Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
DSK wrote in message ...
Curtis CCR wrote: This is a realistic economy. Unlike the overvalued boom we had in the 90s. There was no way to sustain that economy. What we have now is a small term depression. A steady decline in aggregate demand nationally, and this is also reflected world wide. Unemloyment isn't that bad, but the gov't is often saying two different things (I tend to believe the nonpartisan GAO, which will not remain nonpartisan if Bush gets reelected). If you count working at McDonalds as full time manufacturing employment, then sure the economy is great. The main reason why the economy isn't irretrievably in the dumber is because Uncle Sam has been spending bazillions on the military for the past two years... taking that into account, a "mediocre" national economy sucks! A DEPRESSION? You have got to be kidding. What the hell kept you from jumping off a building when Carter was running the country? 2- the gov't *is* foolishly spending even more money Gotta give you that one. And a lot of republicans are not too thrilled with GWB's stewardship of the nation's checkbook. I think a number are less than thrilled with his armtwisting, too. My point, which you clearly did not bother to read, is that if the price of gasoline had climbed steadily with inflation, we would not be in any of the several messes we are in now. And rec.boats would be left to the handful of people that could afford it. Excuse me? Did you understand the point above? If you could afford boating in 1970, and the price of gas kept up with inflation, you could afford it now... Could your point be more muddy? You said your point was that if gas prices had climbed steadily with inflation, "we would not be in any of the several messes we are in now." Is boating in one of the messes you were referring to? And you could only afford to continue boating with climbing gas prices if your income kept up to. Average household income as outpaced inflation, but that's primarily because significantly more households have two full time money earners than they did in 1970. Also considered that if EVERYTHING kept pace with inflation, inflation itself you have been much higher. Gasoline has kept pace with the cost of production over 30 years. Just like computers... if electronics had kept pace with inflation my latest TV would have cost about $5,000, and the Mac I bought a couple of months ago would cost over $10,000. There are kinds of things that haven't kept pace with inflation. If they had, we'd be in a whole new mess... ... I always laugh at those that opine gas prices in the US are artificially low (usually some part of the left wing). LOL anybody who disagrees is a wild-eyed left-winger, eh? I admit that it was gratuitous accusation. But are you saying it isn't true? gas prices have not been artifically low in the US. Refiners have historically made money - so the prices we have been charged have covered more than the cost of production. It seems to me to be Europeans that often think gas is too cheap here. It's not artificially cheap here - it's artificially expensive there. Take a look at refinery operating capacity, and the rate at which new capacity is being built, and figure whether we are slipping. Prices are not sustainable at this level, which is why they are going up. Duh. You're right on that - supply and demand. It's not the only reason for higher prices, but it's a significant factor. We have about half the number of refineries running in the US today than we did 25 years ago. But the half that are left are pumping damned near the same amount of product. They are running at over 90% capacity. That should tell you that the most inefficient refineries are gone. Efficiencies allow producers to produce more and keep costs down. Nobdy should be blaming George Bush for a lack of refining capacity. Who would want to build a new refinery? And if someone wanted to, who would let them? World oil demand is climbing - it's not just the US. China is getting very oil thirsty. Numerous reports point to China as a significant contributor to demands for oil - I am not blaming China for wanting oil, but they are now competing more for the resource and it effects the price. And China is not filling a reserve --- but they might. They announced last week that they are building strategic reserve facilities. If they start to fill it - watch prices then. But our economy in the dumper? Not even. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
OT--Not again! More Chinese money buying our politicians. | General |