Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Panic at the pump
The Washington Times ^ | 8-31-05 | WALTER WILLIAMS

Posted on 08/31/2005 11:34:55 AM PDT by JZelle

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last
To: wildweezel

"Seeing Carter on tv made me ill. OK?"

But you're advocating the second coming of Carter's energy "policy," and that doesn't make you ill?


61 posted on 08/31/2005 12:50:09 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry (Esse Quam Videre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

Comment #62 Removed by Moderator

To: wildweezel

Is that you, Paul Krugman?


63 posted on 08/31/2005 12:51:18 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie ("Avoid novelties, for every novelty is an innovation, and every innovation is an error. " - Mohammed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: wildweezel

The industry has fought for additional refinery capacity for years... and been turned down. They have asked to drill off Florida and been turned down. Alaska? NO. Nuclear? NO. Coal Plants? NO. Now, along comes China and India sucking up available resources and its big oil's fault? I don't see it.


64 posted on 08/31/2005 12:51:25 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: FreeDemm
Never in history has gas prices gone up this much, this fast, there is nothing to relate it to.

Then you are probably not old enough to remember the first gas crunch when the price of gasoline essentially doubled overnight. Before the current run-up (Katrina), I was paying $2.50. OK, it's basically jumped to $3, but it ain't $5 yet.

65 posted on 08/31/2005 12:52:39 PM PDT by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

"Now, along comes China and India sucking up available resources and its big oil's fault? I don't see it."

It's the fault of Big Environmentalism, which is looking more and more like the bastard child of Big Socialism.

Don't you just love a handy, negative connotation that's so easy to come by, just by describing anything you disapprove of as "Big?" I myself am upset about Big Vegetarianism driving up the cost of Beano (not) LOL.


66 posted on 08/31/2005 12:56:59 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry (Esse Quam Videre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: JZelle
In 1950, a gallon of regular gasoline sold for about 30 cents; today, it's $2.50.

Some corrections:

  1. A gallon of regular gasoline sold for 30 cents in 1964.
  2. Today it's about $3.00.

    Using MY trusty inflation calculator, what cost 30 cents in 1964 costs $1.81 in 2005. In real terms, that means gasoline prices today are significantly higher, about 66 percent, than in 1964.

A couple of other points:

  1. The annual profits of oil companies today relative to those in 1964 (or 1950) is more relevant comparison.
  2. The portion of our household budget that we are prepared to pay today relative to the proportion of our household budget in 1964 is also a relevant number.

What the hell motivate economists to try to tell us we really aren't paying more?

67 posted on 08/31/2005 12:58:22 PM PDT by delacoert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: delacoert

"Using MY trusty inflation calculator, what cost 30 cents in 1964 costs $1.81 in 2005"

And what is so significant about 1964, other than conveniently supporting your contention? Want to try 1980?


68 posted on 08/31/2005 1:01:09 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry (Esse Quam Videre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: wildweezel

You're comments are unbelievably naive.

The gas lines of the 70s were not caused by full serv vs. self serv, or the number of gas stations. There was self service in the 70s and the full service stations with lines had plenty of staff to keep all of the pumps busy. There were also less people and less cars to go with the smaller number of gas stations.

The problem is that stations would run out (for days at a time) and people would stack up at the remaining stations. The dirty little secret is that gas stations don't actually make the gasoline, they only distribute what is delivered from refiners.

If prices had been allowed to rise, people would have adjusted habits, investors would have increased production, and the shortage would have been short lived. In fact, after Reagan eliminated the stupid price controls, that is exactly what happened. The prices rose to over $3/gallon (in today's dollars), the problem went away, and prices fell again.


69 posted on 08/31/2005 1:03:18 PM PDT by 3niner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: delacoert

The old inflation rule-of-thumb (circa 1980) was that consumer prices doubled every 7 years. Inflation was a significant factor in from 1965 through 1979, so that multiplier effect is probably high when you factor in the relatively low inflation years since then.

It gets really crazy when you try to put a value on products that didn't exist, or are radically different than they were 40 years ago. Compare a 2005 Lexus with a 1964 Coup De Ville. Both are cars, but a price comparison is practically meaningless.


70 posted on 08/31/2005 1:06:52 PM PDT by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: wildweezel

"But real wages (adjusted for inflation) have not gone up much since 1973"

The 77.4% increase in disposable income since 1973 is considerable, contrary to your undocumented assertions. A virtual doubling of our spendable money is a whole lot to me.

Disposable Personal Income Chained to 2000 USD, per U.S. Department of Commerce here: http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn/nipaweb/TableView.asp#Mid

1950: 8,306
8,408
8,534
8,802
8,757
9,177
9,450
9,508
9,433
9,685
1960: 9,735
9,901
10,227
10,455
11,061
11,594
12,065
12,457
12,892
13,163
1970: 13,563
14,001
14,512
15,345
15,094
15,291
15,738
16,128
16,704
16,931
1980: 16,940
17,217
17,418
17,828
19,011
19,476
19,906
20,072
20,740
21,120
1990: 21,281
21,109
21,548
21,493
21,812
22,153
22,546
23,065
24,131
24,564
25,472
2000: 25,698
26,236
26,596
2004: 27,230


71 posted on 08/31/2005 1:14:39 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie ("Avoid novelties, for every novelty is an innovation, and every innovation is an error. " - Mohammed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry
And what is so significant about 1964, other than conveniently supporting your contention? Want to try 1980?

