Hurting at the gas pump? Gee, this is the direct result of Bush's deregulation.

[icarus]

Hurting at the gas pump? Had a couple people tell you that "Oh, you Americans are just spoiled. They pay $6 a gallon in Amsterdam." And 12 cents a gallon in Venezuela.

Wait, what?

12 cents. In Venezuela.*

See, that's what happens when you're a major oil-producing nation. Unlike Europe, gas tends to be a little cheaper when you don't have to import every drop. (Europe also taxes imported oil.)

But wait, you ask. Isn't the U.S. an oil-producing nation?

Why, yes. We sell oil to everyone but ourselves and we don't make enough for our entire demand, but that's why our gas prices have been relatively low compared to the rest of the world. Until now.

What changed?

Let's sing it folks: Bush de-reg-u-lated in 2000. He tossed the commodities (including oil) ball into the ring of speculators and said, "Have a ball, guys! Gamble away. Don't worry about throwing prices out of whack. We don't need these regulations that have been in place since 1936. Hell, people made tons of money in the 1920s!"

The gambling over future gas prices has hit a fever pitch. Haven't you ever wondered why the news can say, "And gas prices are expected to rise to $X.XX this summer"? They ask the speculators, that's how. On Friday the stock market wailed piteously and dropped 400 points, rocked by the single biggest jump in gas prices in history. A jump driven by--you guessed it--gambling. Speculators.

• Do you think it's high time to bring back the regulations that were put in place once such irresponsible trading led us to the Great Depression? Hell, yeah.


• Do you think the London-Dubai connection should continue (where the US looks the other way and allows other countries that don't give a shit regulate our markets)? Hell, no.

And while we're at it, let's take a hard look at how oil companies are refusing to build new refineries--which they now own--in order to keep gas prices artificially high.

The good news? Why yes, there is a push to bring back sane regulations. As reported in Businessweek. Of course, Businessweek doesn't mention till later in the article that these are the regulations we had from 1936-2000.



* In Nigeria, gas is 38 cents a gallon. In Egypt, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, gas falls between 65 cents and 91 cents a gallon. Moscow has prices along the lines of US (former) prices, of $2.10 a gallon. Why does the US pay twice as much per gallon as Russia?

Comments

[jackie-brown.livejournal.com]

The effect of tax is enormous over here (UK) It's 81.5% of the total price of fuel (which costs around £1 a litre). Because of the North Sea oil reserves, we didn't start becoming a net importer of crude oil until a couple of years ago, so it wasn't expense or scarcity that made the prices so high. Just tax-happy governments!

They must be swimming in the stuff in Venuzuela. I don't know much about that country, but I'm wondering how much state-sponsored stuff like healthcare and education there is there that would need tax money spent on it. Probably not as much as European countries.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

In Nigeria, gas is 38 cents a gallon. Egypt, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, gas is between 65 cents and 91 cents a gallon. Moscow has prices along the lines of US (former) prices, of $2.10 a gallon.

What do all these countries have in common with the US? They are all oil-producing nations.

In the US, gas prices remained steady at around Moscow rates -- until deregulation. Then the prices started to climb at exponential rates.

[jackie-brown.livejournal.com]

I think we agree! My point is that the UK was until very recently self-sufficient for oil, but petrol has always been very expensive, because of taxation. It sounds like the situation in the US is very different, and Bush doesn't have a similar excuse for the price increases, just that he has some very unsavoury bed-fellows (*enron cough enron*)

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Ah, yes. Now I follow. No, we don't have your high taxes. Heavy gas taxes have been proposed off and on since the late 1970s but the trucking, oil, and auto industries have always forestalled them.

Very unsavory bedfellows. And obvious profits going to his own oil interests. And resulting from the same deregulation that made Enron possible.

[auburnnothenna.livejournal.com]

Oh, hell yes. I live in California; I haven't forgotten Enron. Remember Enron and the profiteering assholes - who were all bubba buddies with Cheney and Bush and the Texas clique?

