Do the calculation yourself and you will find that the drop of gas
from $4.00 to now $1.85/gal will save the USA about $500 billion over
a year. This is real money, not some government sleight of hand
accounting or taking money from our great grandchildren. The real way
to stimulate the economy is obvious, DRILL NOW. Of course, the Dems
have no real interest in helping average Joe American, they just want
to concentrate power in their hands. The appointment of Clueless
Caroline is obvious evidence that their interests lie with the moneyed
elite class and they will ignore the good of the rest of us. They will
not approve new offshore drilling.

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...
Do the calculation yourself and you will find that the drop of gas
from $4.00 to now $1.85/gal will save the USA about $500 billion over
a year. This is real money, not some government sleight of hand
accounting or taking money from our great grandchildren. The real way
to stimulate the economy is obvious, DRILL NOW. Of course, the Dems
have no real interest in helping average Joe American, they just want
to concentrate power in their hands. The appointment of Clueless
Caroline is obvious evidence that their interests lie with the moneyed
elite class and they will ignore the good of the rest of us. They will
not approve new offshore drilling.


When would the production from new drilling have a significant impact on the
price? I honestly don't know the answer, but I'm sure you have the number
handy.

And, prove that speculators wouldn't jack up the price of that new oil so it
was just as expensive as oil was a year ago.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...
Do the calculation yourself and you will find that the drop of gas
from $4.00 to now $1.85/gal will save the USA about $500 billion over
a year. This is real money, not some government sleight of hand
accounting or taking money from our great grandchildren. The real way
to stimulate the economy is obvious, DRILL NOW. Of course, the Dems
have no real interest in helping average Joe American, they just want
to concentrate power in their hands. The appointment of Clueless
Caroline is obvious evidence that their interests lie with the moneyed
elite class and they will ignore the good of the rest of us. They will
not approve new offshore drilling.


When would the production from new drilling have a significant impact on the
price? I honestly don't know the answer, but I'm sure you have the number
handy.

And, prove that speculators wouldn't jack up the price of that new oil so it
was just as expensive as oil was a year ago.



You want to continue sending your money to the middle east?

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 17:57:33 -0500, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...
Do the calculation yourself and you will find that the drop of gas
from $4.00 to now $1.85/gal will save the USA about $500 billion over
a year. This is real money, not some government sleight of hand
accounting or taking money from our great grandchildren. The real way
to stimulate the economy is obvious, DRILL NOW. Of course, the Dems
have no real interest in helping average Joe American, they just want
to concentrate power in their hands. The appointment of Clueless
Caroline is obvious evidence that their interests lie with the moneyed
elite class and they will ignore the good of the rest of us. They will
not approve new offshore drilling.


When would the production from new drilling have a significant impact on the
price? I honestly don't know the answer, but I'm sure you have the number
handy.

And, prove that speculators wouldn't jack up the price of that new oil so it
was just as expensive as oil was a year ago.


Anyone with a brain knows that no matter when or where the crude would
be harvested, it'd make a several penny difference on pricing. Prices
are set by market makers and since any additional capacity generated
by the US would be an infintessimal percentage compared to world
supply/production, it'd make no difference. It's a red herring for
dolts.

What would affect gas prices is more refineries. The oil companies
don't want to build refineries (even tho' they've been ok'd) because
it'd take their ability to jack up prices on claim supply/demand
spikes. That's where they make $.

The other thing would be to restrict speculators (folks who don't
actually take delivery or own supply depots) to bid on the commodities
market.

That's what caused $4 gas, not supply/demand. Get an education
please.

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 15:11:46 -0800, jps wrote:

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 17:57:33 -0500, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...
Do the calculation yourself and you will find that the drop of gas
from $4.00 to now $1.85/gal will save the USA about $500 billion over
a year. This is real money, not some government sleight of hand
accounting or taking money from our great grandchildren. The real way
to stimulate the economy is obvious, DRILL NOW. Of course, the Dems
have no real interest in helping average Joe American, they just want
to concentrate power in their hands. The appointment of Clueless
Caroline is obvious evidence that their interests lie with the moneyed
elite class and they will ignore the good of the rest of us. They will
not approve new offshore drilling.