The price of regular gasoline in 1964 was actually $0.30. That is the same number the economist used for 1950. What's so hard to understand about that.

The price of regular gasoline in 1980 was $1.19. That's not the same as $0.30.

These prices are listed in the link I provided.

The real question is why the economist chose 1950 instead of 1964 where the price was actually $0.30. My answer would be his inflation calculation works out much more favorably for him to weave his tale by going back to 1950 instead of 1964.

Here's a couple questions for you, do all commodities have the same inflation rate? Why not?

72 posted on 08/31/2005 1:19:27 PM PDT by delacoert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: JZelle; wildweezel
Oil is 120% more affordable than it was in 1980.

In 1980, the average American's inflation adjusted annual disposable income could buy 180 barrels of oil.
In 2005, the average American's inflation adjusted annual disposable income can buy 400 barrels of oil.

In 1980, disposable income per person was $16,940.
In 2004, disposable income per person was $27,230.
(Constant 2000 dollars)

In 1980, a barrel of oil cost $94.
In 2005, a barrel of oil costs $68.
(Constant 2004 dollars)

73 posted on 08/31/2005 1:21:51 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie ("Avoid novelties, for every novelty is an innovation, and every innovation is an error. " - Mohammed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jude24
Price controls would be unjustified except for one critical point: the oil companies are posting record profits. If they were struggling to make ends meet, then high gas prices would be unjustified. But, as Exxon and other oil companies are buying back their stock, they are enriching themselves while working Americans bend over and take it.

As we dance to the socialism tango... Sorry, it just reminded me of a song I was taught in high school.

Actually, it's the possibility of increased profits that motivates producers to invest in producing more.

If prices were high because the oil was expensive, I'd have no problem paying $3.00/gallon. That's not the case, however. Prices are high because the market has to buy their product, so the oil companies can force people to buy it.

Nope, wrong! When prices rise, people use less, unless the price is not particularly significant. We'll know that prices have risen to a significant level, when we see significant adjustments being made by consumers.

I support a Windfall Profits Tax. And don't give me the "troll" garbage. I've been here since Sept. 2000. The simple fact of the matter is that these oil companies are on the way to actually derailing the American economy. 100 years ago, when coal strikes threatened the American economy, the military seized the coal mines and ensured the uninterrupted supply of coal. We need to do the same for oil now.

Who cares how long you've been here? If you think like a commie, you're a commie. The free market invariably solves these kinds of problems better than government intervention.

74 posted on 08/31/2005 1:27:34 PM PDT by 3niner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: delacoert

So gasoline prices have fluctuated of over the last few decades, and they are relatively high, right now. So what? Get over it.

If you think gasoline costs too much, use less of it.

When I was poor, and gasoline was expensive (back in '75), I drove a beetle (infrequently), worked in a filling station (where I got a discount), lived close to work and school, and rode my bike a lot.

Here are some suggestions for you. Stop commuting in an SUV. Quit driving 30 miles at the drop of a hat. Maybe you should try the bus.


75 posted on 08/31/2005 1:49:55 PM PDT by 3niner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: delacoert

Curiosity causes me to ask, how was that .30 price derived? Was that the "prevailing rate", do you know what kind of formula they use to come up with that price? As I recall in that time period there was a phenomena that was occurring on a very regular basis called "gas wars" was this factored in? Any consumer who was at all savvy in those times watched for them. I know that my parents did and I also know that they seldom payed the going rate for gas because of it. I can remember on several occasions in the 60's that we payed .03 cents a gallon. This was obviously before so many states outlawed selling below cost. We no longer have the benifit of these "gas wars" because of the state laws.


76 posted on 08/31/2005 2:07:25 PM PDT by ghostcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: ghostcat
The site from which I took the price data is a DOE web site. The gasoline price link simply lists the annual retail prices going back to 1949. I imagine the numbers are averaged over available data.
77 posted on 08/31/2005 2:19:46 PM PDT by delacoert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: 3niner
So what?
Get over it.
Stop commuting in an SUV.
Quit driving 30 miles at the drop of a hat.
Maybe you should try the bus.

Thanks for the advice. Though most of it doesn't really apply to me.

When speaking with people I know, the cost of gasoline having reached $3.00/gal and apparently heading toward $4.00/gal strikes most of them as high.

I haven't run into too many people such as yourself that don't seem to mind. Perhaps your just an optimist (always on the sunny side) and just don't like to hear anyone complain.

In case I wasn't clear in my previous posts my gripe is with the economist/author:

  1. I can run the price and inflation numbers myself, and I get significantly different results.
  2. I don't appreciate his spin.

78 posted on 08/31/2005 2:48:35 PM PDT by delacoert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: 3niner
So what?
Get over it.
Stop commuting in an SUV.
Quit driving 30 miles at the drop of a hat.
Maybe you should try the bus.

Thanks for the advice. Though most of it doesn't really apply to me.

When speaking with people I know, the cost of gasoline having reached $3.00/gal and apparently heading toward $4.00/gal strikes most of them as high.

I haven't run into too many people such as yourself that don't seem to mind. Perhaps your just an optimist (always on the sunny side) and just don't like to hear anyone complain.

In case I wasn't clear in my previous posts my gripe is with the economist/author:

  1. I can run the price and inflation numbers myself, and I get significantly different results.
  2. I don't appreciate his spin.

79 posted on 08/31/2005 2:48:57 PM PDT by delacoert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: delacoert

4.99 in Atlanta


80 posted on 08/31/2005 2:50:01 PM PDT by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson