"Calif Bill" wrote in message ink.net...
"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
news:CXVqc.3073
Yes, make that gas $10 a gallon. almost no one could afford to drive.
See
where the economy would be then. As to price, adjusted for inflation,
is
cheaper than about 1970.

And I was driving in 1970, and it wasn't easy to make sure I had
enough gas to make it to school and back. It sucked then, and it sucks
now, so what is the point?

For your edification. Relative to the economy, gas is cheaper than 1970.
You just want those $100k/year jobs and $0.23 a gallon gas. I remember when
I made $5k a year (about 1964) and the CEO of the company (Fortune 500) was
knocking down about $89k/year. Thought that if I ever made 20k I would be
in fat city. When I exceeded the CEO's yearly, I still was not in fat city,
as the rest of the costs had escalated also. My first $25k house is now
$400k, My house that costs about $50k after additions is a $900k house.
Figure a 16x multiplier and that $0.23 gallon gas should be $3.68 gallon. A
large part of the energy problem is government regulations. We are require
to add MTBE to gas in California (and other states) by the Fed's. Reduces
air pollution by a stated 6%, but since we get 10% less mileage with MTBE,
the overall saving is less, as well as we have poisoned the waters all over
the nation with a really toxic substance. The Fed's to help out ADM (very
good friend of the Clinton Administration) are requiring alcohol to be added
to gas. Less mileage, and costs more per gallon to produce than the gas.
Now they have reformulated diesel #2 for OTR (over the road) and the price
is up, and the energy per gallon is down. (less mileage). Chevron and the
other oil companies have stated they can make just as clean burning fuel
without adding MTBE or alcohol. But government requirements are preventing
this.

Sorry, your senile babbling does nothing to answer the question.