Oh, yeah, and how many of them are in jail now? One?

Somewhere, somehow, Bush's connections are making fortunes off this and why should we be surprised that he'd screw over the entire country when he was perfectly willing to look the other way as they did it to one state?

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

I haven't forgotten Enron either. And it was Kenneth Lay of Enron who sat in Dick Cheney's office and helped Cheney craft our "energy policy." Cheney refused to turn over records of those meetings in the Enron case.

Now, oh look. Said "energy policy" is turning out to be completely corrupt, destabilizing, and producing record-breaking profits for Cheney's oil interests in 2005, 2006, and 2007. How odd.

I believe Lay was supposed to go to jail but he shot himself instead.

[auburnnothenna.livejournal.com]

If I were a conspiracy theorist - which I'm not, just a cynic - I'd wonder if Lay didn't go hunting with Cheney. Bad joke.

A little more seriously, Lay probably expected his Cheney connection to save him from jail, but those sort of people don't stand by you - they shove you into the shit and take off. Their only friends are the people that can help them, not need help. And that's why they're fine with profiteering and destablizing: they don't see beyond feathering their own nests. Long term consequences? Hah, that's someone else's problem.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

I'm not a big fan of conspiracy theories myself. But I would not blink if we learn -- 20 years from now -- that Lay had copies of those meeting minutes the investigators wanted from Cheney. I would not be surprised if Lay was willing to drag Cheney down with him in exchange for a lighter sentence (say, one that didn't include jail time?). The Enron types are perfectly willing to doublecross their friends if their friends aren't willing or able to save them.

[tekalynn.livejournal.com]

Do we know that's how he died? I thought it was reported as a heart attack.

It was certainly a conveniently-timed heart attack.

[september1967.livejournal.com]

You know, I have asked a recent graduate with an MBA why are gas prices high. Isn't it because of speculators? And she denied that and thinks its all about not having access to American drilling sites like in Alaska and other places. Sigh.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Sounds like MBA programs are like Marine boot camps. You come out of there programmed and it takes a while for independent thinking to kick in again.

Senator Maria Cantwell led a government inquiry into the possible benefits of opening the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge for drilling. It turned out that:

1 - it would be 20 years, minimum, before we'd have the infrastructure in place to see any oil out of the area;

2 - the type of oil found in the ANWR is difficult and costly to extract;

3 - the oil companies who pushed for drilling in the ANWR resisted the idea of providing the oil extracted to just America; all drilling in the wildlife refuge do is boost profits;

4 - even if there were a way to get the oil instantly out of the ANWR, the amounts available would only provide a tiny fraction of US needs; even if the oil companies were forced to sell it only to us, it wouldn't make a dent in US prices.

That's setting aside her utter illogic: the ANWR has been off-limits for 50 years. It could not possibly have a sudden impact.

[chronolith.livejournal.com]

Why does the US pay twice as much per gallon as Russia?

Side tangent: Russia's gas costs have dropped because they just opened two new fields and have (have threatened?) to nationalize production so they can set their rates.

Other than that, yes, deregulation is definitely part of it.

[webbapettigrew.livejournal.com]

Personally, the "Europeans are paying 10$ for gas a gallon" argument doesn't wash with me. Yes, that is terrible and I heard 75% of that is tax alone, but here's my issue: take England. England is a small nation. I'm not sure how large across and vertical it is, but my guess is that a gallon of gas lasts a lot longer for your average Brit because they're not traveling as far to work, and there's also the wonderful advantage of subways and those really cute buses with the two decks.

Where I live, things are rural. I am lucky. The job I will have once Emily is born is two blocks from my home, but my father has to drive 40 minutes one way to his job. It's just because the area is so rural and the towns are so spread out! So for dad, one gallon of gas almost gets him to work. See what I mean? If dad commuted one mile, ten dollar gas wouldn't hurt so much because it would last longer in his tank.

