[Spirit100]

$3.09 in NKY...

as low as $2.89 in OH...

[panther nation]

$3.02-$2.99
In SEKY.

[Jarons]

$2.96-3.15 along my route to work in Eastern North Carolina

[TheRealVille]

2.88 in Lexington. 2.92 in Richmond. I'm hearing mid 2's this winter.

[Spirit100]

2.88 in Lexington. 2.92 in Richmond. I'm hearing mid 2's this winter.

That would be fantastic...

2.90s in Ohio, 3.10'ish in NKY!

[Bob Seger]

2.93 in Paintsville

[Hoot Gibson]

If gas prices were high because of greedy oil company gouging when they were rising to nearly $4/gal., why did those same greedy oil companies decide to drop prices below $3/gal. just in time for an election? Would not Democrats fared even worse in the election with higher gas prices? Republicans would have made Obama's energy policies, including the blocking of the Keystone pipeline, an even bigger campaign issue.

How about it oil company price gouging monopoly conspiracy theorists? Do you care to explain why gas prices have been dropping so much? If we are at the mercy of greedy oil companies, what are they up to by dropping prices so much? Are they in league with Obama and were the price drops a ploy to help Democrats retain control of the U.S. Senate?

[TheRealVille]

If gas prices were high because of greedy oil company gouging when they were rising to nearly $4/gal., why did those same greedy oil companies decide to drop prices below $3/gal. just in time for an election? Would not Democrats fared even worse in the election with higher gas prices? Republicans would have made Obama's energy policies, including the blocking of the Keystone pipeline, an even bigger campaign issue.

How about it oil company price gouging monopoly conspiracy theorists? Do you care to explain why gas prices have been dropping so much? If we are at the mercy of greedy oil companies, what are they up to by dropping prices so much? Are they in league with Obama and were the price drops a ploy to help Democrats retain control of the U.S. Senate?

No, they are in relation to the oversupply of gasoline, the US producing more oil, oil prices dropping globally, and people driving more fuel efficient vehicles relieving the demand on supply, while driving less after summer and the vacation season, winter gasoline grades are cheaper. Of course, those facts don't play into your politics, so you are left in a quandary trying to tie the dropping prices to suit your politics.

[Hoot Gibson]

No, they are in relation to the oversupply of gasoline, the US producing more oil, and oil prices dropping globally, and people driving more fuel efficient vehicles relieving the demand on supply. Of course, those facts don't play into your politics, so you are left in a quandary trying to tie the dropping prices to suit your politics.

As is often the case, you did not understand my post. I agree that the price of gasoline is not immune to the law of supply and demand.

However, there are a few conspiracy theorists here who claim that greedy oil companies are free to set the price of gasoline however they want to fatten their wallets. When prices drop, their voices fall silent.

The point of my post was not to allege price fixing by Obama or the Democrats, it was to challenge the conspiracy theorists to explain the drop in the cost of gasoline based on their "analysis" of rising prices.

Although you did not intend to do so, you seem to agree with me that global oil prices drive gasoline prices, although there is sometimes a lag between changes in oil prices and changes in gasoline prices. EPA requirements, which change with the location and season, also contribute to price volatility.

There is no quandary for me - politicians can and have impacted the price of gasoline through tax rates and regulations, but periodic increases and decreases in the price of gasoline are normal and have nothing to do with politics. Prices react to changes in demand and supply.

[TheRealVille]

As is often the case, you did not understand my post. I agree that the price of gasoline is not immune to the law of supply and demand.

However, there are a few conspiracy theorists here who claim that greedy oil companies are free to set the price of gasoline however they want to fatten their wallets. When prices drop, their voices fall silent.

The point of my post was not to allege price fixing by Obama or the Democrats, it was to challenge the conspiracy theorists to explain the drop in the cost of gasoline based on their "analysis" of rising prices.

Although you did not intend to do so, you seem to agree with me that global oil prices drive gasoline prices, although there is sometimes a lag between changes in oil prices and changes in gasoline prices. EPA requirements, which change with the location and season, also contribute to price volatility.

There is no quandary for me - politicians can and have impacted the price of gasoline through tax rates and regulations, but periodic increases and decreases in the price of gasoline are normal and have nothing to do with politics.

