comment #1

CinemaPhreek says ...

As much as it is hurting my wallet when fill up myself, I do get a wonderful sense of schadenfreude thinking about all those sheeple out there who thought that making cars more gas efficient was some sort of hippy/granola head/Birkenstock thing that would never relate to how they lived. Not to mention all those idiots who voted for Bush watching all their cash going into the SUV.

You reap what you sow, you ignorant assholes.

Don't ever try to tell me that the common man American has any fucking common sense or innate intelligence: they voted for Bush, TWICE!

comment #2

Trojanbay says ...

Ha, yes. I sensed this summer was going to bring screaming high prices. Please check out this little video I shot a few months back where I tired to express the frustration.

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/15d4b41486

comment #3

The Winchester says ...

When I see the Arco has gas for $4.55 a gallon for regular, I cheer and do a dance because it went down a little. Is that wrong?

comment #4

Mr. Muckle says ...

You kidding? $5.00 is only a 4% increase from where you are. If it's not there in 3 weeks, I'll give you a nickel.

comment #5

renorambler says ...

Three words...ride your bike!

comment #6

EOTW says ...

...or your scooter. I ahve both a regular mountain bike and then a scooter for everything else. Laugh all you want, gets about 100 miles to the gallon. It barely costs 5 bucks to fill it up. Again, the only way to stop this sort of thing is to break your dependence on the oil companies. Yeah, i still pay for gasoline, but last month, It cost me over $250 to drive the car I had for 3 years (before I sold it!). Those days are over. Believe me, riding a scooter feels better, especially in my wallet.

comment #7

Arran says ...

Here in New Zealand it's about the equivalent of $US6.10 a gallon. In the UK it's about $US9 a gallon.

$US5 is fuck all.

comment #8

p.Vice says ...

How much longer until we enter Road Warrior territory?

comment #9

Aris P says ...

Not bloody soon enough. This town needs some back-to-basics armageddon. I'll be wearing the hockey mask.

comment #10

Studly Semite says ...

think how cheap the condos off Montana Ave. will be then! I can't wait.

comment #11

Dan says ...

You know, Jeffy-poo, Santa Monica and Westwood has gas for much cheaper than that. I just filled my tank up with 4.63/gal yesterday.

comment #12

Edward says ...

The oil executives were grilled by Congress and big surprise, nothing happened. Sure gas is more expensive in Europe and elsewhere, but how many billions of dollars in profits are the oil companies going to be allowed to make! Ain't Capitalism great?

comment #13

MilkMan says ...

hey, but at least i have enough money to buy my nilla wafer cakesters, and take my kids to see kung fu panda, and pay for my teens like it big dot com subscription, and my weekly visits to the magazine stand where i spend 2o dollars on magazines that tell me what i should eat see and jerk off too next. take any of those things away from me and i'll be the first one armed to the teeth

comment #14

BurmaShave says ...

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/07/05/bin-laden-144-oil/

comment #15

Zimmergirl says ...

Burma, one of my fave sites there, Think Progress, and yeah, that piece is just depressing as all hell.

comment #16

Indeed says ...

Edward: "The oil executives were grilled by Congress and big surprise, nothing happened. Sure gas is more expensive in Europe and elsewhere, but how many billions of dollars in profits are the oil companies going to be allowed to make! Ain't Capitalism great?"

Although blaming the big, bad oil companies is the posh thing to do these days, its really for people who dont know what theyre talking about.

The steep increase in the price (not value) of oil can be mainly contributed to one thing...the falling value of the dollar. Speculators and hedge funds play a small role, but really its because we saw fit to lower interest rates at a pace not seen since after 9/11.

For some type of validation, the gas prices in Europe have been climbing hand in hand with ours...that was until the ECB raised their own interest rate. Its the same reason why corn, steel, wheat, rice, gold, silver, etc has all gotten more expensive at the same pace as gas. Inflation.

Oil companies on average have profit margins of 7-9%. A company like Nike has a profit margin of about 15%. Those greedy Air Jordan makers!

If you absolutely have to point the finger at somebody, it would be Ben Bernake...but even then he's doing the best he can with the situation he was given. This is what we get for continuously printing money out of nowhere, be it for rediculous wars or rediculous social programs.

comment #17

Indeed says ...

Oh, and capitalism is great when its done properly. Take a look at Switzerland for a great example.

comment #18

actionman says ...

This past June, it cost me $500 in gas to fuel a 2006 Honda Accord across the country. Lame.

comment #19

Edward says ...

Indeed: I'm from Oregon, we love Nike! (There's plently to complain about there too--I'll never buy an overpriced sneaker from Nike or anyone.) Blaming the oil companies is easy, but my point was more about Congress being pissed at the high prices and making a show on C-SPAN and then doing nothing.

comment #20

SpinDozer says ...