I also think we pay twice as much per gallon because many people don't seem to care about the price, as long as they can keep their precious SUVs. We as a whole are a very spoiled nation and we as a whole, but not necessarily everyone, feel we're entitled to so much that when we don't get it, we pitch a fit.

For those people who do care, we're the lower middle class, the ones who pay the vast majority of taxes overall and the ones who make sure the CEO's boots are nice and polished. We can't afford to run for any office and so our voices and opinions mean about as much as a bowl of festering dog snot.

Point me to a candidate who is vehemently opposed to big oil, and that's who will be getting my vote in November.

[frogspace.livejournal.com]

my father has to drive 40 minutes one way to his job.

Driving 40 minutes one way to your job isn't uncommon in Europe. Neither is driving an hour or more.

[kennahijja.livejournal.com]

Ah, but it depends on where in the UK you are - in large cities, you often have a decent public transport system, or, *gasp* even trams! But that can be pretty damn expensive too. But in rural areas... Horrid at best in many areas. Come to think about it, while Germany is slightly better provided for, if you're off the beaten track, getting anywhere without a car is still hell.

[gwendolen.livejournal.com]

That argument only works for the big cities and even there public transport isn't always an option as it really depends on where you live and where you have to go.

I'm living in rural Germany and I once had a job where I had no other option than to use the car and had a one-way commute of about 30 minutes (about 30 kms). Other co-workers drove 40 or even 60 minutes. Car-pools also weren't an option.

And there are many things I need the car for simply because walking, taking the bicycle or using public transport isn't possible, i.e. grocery shopping or going out (last train leaves at midnight and would leave me stranded at the train-station as there are no more busses that late at night).

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

75% of your high gas prices go to taxes.

Ours, well... as far as I can tell, they're funding vacations in the Bahamas for oil executives. It's all going straight to their pockets. I understand that the salary for CEOs in the US are obscenely high compared to Europe.

That was a question our senators asked. After grilling the oil execs about the record profits, they asked how much they were making personally.

[wenelda.livejournal.com]

... *wibble* I... I want 91 cent gas.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

If regulations return to normal, it would knock 25% off gas prices.

[vichka.livejournal.com]

When I came to America, the gas prices were almost the same as octane rating - 85-87, 88-89, 90-92. I did not know about the octane rating at the time and thought that two different prices were listed. Perhaps one was elderly discount...

[vichka.livejournal.com]

Thank god my trolls aren't reading this... lol :D
<3

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Ban your trolls. It's your journal. You have the right to control your space.

[teenygozer.livejournal.com]

You know, every time someone brings up how high the cost of gas is in Europe & other countries (thus implying that we in the US should shut up about our own high cost of gas,) I feel the need to point out that a huge chunk of European gas prices are taxes, and that people overseas generally get real benefits (that we do not) from their highly-taxed gas payments. We do not get neat-o bennies, our money just lines Big Oil's pockets with nothing in return!

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Exactly.

[magic-8ball.livejournal.com]

Isn't it really simplistic to reduce this all to the effect of speculators, though? Granted, speculators have had an effect, but it's arguable that the massive increase in demand from both China and India are also playing part, as is the fact that while oil production may not yet have peaked, easy-to-extract oil almost certainly has. (Meaning that there's an increasing amount of groundwater in the wells, taking the place of oil that's extracted. Technology is continually improving to capture more and more of the oil that's present, but developing and implementing that new technology is adding to the overall cost of the extracted oil.) So the cost of production is increasing at the same time as many economies (not just India and China, which are the largest, but also South Korea, Mexico, Brazil -- which admittedly doesn't have the gasoline problem we have because of its ethanol policies -- and South Africa, just for starters) are rapidly increasing demand.