I guess we mostly agree then. But, make no mistake, oil companies did/have been making record profits with their gas prices, for the last several years, while Americans have suffered at the pump, that's an indisputable fact. Further proof that big money is getting richer, while the middle is shrinking. The valley between the rich and the middle is the biggest it's ever been, and upward mobility is at it's lowest. Wages are stagnant for the middle, and growing for the rich.

[Hoot Gibson]

I guess we mostly agree then. But, make no mistake, oil companies did/have been making record profits with their gas prices, for the last several years, while Americans have suffered at the pump, that's an indisputable fact. Further proof that big money is getting richer, while the middle is shrinking.

It is also an indisputable fact that profit margins in the oil industry are tiny compared to many other industries. In terms of dollars, profits are large because companies like Exxon are huge and employ tens of thousands of employees. Profits should always be considered in the context of return on investment. Just stating profits in terms of dollars, with no regard to costs of production, is often done for political purposes.

Americans have suffered more at the pumps more because of high tax rates on gasoline at the pump rather than oil company profits. Companies like Microsoft have much higher profit margins than oil companies.

As for wages, they have declined sharply under Obama's watch, and the gap between the rich and the poor has grown wider.

[TheRealVille]

It is also an indisputable fact that profit margins in the oil industry are tiny compared to many other industries. In terms of dollars, profits are large because companies like Exxon are huge and employ tens of thousands of employees. Profits should always be considered in the context of return on investment. Just stating profits in terms of dollars, with no regard to costs of production, is often done for political purposes.

Americans have suffered more at the pumps more because of high tax rates on gasoline at the pump rather than oil company profits. Companies like Microsoft have much higher profit margins than oil companies.

As for wages, they have declined sharply under Obama's watch, and the gap between the rich and the poor has grown wider.

I think, if you look, the valley between the rich and middle started somewhere around Reaganomics. This void didn't start with, or grow under Obama. He has been fixing things, although I'll concede that he isn't doing it fast enough for you guys. As the saying goes, republicans drove us to near depression under Bush, but republicans are mad because Obama is slow to fix their mess. The republican voting slogan, "We put America in an almost depression, Obama isn't fixing it fast enough, so elect us again, to fix our mess." You have even stated on this forum about Obama's "slow recovery", when your guy screwed America's eyes out. Back to the rich/middle discussion, tax codes, and other things implemented by republicans, that cater to the rich, plus no wage increases for the poor and middle, are the reason the gulf is getting wider, and upward mobility is getting harder. If the rich are the only ones making money, the middle will die(and it's already shrinking), and America dies with them.

[Hoot Gibson]

I think, if you look, the valley between the rich and middle started somewhere around Reaganomics. This void didn't start with, or grow under Obama. He has been fixing things, although I'll concede that he isn't doing it fast enough for you guys. As the saying goes, republicans drove us to near depression under Bush, but republicans are mad because Obama is slow to fix their mess. The republican voting slogan, "We put America in an almost depression, Obama isn't fixing it fast enough, so elect us again, to fix our mess." You have even stated on this forum about Obama's "slow recovery", when your guy screwed America's eyes out. Back to the rich/middle discussion, tax codes, and other things implemented by republicans, that cater to the rich, plus no wage increases for the poor and middle, are the reason the gulf is getting wider, and upward mobility is getting harder. If the rich are the only ones making money, the middle will die(and it's already shrinking), and America dies with them.

Average wages have dropped under Obama. Part-jobs have been rapidly replacing permanent jobs and the number of people in this country who are not participating in the labor force has never been higher. We can debate these facts in the appropriate forum if you want, but the state of the economy is one of the main factors that voters dumped so many of Obama's supporters from office on Tuesday.

A deep recession, or as you put it an "almost depression" has always been followed by a robust recovery - until now. The result is that there will be more Republicans in the House of Representatives in 2015 than at any time during the past 84 years. Had gas prices still been hovering near $4/gallon, imagine how bad it might have been for Democrats. Timing is everything in politics and it is a bad time to be a Democratic politician.

