelletizer, they could spend large sums on oil as their economy picked up. Sheesh, you do need that virtual oxygen tank.