When would the production from new drilling have a significant impact on the
price? I honestly don't know the answer, but I'm sure you have the number
handy.

And, prove that speculators wouldn't jack up the price of that new oil so it
was just as expensive as oil was a year ago.


Anyone with a brain knows that no matter when or where the crude would
be harvested, it'd make a several penny difference on pricing. Prices
are set by market makers and since any additional capacity generated
by the US would be an infintessimal percentage compared to world
supply/production, it'd make no difference. It's a red herring for
dolts.

What would affect gas prices is more refineries. The oil companies
don't want to build refineries (even tho' they've been ok'd) because
it'd take their ability to jack up prices on claim supply/demand
spikes. That's where they make $.

The other thing would be to restrict speculators (folks who don't
actually take delivery or own supply depots) to bid on the commodities
market.

That's what caused $4 gas, not supply/demand. Get an education
please.

Comments are directed towards Frogfart, not Doug.

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"jps" wrote in message
...


That's what caused $4 gas, not supply/demand. Get an education
please.

Please explain the drop from $140/barrel to $34/barrel when the demand
tanked.

Eisboch

There is no single reason, and you are fully aware of that fact.

Explain why the price took so long to tank after demand dropped.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...n4707770.shtml

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"jps" wrote in message
...


That's what caused $4 gas, not supply/demand. Get an education
please.

Please explain the drop from $140/barrel to $34/barrel when the demand
tanked.

Eisboch

There is no single reason, and you are fully aware of that fact.

Explain why the price took so long to tank after demand dropped.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...n4707770.shtml



The JimH theory?

Eisboch

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 15:18:44 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Jan 20, 6:11*pm, jps wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 17:57:33 -0500, "JoeSpareBedroom"





wrote:
"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...
Do the calculation yourself and you will find that the drop of gas
from $4.00 to now $1.85/gal will save the USA about $500 billion over
a year. *This is real money, not some government sleight of hand
accounting or taking money from our great grandchildren. *The real way
to stimulate the economy is obvious, DRILL NOW. *Of course, the Dems
have no real interest in helping average Joe American, they just want
to concentrate power in their hands. *The appointment of Clueless
Caroline is obvious evidence that their interests lie with the moneyed
elite class and they will ignore the good of the rest of us. They will
not approve new offshore drilling.

When would the production from new drilling have a significant impact on the
price? I honestly don't know the answer, but I'm sure you have the number
handy.

And, prove that speculators wouldn't jack up the price of that new oil so it
was just as expensive as oil was a year ago.

Anyone with a brain knows that no matter when or where the crude would
be harvested, it'd make a several penny difference on pricing.

Anyone with any brains knows your analysis is generally based more on
ideology than any known or provable facts... Pffffttt

Uh no, it's not. Go talk to an economist about why oil went to
$150/barrel while demand was going down and supply was going up.

You may also want to look up the definition of ideology.

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 18:24:32 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
.. .


That's what caused $4 gas, not supply/demand. Get an education
please.

Please explain the drop from $140/barrel to $34/barrel when the demand
tanked.

Eisboch

Concurrent with congress announcing that they were going to
investigate why oil prices were rising while demand was dropping and
supply was increasing.

That's not a commodity market. They were trading contracts as
investment instruments.

There were many investment banks and large funds investing in oil
futures that had no interest whatsoever in purchasing oil.

Do a little research and you'll find plenty of info...

"jps" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 18:24:32 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
. ..


That's what caused $4 gas, not supply/demand. Get an education
please.

Please explain the drop from $140/barrel to $34/barrel when the demand
tanked.

Eisboch

Concurrent with congress announcing that they were going to
investigate why oil prices were rising while demand was dropping and
supply was increasing.

That's not a commodity market. They were trading contracts as
investment instruments.

There were many investment banks and large funds investing in oil
futures that had no interest whatsoever in purchasing oil.

Do a little research and you'll find plenty of info...


If I recall correctly, Eisboch doesn't agree with that theory, even though
many experts in the oil business do.