[TheRealVille]

Average wages have dropped under Obama. Part-jobs have been rapidly replacing permanent jobs and the number of people in this country who are not participating in the labor force has never been higher. We can debate these facts in the appropriate forum if you want, but the state of the economy is one of the main factors that voters dumped so many of Obama's supporters from office on Tuesday.

A deep recession, or as you put it an "almost depression" has always been followed by a robust recovery - until now. The result is that there will be more Republicans in the House of Representatives in 2015 than at any time during the past 84 years. Had gas prices still been hovering near $4/gallon, imagine how bad it might have been for Democrats. Timing is everything in politics and it is a bad time to be a Democratic politician.

Like I said, you guys are pissed because he isn't fixing Bush's mess fast enough. Bush screwed us into one of the biggest holes we have ever been in, it takes time to fix that mess.

[Image: http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/avg_median.gif]


http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/central.html
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/AWI.html

[Hoot Gibson]

Like I said, you guys are pissed because he isn't fixing Bush's mess fast enough. Bush screwed us into one of the biggest holes we have ever been in, it takes time to fix that mess.

[Image: http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/avg_median.gif]


http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/central.html
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/AWI.html

If income levels are not given in constant dollars, they are really not valid. Here is a good synopsis of Obama's economic record from the left-leaning Factcheck.org website.

As for fixing Bush's messes, Obama is generating messes far faster than he is fixing them. The increasing share of part time workers in the job market is also lost in the figures that you cited above. Anyway, we only have to survive two more years of Obama before the healing can begin.

Income, Poverty and Food Stamps
Also since our last report, the Census has released annual figures on income and poverty covering 2013. They provide a bleak picture of the economic well-being of most Americans during the first five years of Obama’s tenure.

Median household income rose just slightly to $51,939 in 2013, Census reported. In “real” income, adjusted for inflation, that was 0.3 percent higher than in 2012, but still 4.6 percent below 2008, the year before Obama first took office, when the first effects of the worst recession since the Great Depression were just starting to be felt. And it is 8.7 percent below the peak year of 1999.

The same Census report showed that although nearly 1.2 million fewer people were living in poverty in 2013 than the year before, the number still remains nearly 5.5 million higher than in 2008. The official poverty rate — meaning the percentage of the population living below the poverty line — dropped 0.5 percent in 2013, but it still remained 1.3 percent higher than in 2008.

Meanwhile, the number of people receiving benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as “food stamps,” bounced back up by nearly 400,000 since the period covered in our previous update. As of June, the most recent period for which the government has released monthly figures, the total stood at 46.5 million people. That’s 2.7 percent below the peak reached in December 2012, but it’s still 14.5 million, or more than 45 percent, higher than the month before the president was first sworn in.

[TheRealVille]

If income levels are not given in constant dollars, they are really not valid. Here is a good synopsis of Obama's economic record from the left-leaning Factcheck.org website.

As for fixing Bush's messes, Obama is generating messes far faster than he is fixing them. The increasing share of part time workers in the job market is also lost in the figures that you cited above. Anyway, we only have to survive two more years of Obama before the healing can begin.

From your link:

Millions of Americans have gained health insurance because of Obamacare, and the number signing up for Medicaid keeps rising. But the exact number of newly insured won’t be known for some time.
Those signing up for private insurance in Obamacare marketplaces for 2015 will find 25 percent more insurance companies competing for their business.
Marketplace premiums for 2015 are averaging 0.8 percent lower than this year, according to preliminary data.
Median household income declined 4.6 percent during Obama’s first five years, and nearly 5.5 million more Americans were living in poverty last year than before he took office.
The federal debt owed to the public has more than doubled under Obama, rising by 103 percent. But federal spending has gone up only 7.9 percent.
This year the economy is adding jobs rapidly and paychecks are rising faster than inflation at last. Real weekly earnings for workers, adjusted for inflation, averaged 0.7 percent higher in August than when Obama entered office.
And the total number of jobs in September was nearly 5.5 million higher than when Obama was first sworn in. Four times more jobs have been added under Obama than were gained in George W. Bush’s eight years in office.
Under Obama, U.S. crude oil production has increased by 70 percent, while oil imports have gone down by more than half.
New figures show annual handgun production has nearly tripled under Obama, rising by 184 percent as of last year.

Is that debt from Bush's wars? Is the wage problem because companies are making, and keeping more profit for themselves, and paying white collar workers more? My chart shows median income getting higher. Who's link is right?

Average and Median Amounts of Net Compensation
Average net compensation Median net compensation a Ratio of median to average
Change Change
Year Amount Annual Cumulative Amount Annual Cumulative
1990 $20,172.11 NA NA $14,498.74 NA NA 71.875%
1991 20,923.84 3.727% 3.727% 15,075.94 3.981% 3.981% 72.052%
1992 22,001.92 5.152% 9.071% 15,610.40 3.545% 7.667% 70.950%
1993 22,191.14 0.860% 10.009% 15,690.77 0.515% 8.222% 70.707%
1994 22,786.73 2.684% 12.962% 16,118.02 2.723% 11.168% 70.734%
1995 23,700.11 4.008% 17.489% 16,650.16 3.302% 14.839% 70.254%
1996 24,859.17 4.891% 23.235% 17,403.45 4.524% 20.034% 70.008%
1997 26,309.73 5.835% 30.426% 18,277.43 5.022% 26.062% 69.470%
1998 27,686.75 5.234% 37.253% 19,157.40 4.815% 32.131% 69.193%
1999 29,229.69 5.573% 44.902% 20,102.35 4.933% 38.649% 68.774%
2000 30,846.09 5.530% 52.915% 20,957.18 4.252% 44.545% 67.941%
2001 31,581.97 2.386% 56.563% 21,767.29 3.866% 50.132% 68.923%
2002 31,898.70 1.003% 58.133% 22,152.84 1.771% 52.791% 69.447%
2003 32,678.48 2.445% 61.998% 22,576.71 1.913% 55.715% 69.087%
2004 34,197.63 4.649% 69.529% 23,355.83 3.451% 61.089% 68.297%
2005 35,448.93 3.659% 75.732% 23,962.20 2.596% 65.271% 67.596%
2006 37,078.27 4.596% 83.810% 24,891.59 3.879% 71.681% 67.133%
2007 38,760.95 4.538% 92.151% 25,737.20 3.397% 77.513% 66.400%
2008 39,652.61 2.300% 96.571% 26,514.38 3.020% 82.874% 66.867%
2009 39,054.62 -1.508% 93.607% 26,261.29 -0.955% 81.128% 67.242%
2010b 39,959.30 2.316% 98.092% 26,363.55 0.389% 81.833% 65.976%
2011 41,211.36 3.133% 104.299% 26,965.43 2.283% 85.985% 65.432%
2012 42,498.21 3.123% 110.678% 27,519.10 2.053% 89.803% 64.754%
2013 43,041.39 1.278% 113.371% 28,031.02 1.860% 93.334% 65.126%

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/central.html
FTR, 09 can't be counted, that is Bush's year up until October.

[Hoot Gibson]

From your link:


Is that debt from Bush's wars? Is the wage problem because companies are making, and keeping more profit for themselves, and paying white collar workers more? My chart shows median income getting higher. Who's link is right?

Companies are hanging onto profits because they have lived in fear of what the future under Obama will bring. Companies will probably be a little more optimistic between now and 2016, but the real recovery should start after the election in 2017 - assuming that another socialist does not win the White House and Democrats do not retake control of the Senate. The private sector needs to have confidence in the future before increasing payrolls and making large capital expenditures.

I don't think that the income levels in your graphic have been adjusted for inflation. Besides, much of the loss in personal income has been due to the conversion of full time jobs to part time jobs, which Obamacare encourages, and looking at the pay rates of full time jobs ignores that fact.

I deliberately chose Factcheck.com because it is a liberal website run by Democrat Brooks Jackson. The Obama administration has become very good at lying with statistics, so I do not want to take time deciphering the numbers on the link that you gave. If wages are not adjusted for inflation, they are very misleading.

Even the inflation rate is very misleading because of everything that is excluded from the calculations. If you ignore increases in energy and food prices over the past six years, then the inflation rate looks pretty reasonable. But anybody who has driven for the past 6 years and bought hamburger and other groceries, knows that inflation is a real issue.

As for "Bush's wars," I think that it is a little late to be blaming everything on Bush. Obama wanted the job of fixing the economy, nobody forced the job on him. After six years, it is time for him and his supporters to take responsibility for his own failed policies.

Democrats supported both wars and they were American wars, not Republican or Democratic Wars. Obama has badly mismanaged both wars and there have been more casualties in Afghanistan since he took office, but I would still not call them "his" wars. Remember, Obama embraced the Afghan war as a war that was justified. He did not campaign against the decision to go to war in Afghanistan - he campaigned to move resources from Iraq to Afghanistan. You cannot honestly just deduct the entire debt incurred because of both wars and call them "Bush's Wars." To do so would be dishonest.

[TheRealVille]

Companies are hanging onto profits because they have lived in fear of what the future under Obama will bring. Companies will probably be a little more optimistic between now and 2016, but the real recovery should start after the election in 2017 - assuming that another socialist does not win the White House and Democrats do not retake control of the Senate. The private sector needs to have confidence in the future before increasing payrolls and making large capital expenditures.

I don't think that the income levels in your graphic have been adjusted for inflation. Besides, much of the loss in personal income has been due to the conversion of full time jobs to part time jobs, which Obamacare encourages, and looking at the pay rates of full time jobs ignores that fact.

I deliberately chose Factcheck.com because it is a liberal website run by Democrat Brooks Jackson. The Obama administration has become very good at lying with statistics, so I do not want to take time deciphering the numbers on the link that you gave. If wages are not adjusted for inflation, they are very misleading.

Even the inflation rate is very misleading because of everything that is excluded from the calculations. If you ignore increases in energy and food prices over the past six years, then the inflation rate looks pretty reasonable. But anybody who has driven for the past 6 years and bought hamburger and other groceries, knows that inflation is a real issue.

Longer-term trends in CEO compensation:

From 1978 to 2013, CEO compensation, inflation-adjusted, increased 937 percent, a rise more than double stock market growth and substantially greater than the painfully slow 10.2 percent growth in a typical worker’s compensation over the same period.
The CEO-to-worker compensation ratio was 20-to-1 in 1965 and 29.9-to-1 in 1978, grew to 122.6-to-1 in 1995, peaked at 383.4-to-1 in 2000, and was 295.9-to-1 in 2013, far higher than it was in the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, or 1990s.
If Facebook, which we exclude from our data due to its outlier high compensation numbers, were included in the sample, average CEO pay was $24.8 million in 2013, and the CEO-to-worker compensation ratio was 510.7-to-1.

I just quoted part because the page is so big. Go check those numbers and percentages out.


From the link of yours, are more people in poverty because wage increases are idled, while CEOs are going up. In inflation, stalled workers wages, put more people in poverty. Raise wages, according to inflation, and more people come out of poverty. Yes, inflation is a real issue, and wages not corresponding to inflation hurts families. Inflation goes up, workers wages stay flat, while the companies and their CEOs enjoy fat increases.

http://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-pay-c...s-to-rise/

[Hoot Gibson]

I just quoted part because the page is so big. Go check those numbers and percentages out.


From the link of yours, are more people in poverty because wage increases are idled, while CEOs are going up. In inflation, stalled workers wages, put more people in poverty. Raise wages, according to inflation, and more people come out of poverty. Yes, inflation is a real issue, and wages not corresponding to inflation hurts families. Inflation goes up, workers wages stay flat, while the companies and their CEOs enjoy fat increases.

http://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-pay-c...s-to-rise/

Honestly, RV, I don't want to spend the time wading through pages and pages of the Obama administration's statistics. Middle income wages have failed to keep pace with inflation because millions of people are no longer in the workforce, millions more have gone from full time to part time jobs, and the result is a reduction in the competition among companies for labor. There is a glut in the supply of labor that continues to outstrip demand for labor.

You do not see any connection between Obama's policies and the damage to middle class incomes and I see them as a huge factor. Obama committed a huge blunder in pandering to the extreme environmentalists in his party and bottling up the Keystone Pipeline in endless red tap. He gave away the state of West Virginia with his war on coal. Had it not been for the coal issue, Democrats would have been in much better position to unseat McConnell.

People want jobs and people who have jobs want to move up to better jobs that are no longer widely available. If you want to continue to insist that Obama is not responsible for the demise of the Democratic Party, that is your choice, but an increasing number of Democrats are facing reality.

You seem to think that it is inevitable that Republicans will lose House and Senate seats and Democrats will retain the presidency in 2016 because it is their turn, or something like that. That is just not how things work. If Obama continues to take unpopular actions - and issuing an executive order granting green cards to 5 million illegals will be unpopular among most voters, Democrats will continue to lose ground to Republicans.

Nearly every Democratic candidate who just lost avoided Obama like the plague during their campaigns and for most of them, that strategy failed. Unless Obama changes, Democrats will once again run away from Obama in 2016, but before those elections, some of them will begin working with Republicans to save their own political careers. It has happened before and there is no reason to believe that it cannot happen again.

[TheRealVille]

Honestly, RV, I don't want to spend the time wading through pages and pages of the Obama administration's statistics. Middle income wages have failed to keep pace with inflation because millions of people are no longer in the workforce, millions more have gone from full time to part time jobs, and the result is a reduction in the competition among companies for labor. There is a glut in the supply of labor that continues to outstrip demand for labor.

You do not see any connection between Obama's policies and the damage to middle class incomes and I see them as a huge factor. Obama committed a huge blunder in pandering to the extreme environmentalists in his party and bottling up the Keystone Pipeline in endless red tap. He gave away the state of West Virginia with his war on coal. Had it not been for the coal issue, Democrats would have been in much better position to unseat McConnell.

People want jobs and people who have jobs want to move up to better jobs that are no longer widely available. If you want to continue to insist that Obama is not responsible for the demise of the Democratic Party, that is your choice, but an increasing number of Democrats are facing reality.

You seem to think that it is inevitable that Republicans will lose House and Senate seats and Democrats will retain the presidency in 2016 because it is their turn, or something like that. That is just not how things work. If Obama continues to take unpopular actions - and issuing an executive order granting green cards to 5 million illegals will be unpopular among most voters, Democrats will continue to lose ground to Republicans.

Nearly every Democratic candidate who just lost avoided Obama like the plague during their campaigns and for most of them, that strategy failed. Unless Obama changes, Democrats will once again run away from Obama in 2016, but before those elections, some of them will begin working with Republicans to save their own political careers. It has happened before and there is no reason to believe that it cannot happen again.

Do you realize that there are more jobs now, than when he took office? You keep bringing up people "dropping out of the workforce". Do you take into account all the baby boomers retiring in very large numbers. As the baby boomers retire, of course there will be a lot of people leaving the workforce. They are the biggest class of people leaving the workforce at this point in time.

[Hoot Gibson]

Do you realize that there are more jobs now, than when he took office? You keep bringing up people "dropping out of the workforce". Do you take into account all the baby boomers retiring in very large numbers. As the baby boomers retire, of course there will be a lot of people leaving the workforce. They are the biggest class of people leaving the workforce at this point in time.

The population has grown and many of those "jobs" are part time jobs that were created in response to Obamacare. I know that some of the people who have left the workforce are retirees, but many people have retired earlier than they wanted because they could not find jobs comparable to the ones that they lost. I also keep bringing up the transition of full time jobs to part time jobs and you keep ignoring that factor.

The economy is a mess. If it does not begin improving at a much faster pace, Democrats will continue to suffer losses. If the economy does begin picking up steam, then it will be easy for Republicans to claim at least part of the credit because they will be in charge of Congress and will be able to point at the before and after snapshot of the economy.

If Obama does not begin cooperating with Republicans in 2015, individual Democrats who will be running for reelection in 2016 will start peeling away from Obama and Harry Reid. Doing so will give them some credibility when they try to distance themselves from Obama's policies in the 2016 campaigns. Obama will still be in office and if he is still unpopular, which is almost a certainty, then Democratic candidates will not want to see those "voted with Obama 97% of the time" campaign ads.

You are smart enough to understand who will be blamed if Republicans start sending a steady stream of bills to Obama to sign, only to have most of them vetoed. If McConnell has any sense at all, that is exactly what will happen. Republicans will remind voters constantly that they are passing bills that Harry Reid and Obama blocked for up to four years. The pressure on Democrats to vote in favor of some of those Republican bills will be enormous, if they plan to run in 2016.

If Obama hands out 5 million green cards to illegals, it will be one of the biggest political blunders in U.S. history. Democrats best hope is to focus on the economy with Republicans and marginalize Obama for the next two years. He won't like it, but he will not be running for office again.

This is my last post in this thread. We have veered way off topic, especially since we generally agree on the cause of gas price drops quite a few posts ago.

[Spirit100]

Gas is now $2.87 in NKY...

Sorry to interrupt...nicker:

[64SUR]

stop lastnight off I-75 in livingtons gas price was 2.69. :closed:

[TheRealVille]

Just paid 1.75 at the Kroger in Richmond. The actual price was 1.95, but 20 cents off with the Kroger card.

[TheRealVille]

As is often the case, you did not understand my post. I agree that the price of gasoline is not immune to the law of supply and demand.

However, there are a few conspiracy theorists here who claim that greedy oil companies are free to set the price of gasoline however they want to fatten their wallets. When prices drop, their voices fall silent.

The point of my post was not to allege price fixing by Obama or the Democrats, it was to challenge the conspiracy theorists to explain the drop in the cost of gasoline based on their "analysis" of rising prices.

Although you did not intend to do so, you seem to agree with me that global oil prices drive gasoline prices, although there is sometimes a lag between changes in oil prices and changes in gasoline prices. EPA requirements, which change with the location and season, also contribute to price volatility.

There is no quandary for me - politicians can and have impacted the price of gasoline through tax rates and regulations, but periodic increases and decreases in the price of gasoline are normal and have nothing to do with politics. Prices react to changes in demand and supply.

Thinking back, seems like I distinctly remember you blaming high gas prices on Obama policies. Maybe I remember wrong?

[Stardust]

It is a simple fact, Obama made a deal with Conservative leadership to increase American produced oil production in order to keep him completely shut out in congress. America is producing over a million more barrels of oil per day, or 60% more than we did this time in 2013.

Is it politics, hell yes it is politics. But it tells you that this President has done more to hurt Americans over his 10 years than he ever cared to help them. Only now, when he will be personally affected, has he loosened the American oil restrictions to finally help the very Poor and Middle Class that he has so ardently tried to keep oppressed!

For the long term, the Conservative leadership has already made steps to help the American people in the long run. By increasing American produced oil, it has driven imported oil from Opec and Russia down, thus this is a net possitive change for all of us Americans for the foreseeable future.

[TheRealVille]

It is a simple fact, Obama made a deal with Conservative leadership to increase American produced oil production in order to keep him completely shut out in congress. America is producing over a million more barrels of oil per day, or 60% more than we did this time in 2013.

Is it politics, hell yes it is politics. But it tells you that this President has done more to hurt Americans over his 10 years than he ever cared to help them. Only now, when he will be personally affected, has he loosened the American oil restrictions to finally help the very Poor and Middle Class that he has so ardently tried to keep oppressed!

For the long term, the Conservative leadership has already made steps to help the American people in the long run. By increasing American produced oil, it has driven imported oil from Opec and Russia down, thus this is a net possitive change for all of us Americans for the foreseeable future.

Bullshit. I worked in the Marcellus area. It's nothing to do with loosing the policies. We have hit the mother lode in oil and gas in the Marcellus Shell, and the Utica Shell. If you don't know anything, please don't speak. You only look like the ignorant ass that you are.

[Westside]

Bullshit. I worked in the Marcellus area. It's nothing to do with loosing the policies. We have hit the mother lode in oil and gas in the Marcellus Shell, and the Utica Shell. If you don't know anything, please don't speak. You only look like the ignorant ass that you are.

You call yourself the scurge of New Mexico, well by George I AM NEW MEXICO!!!

[Spirit100]

My wallet is happy to report $2.11 in NKY...

inglepar

[Granny Bear]

It is $1.99 all over Corbin, and $1.98 at a couple of places like Kroger. With your Kroger card, you can reduce it even more.

We've travelled to Berea so many times lately, I ought to know!!