'The steep increase in the price (not value) of oil can be mainly contributed to one thing...the falling value of the dollar. '
'For some type of validation, the gas prices in Europe have been climbing hand in hand with ours...'

So which is it, falling value of the dollar or something a bit more plausible, like flat production/supply and increased demand?

comment #21

Wordpainter says ...

Amazing to hear how much Americans whinge about their petrol prices when a vast majority of the REST of the world has been paying far more than that for a rather long time. We filled up in Melbourne, Australia this afternoon and our prices are now almost $1.70 per LITRE for unleaded -- and $1.89 for diesel. The unleaded cost adds up to $6.80 per gallon. And we have friends in Scotland who just paid the American equivalent of $12 per gallon last week for petrol. The whole world is doing it tough and you are at the VERY low end of the scale.

comment #22

astrophore says ...

America has 5% of the world's population and consumes about 25% of the petroleum supply. When you increase demand (hello, Chinese and Indian middle class) and decrease supply (where did we put those new oil fields, anyway?), the result is preordained.

Continue to ratchet up the pain for those Chevy Tahoe drivers who live in the exurbs and think there's a constitutional right to cheap gas. Hopefully, they can pry off their Bush 2004 stickers before they get to the Kia dealership for a trade-in.

Unfortunately, the working classes end up being collateral damage in this skirmish.

comment #23

gruver1 says ...

Wells to Astrophore: Very astute, very well-written, right on the money. Hats off.

comment #24

George Prager says ...

Bumper stickers can ruin my day. The ones that bug me right now are the Kerry/Edwards bumper stickers that are still on cars that also have Obama bumper stickers. Are people really that clueless?

comment #25

DarthCorleone says ...

It's true that the rest of the world has it worse in the price per gallon, but I doubt that any other place in the world drives as much as we do. I wager the average American automobile commute dwarfs that of any other country. So to those outside the U.S., yes, we are a bunch of whiners here, but comparatively speaking our whining is warranted. Manifest Destiny and urban sprawl set us the U.S. on this path, and now we simply don't have the infrastructure to handle it.

I've done the best I could over the years - purchasing the most fuel-efficient vehicle I can afford and futilely advising my friends to opt for more fuel-efficient vehicles instead of the behemoths they prefer - but it's just not enough.

comment #26

Edward says ...

We just got back from a trip to the East Coast to visit my elderly, ailing mother. I started checking prices several months before we planned to leave. By the time I was able to purchase tickets the total price for the three of us increased about $1000 (This included air, hotel and car rental). We couldn't drive, because my daughter had only a week off from school so I didn't even try to calculate what driving would have cost.

comment #27

Indeed says ...

Edward, good call on Congress. Sorry I missed your point.

But yes, Congress has a history to only look out for...well...nobody really.

Spindozer: Believe it or not, but in this instance those folks at OPEC are kinda telling the truth when theyre saying they ae pumping an appropriate amount. Yes, increase usage (especially by places like India and China) is a contrirbuting factor, but not by much.

People keep suggesting that prices will drop sharply after the Olympics. Yeah, right.

comment #28

supertaster says ...

America has 5% of the world's population and consumes about 25% of the petroleum supply. When you increase demand (hello, Chinese and Indian middle class) and decrease supply (where did we put those new oil fields, anyway?), the result is preordained.

Continue to ratchet up the pain for those Chevy Tahoe drivers who live in the exurbs and think there's a constitutional right to cheap gas. Hopefully, they can pry off their Bush 2004 stickers before they get to the Kia dealership for a trade-in.

Unfortunately, the working classes end up being collateral damage in this skirmish.

The point you make with the first paragraph is completely undone by your blinding contempt for half of this country's citizens. You correctly point to supply and demand, but then instead of calling out the group responsible for limiting supply (Democrats), you go off on some nutter rant about Bush and Republicans, which got Wells (the same guy who drives a 20 year old car that spews more carbon than five Tahoes combined, and is the one bemoaning "unconstituional" gas prices) slurping up your rhetoric like a chick with a straw in a bukkake video.

Yes, the first paragraph was very astute ... and then you had to spoil it by feigning concern for the "working class" while holding nothing but contempt.

comment #29

SpinDozer says ...

'Yes, increase usage (especially by places like India and China) is a contrirbuting factor, but not by much.'

I disagree. The flat supply and increased demand magnify all other causes of cost increases. If the situation was reversed, the supply was increasing and the demand was flat, we would not be having this conversation.

comment #30

bluefugue says ...

>The ones that bug me right now are the Kerry/Edwards bumper stickers that are still on cars that also have Obama bumper stickers. Are people really that clueless?

I have no idea why it would be "clueless" to vote for the same political party two presidential elections in a row. Should they now be ashamed of having voted against Bush in '04? I wasn't aware there was a statute of limitations on old bumper stickers. Plus, they can be hard to scrape off.

comment #31

SpinDozer says ...

'instead of calling out the group responsible for limiting supply (Democrats)'

Yeah, you know what you're talking about. Keep up the good work.

comment #32

George Prager says ...

"I wasn't aware there was a statute of limitations on old bumper stickers."

There is.

comment #33

Mjs says ...

Well I still see a lot of Bush/Cheney bumper stickers. Those people are clueless. You're bragging that you voted, for a second term, for the worst president in history. Clueless.

comment #34

supertaster says ...

Thank you, Spindozer, for sparing me the 3 or 4 links you normally google to support your dug-in positions.

It's common knowledge that the Democrat party is vocally against opening any new vein of oil, whether it be offshore, shale, you name it. In case you can't quite connect the dots, that means doing nothing in the face of growing demand or, as i said, limiting supply (NEW supply). I forgot that some people such as yourself need everything spelled out quite literally and assumed "new" would be inferred.

This is not to suggest that oil is the answer for the future, but today (even for oil-addicted, fugazi enviro cheapo whiners like some around here) we need more of it.

comment #35

BNick says ...

Drilling for new oil supplies may have an effect on current prices even if we can't get anything out of the ground for 7 to 10 years. This is because the promise of an increase in supply will result in a lowering of expected future prices, which should decrease current hoarding of oil. If you think prices in the future will be lower than prices today, you don't have an incentive to hoard. Additionally, if you are a supplier of oil (hello, OPEC!) and you see competition coming down the road, maybe you pump a little more now and sell it at today's high prices rather than risk a drop in prices down the road.

Of course it's not obvious that a lot of hoarding is going on. It's hard to get good evidence of it, and what evidence there is suggests that inventories are not increasing by significant amounts, for reasons I'll get to.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned in relation to India and China is that both countries heavily subsidize oil prices, so their people pay far less for oil than the rest of the world does, and therefore demand much more of it. They have rolled back the subsidies a bit lately in the face of their staggering costs, but their continued existence continues to create an artificially high demand.

Lastly, Paul Krugman, no one's idea of an apologist for speculative hedge funds, has presented good evidence that speculation is not contributing materially to the high price of oil. This is because futures prices are actually lower than spot prices. There's no incentive right now for someone with oil to store it in a factory and sell it later on via a futures contract because they could get a better price in the spot market.

comment #36

SpinDozer says ...

'Thank you, Spindozer, for sparing me the 3 or 4 links you normally google to support your dug-in positions.'

No problem, I know how little regard you have for facts, so citing what for most people is common knowledge is not so good a use of my time.

"It's common knowledge that the Democrat party is vocally against opening any new vein of oil, whether it be offshore, shale, you name it."

Common knowledge amongst those disconnected from any realistic undersatnding of the facts. Democrats have vocally opposed specific projects for obvoius reasons none of which has been to restrict oil supply. On the other hand, proponents of ANWR, etc have expressed that even though oil co's weren't that keen on ANWR drilling, it was important to do so because if they could drill in ANWR, they could drill anywhere. The major fact limiting supply has nada to do with politics but is inherent in dependence on a non-renewable source.

comment #37

SpinDozer says ...

'This is because the promise of an increase in supply will result in a lowering of expected future prices'

I'm not too sure that drilling in problematic areas like offshore or ANWR will lead anyone to conclude that there will be an increase in supply. The fact of the matter is even with greater deployment of technologies etc., discovery of new oil sources continues to decline while existing fields are depleted.

"Oil can't be pumped from the ground until it has been found, and yet the volume discovered each year has steadily fallen since the early 1960s despite dazzling technological advances, including computer-assisted seismic imaging that allows companies to "see" oil deep below the Earth's surface. One reason for the decline is simple mathematics: Most of the big, easily located fields—the so-called "elephants"—were discovered decades ago, and the remaining fields tend to be small. Not only are they harder to find than big fields, but they must also be found in greater numbers to produce as much oil."

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/06/world-oil/roberts-text/3

comment #38

cobhome says ...

gas here in New Jersey is 3.79 a gallon - prices are always lower here than in the neighboring states - not sure why - have been told it is due to proximity to refineries - so - live near a refinery!

Speaking of capitalism - want prices to go down? use less gas - ya know - supply and demand?

comment #39

SpinDozer says ...

For those interested in the subject and not content with unprocessed partisan propaganda, there is an excellent article in the NY Times which addresses how we got here.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/business/06oil.html?_r=1&ref=business&oref=slogin

BNick, this article says the best case scenario of opening ANWR now would reduce prices by $1.44 per barrel in 2027. That's 1% of today's price. I can’t imagine that such a modest projected impact would materially effect today's prices.