And while the lack of new refineries is an issue, there's still the basic economic fact that oil is seen as a fading resource, in that governments and private citizens are increasingly looking toward the next power source, whether that be ethanol, wind, solar, hydrogen, happy thoughts, etc. Any investment in refineries is an extremely expensive investment in a facility that will almost certainly not be needed in 50 years, which is a bit of an issue for the corporation making the investment. In addition, our government is pushing for increased fuel economy in passenger vehicles, which means we may be topping out on gasoline demand right now; if demand is set to decrease over the years, then why invest in increasing production when such an increase will decrease demand -- and profits -- in the foreseeable future?

And I hate that I sound like an apologist for oil companies, because that makes me feel dirty. But I also think that a lot of this could have been avoided if the people (and government) had actually addressed this issue back in the 1970's when we had that whole song and dance with OPEC. Oil dependence is not just stupid from an energy policy standpoint, it's also drawn us into being inextricably involved with the political scene of the most politically volatile region on Earth, and it's helped ruin our environment. It's just far bigger a problem than speculation run rampant in the face of a lack of regulation.

[kennahijja.livejournal.com]

*nods*

That's along the lines of what I wanted to say, just put so much better :). There are many different factors contributing to the high oil price, speculation being one of them, but ultimately, I think cheap oil is a thing of the past that won't come back again as it *is* a resource that's running out. And yes, it's not as if it hasn't been forseeable...

That considered, oil-producing countries would probably do better conserving their resources and selling them at a high price later rather than now cheaply, but well... foresight and oil don't seem to go together.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Hijja, you're in Germany. 75% of the price of your gas goes to taxes.

Our energy policy was crafted in meetings between Dick Cheney and Kenneth Lay. Kenneth Lay was later sentenced to prison for fraud (he committed suicide rather than serve any time).

What Lay did was leap in on deregulation (hmm, sound familiar?) in California, artificially pump up prices by creating non-existant shortages (hmm, not enough oil refineries, sound familiar?), and squeeze as much money out of the citizens of California as possible, doubling energy prices (hmm, sound familiar?).

He then used energy speculation and hype (hmm, sound familiar?) to artificially pump up the value of Enron's stock, having investors bet on hypothetical profits, and speculated that the prices -- which he was controlling -- would go up.

This is the man who crafted US energy policy with Dick Cheney in 2000 (before Lay's arrest). US energy policy has not changed despite the devastating collapse of Enron that shook financial markets and took Arthur Anderson with it.

Many of the side players in the Enron scandal were never investigated. They (Goldman Sachs, Chase Manhattan Bank, among others) are currently the main players in the current oil speculation and the devastation of the housing crisis in the US.

Our oil prices and current economic woes come down to one word: corruption.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

First off, India and China have had a growing impact over the last 15 years. But their oil use has not drastically increased in the last two to two-and-a-half years. Not to a degree that accounts for the surge in US gas prices. The US has gone from $2.65 a gallon roughly two-and-a-half years ago to $4.39 a gallon now, nearly double in less than three years. And most of that change has been within the last year.

This is a sudden change that can't be related to a slow change.

The current spike this week that's devastated the Dow Jones is a direct result of speculation.


And while the lack of new refineries is an issue....

The lack of new refineries is being used a valve mechanism to keep the price of gasoline high, milking as much profit from a limited resource as possible. The cost of building them is just an excuse. The oil industry has no qualms about the cost of drilling in the Arctic circle, which is far more expensive.

...governments and private citizens are increasingly looking toward the next power source, whether that be ethanol, wind, solar, hydrogen, happy thoughts, etc.

I'd like to think that that is true. But you're making an assumption that the US government is looking towards replacement power sources. This administration is not, due to its ties with the oil industry. In fact, the auto industry along with the oil industry killed our alternative electric car, destroying even the blueprints. President Bush has allowed more nuclear power plants to be built in his native Texas, however.

Apparently, the aim is to milk the limited oil resources for as much money as possible, with no concern about long-term costs. Speculation and deregulation is part of that effort.

Recall that Cheney and Lay (of Enron) met extensively in 2000 to map US energy policy that led to deregulation. The deregulation of US commodities is the direct result of Cheney and Lay's energy policy. Given Lay is the architect of Enron, which relied on deregulation to bleed California dry, it is not a stretch to assume that deregulation of US commodities was intentionally aimed to do the same.

In addition, our government is pushing for increased fuel economy in passenger vehicles, which means we may be topping out on gasoline demand right now; if demand is set to decrease over the years, then why invest in increasing production when such an increase will decrease demand -- and profits -- in the foreseeable future?

Be careful to make a distinction between "our government = congress" and "our government = the Bush administration" (a distinction I didn't make and should have). Congress has held hearings with the heads of the various oil companies twice in the last two years, demanding that they stop their exhorbitant profiteering, that it's hurting the country. The oil company execs all cite market forces and has stonewalled congress.

Definitely Congress is trying to do something. But our energy policy a la Kenneth Lay has to change. Starting with the commodities speculation.

Oil dependence is not just stupid from an energy policy standpoint, it's also drawn us into being inextricably involved with the political scene of the most politically volatile region on Earth, and it's helped ruin our environment. It's just far bigger a problem than speculation run rampant in the face of a lack of regulation.

You're buying into the shifting of blame that's being done by the oil companies. A very real global problem is being used as a smokescreen to allow them to maximize profits at our expense. Do you honestly think that the record-breaking profits posted by oil companies immediately after deregulation are coincidental?

[magic-8ball.livejournal.com]

But their oil use has not drastically increased in the last two to two-and-a-half years.

I'll take your word for it. I can't find anything that shows post-2005 numbers, but this graph (http://www.swivel.com/graphs/show/8256794) shows the drastic upward trend I have in mind.


The current spike this week that's devastated the Dow Jones is a direct result of speculation.

Absolutely no doubt, but that type of speculation is also creating a bubble that's likely to burst and provide a market correction that'll end up burning a lot of those same speculators. It was my impression we were discussing multi-year trends, and not wackiness like what the market had at the end of last week.


In fact, the auto industry along with the oil industry killed our alternative electric car, destroying even the blueprints.

Seriously, you don't want to go down the road of the electric car. The model that was briefly in use before being taken from owners at the end of their leases and subsequently destroyed was not a feasible model for many reasons, and it posed more challenges than solutions. The electric car is itself a perfect way to sum up the energy problem as a whole, and it's definitely not fit for this small a space.


Be careful to make a distinction between "our government = congress" and "our government = the Bush administration"

The executive branch is dead to me. I apologize for any misunderstanding on that matter. Discussion of past errors invariably refers to the executive branch's performance over the past seven years, while attention to current and future trends points to Congress's fruitless current efforts or my hopes for the next executive administration.


You're buying into the shifting of blame that's being done by the oil companies.

I guess that, once again, we'll have to agree to disagree. I view the problem as being political and societal as much as it is economic. I don't think oil corporations' profit margins are per se unreasonable (at least from what I've read, placing profit margin in the neighborhood of 8-9%); however, like you, I'm aghast at the very obvious fact that the companies are clearly trying to milk petroleum for all it's worth before finally moving on to the next big thing, and only when they have absolutely no choice. But as long as our political system allows it to happen, I don't see what there is to be done.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Yes, your graph shows exactly what I said: China's oil demands have increased steadily since the 90s. If you look at the numbers carefully, other than a spike in 2004, there is not the sharp increase in demand that explains the sharp increase in US prices:

2005 - 216
2004 - 969
2003 - 515
2002 - 416
2001 - 100
2000 - 295
1999 - 249
1998 - 49
1997 - 477
1996 - 307
1995 - 279

This graph here (http://news.mongabay.com/2007/0508-china.html) shows that 2006 was not a drastic increase over 2005. 2007 analysis appears to not be available yet, but analysts say that "the demand for oil may have cooled off a bit lately."

The problem at the gas pump boils down to corruption in the US government. Frankly, this administration may be dead to you, but their energy policy lives on. There will never be any attempt to move on to a sane energy policy until we deal with the corruption.

[dancing-moon.livejournal.com]

It's not like the first gasoline cars where all that swell either - if the electric cars had been given a fair chance 30 years ago, nobody knows where we'd be now. Maybe they would have continued to suck, maybe not.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

The electric cars from the late 90s in Who Killed The Electric Car? were gosh darn cool. You would still use oil (to generate electricity) but all you had to do was plug them into your garage outlet. They were sleek and pretty. Silent. And ultra clean. So much better for the environment.

They also reached the high speeds we love (I love), and a battery patented by an old fellow in Michigan (a patent bought and dumped by GM) could hold a charge for 300 miles.

[magic-8ball.livejournal.com]

Out of respect for icarusancalion, who provides these occasional, juicy posts that inspire my mind to work, I guess I'll expound on my electric car issues rather than leave my anti-electric car comment as a single, semi-snide sentence. It's not that I'm against the electric car, it's just that I believe people have completely idealized them based on small scale test programs (like the one icarus cited in the movie Who Killed the Electric Car?, which I haven't seen... although I'm prett sure she's way off on how long the batteries held a charge). My concerns are as follows:

1. Mass use of electric cars means millions of people (rather than a few dozen in a test program) plugging in their cars every night to recharge. Outside of a few select cities (I'd be willing to wager maybe Las Vegas and Phoenix, but no others come to mind), the existing power grids would be completely overwhelmed by the power needs. Weather like on the East Coast right now, with temps in the high 90's, are a perfect reminder of how overtaxed the current systems are. Power companies are asking users to try conserving power as much as possible, especially at the hottest parts of the day, in order to avoid blackouts. Now imagine adding millions of recharging cars to that. It simply won't work without radical upgrades to existing power grids; in fact, complete overhauls/replacements would likely be necessary in regions with older grids, like New York City and most of California. Furthermore, while the 8-hour charge time could doubt be reduced, most homes' wiring wouldn't be able to handle that demand; so you'd end up blowing circuit breakers until you did some serious home rewiring. You might save money on gas, but your taxes will go up to instead.

2. When you plug your car into the socket to recharge at night, the power doesn't come from magic. Based on information from the US gov' (http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat1p1.html) (and forgive me if my numbers are a tad bit off... I'm doing the math myself), in 2006 electric utilities derived 59% of their power from coal-burning plants, 13% from petroleum/natural gas, and 17% from nuclear (I place nuclear with unclean fuels because we still haven't solved the waste disposal problem). That leaves under 11% (after I did all the rounding) from "clean" sources. So while your gasoline bill goes down, your home power bill will go up. In addition, the fuel that ultimately powers the car is probably going to be more of a pollutant than the gasoline we're using now. So I don't see that as any type of an environmental solution until we start replacing our existing power plants with those that harness renewable energy sources.

3. Battery technology is still developing, but while it's moving away from lead, it's increasingly employing nickel, another heavy metal that's considered a carcinogen. Battery manufacture and disposal could be pose huge environmental challenges that no one's thought through, eventually producing millions of pounds of waste heavy metals every year if electric cars were universally adopted. (And as an aside, I think battery technology also hasn't solved the over-heating problem. It's bad enough when laptop batteries overheat and explode; but imagine what might happen when an electric car's battery overheated and blew up while the car was traveling 70 mph down an interstate.)

And none of this is to say I don't think electric cars are a good idea; I'm actually a fan of the concept. But embracing the idea of the electric car on the societal level means addressing huge problems that will be very expensive to solve. Cars and gasoline are simply one facet of the whole energy issue, an issue that I consider more societal and political than economic. And with this post, I promise to stop spamming icarus' LJ for several more weeks. :)

[dancing-moon.livejournal.com]

Some short points, because I should be going to work...

* Things like air conditioning, the internet, TV for everyone have always pressed the current infrastructure. So will electric cars. Yes, they may be some very messy years but it's not like cables and stuff last for ever anyway.
* Once that infrastructure is in (or while you're slowly expanding it) you can change things on the "power in" end of things. There's solar, wind, water, different nuclear reactors which claim to be cleaner... none of them are as effective as fossile fuels, but they're increasing in efficiency every day.
But until we keep on using gasoline and coal in excess, and in some ways work against renevable fuels, there won't be financers willing to take the risk and try and improve these methods.

You might save money on gas, but your taxes will go up to instead.

Ehehe... I live in a country where the effective tax pressure is something like 70 percent (income tax + VAT + minor taxes) Allow me to not really feel all that agonized by the thought that taxes in america may rise to lover the gas prices and save some enviroment.
By the way, yes, I appreciate the good things we get for all our taxes and I hope that if the US had higher taxes, you would also get good things for them =)

[tigerlilly2063.livejournal.com]

Geez, it hurts, doesn't it?

Here in Germany we're currently at 1.50€/liter what amounts to approx. 10.66$/gallon. *headdesk* And if I remember correctly something about 75 percent of that are taxes.

They always tell us to use public transportation, and I wish I could. But living in the suburbs automatically means bad connections and high prices. So after all it's no use to go through all that trouble.

I'm just glad I got a new car last year which is way more economical.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Gee, I'm glad you guys get that 75 percent in taxes.

Ours -- every single dime of it -- goes to the pockets of the oil industry. They've posted record-breaking profits every year for the last several years.

Funny how Bush and Cheney, who made their money in the oil industry, profit directly from these policies.

[tigerlilly2063.livejournal.com]

Well, I'm a little divided regarding the amount of taxes.
Sure, the oil industry doesn't get the major part of the cake. But hell, every cent of taxes our government gets is practically going down the drain. And in the end all I care about is what's missing in my wallet, and that's a damn huge part lately.

It's the same here with power, water, etc. Companies are breaking profit records one after the other. And still they are complaining about how the prices are too low.
E.g. gas for heating and warm water is going up around 25% these days and in autumn it's probably going up another 40%.
What just bothers me the most is that there isn't really an alternative. *huffs*

*snort* Probably the only reason why Bush wanted to become president. Damn, am I glad when I don't have to see his face anymore next year.

[tekalynn.livejournal.com]

*headdesk*

DEREGULATION IS NOT A GOOD THING. We should have learned that in the 80s with Reagan.

Did anyone else feel really helpless during the Reagan years?

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Yes. About as helpless as I feel now.

[hawkwings.livejournal.com]

Petrol here (Australia) is around $1.60 a litre, depending on the day you buy it. About $6.50 a gallon?
I could have sworn we had off shore oil rigs somewhere...

Pretty sure a chunk of that is tax, which goes towards paying for bigger and better roads. Some of them even have bike lanes too! (For the poor suckers who can't afford petrol any more)

[faithfulreader.livejournal.com]

Why does the US pay twice as much per gallon as Russia?

In Russia we ask a reverse question: why Russians pay almost as much as Americans for petrol? You see Russia is the second oil producer in the world. Several weeks ago when Russia announced that this year the production of oil was down by 1% the market reacted immediately: the price went up for around $20 per barrel.

[mad_maudlin]

::tosses in trivia::

Here in KZ gas prices are about $3.45/gallon (I think, all the conversions hurt my head) and this is an oil producing nation, but most of the oil infrastructure has to go through multinational corporations and/or Russia, so consumers don't get much of the result. Except for psychotically high inflation in Almaty, Astana and Atyrau. (Seriously. Cost of living wise, Almaty = Los Angeles.) This puts KZ in the same boat as the US right now.