chow184 Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Being 20 years old I was too young to drive when gas was under a dollar which seems like such a long time ago. I wonder though how much cheaper fuel could have helped our crippled economy. Higher fuel costs hurt everyone(minus oil companies apparently ), it costs more to transport a product and the cost also gets shifted to the buyer. So in the end, producers of goods and Consumers lose money paying for fuel.Money that could be spent elsewhere in the economy. I view gasoline almost like electricity and food in level of importance to many americans, it something they simply need to survive in daily life. I think oil and gasoline producing companies are finally getting the point that they can't bleed americans dry of money like they have or else we'll die financially(economy going down the drain).I'm not saying big oil killed the economy,but I am saying the american economy is like a gunshot patient bleeding out and big oil was at the bedside drawing pints of blood. this leads me to some questions why in the world is a provider of something so necessary to daily life allowed to do something like that? how easy is it to manipulate a speculative market? why have a speculative market? what should the government be allowed to do when companies rake in massive profits on a product that is essential to american daily life(sounds like a clear case of abuse)? (cough:windfalltaxes:cough) just a bit of a rant have at it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurrayH81 Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Because it would be "socialist" for the Government to regulate the "oil" based energy market, although somehow it's not "socialist" to do so for the "electricly" based energy market. I realize that the difference may be national government vs. local government PUC, but there is no reason why (other than Oil company resistence via political contributions) that the oil market is not regulated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Because it would be "socialist" for the Government to regulate the "oil" based energy market, although somehow it's not "socialist" to do so for the "electricly" based energy market. I realize that the difference may be national government vs. local government PUC, but there is no reason why (other than Oil company resistence via political contributions) that the oil market is not regulated. You do know oil companies CANNOT donate to politicians? The rest of the post is not much better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chow184 Posted November 12, 2008 Author Share Posted November 12, 2008 You do know oil companies CANNOT donate to politicians?The rest of the post is not much better ted stevens says you're a liar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 ted stevens says you're a liar He will soon be saying it from jail though:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FanboyOf91 Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 To answer the OP's title, no. Cheap gas would have been little help to anybody who's adjustable-rate mortgage rates adjusted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I think the problem arises from the real estate and banking industries, and that cheap gasoline would make little difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I think it would have prolonged the time before crisis, but it wouldn't have stopped it from happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EersSkins05 Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 To answer the OP's title, no.Cheap gas would have been little help to anybody who's adjustable-rate mortgage rates adjusted. I think that response is a little short-sighted. Of course lower gas prices would have helped the economy to some degree. How much is somewhat debatable, but I can tell you that certainly the extra 120 bucks my wife and I aren't spending on gas this month that we spent a few months ago is being dispersed back into the economy in the form of goods and services bought, and I'm certain we're not alone. Now, would it have saved AIG from needing bailout? Probably not. But you can't deny that it would've had an impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebornempowered Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 How much is somewhat debatable, but I can tell you that certainly the extra 120 bucks my wife and I aren't spending on gas this month that we spent a few months ago is being dispersed back into the economy in the form of goods and services bought, and I'm certain we're not alone. I know you aren't alone. We haven't had that significant in savings but the $70 or $80 we have is going to go to other retail outlets for food and other goods. I have also noticed, here at least, that the stores and malls seem to have more people at them the last few weeks. Hmmm....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbear Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Back when I was in college (way back in the day:(), our macro economics class looked at a bunch of different variables and how they correlated to changes in tax revenue. Energy prices had a higher correlation than tax rates. That was kind of a surprise. We had all thought that surely companies would do better with lower tax rates and the economy would take off. That was the first time I studied the Lafer curve. Well, energy prices evidently had a bigger impact on the economy than the tax rate. Back to the question. In truth, I'm not sure it would have kept us from having the current problems. I do think cheaper gas a year ago may have helped us now though in the sense that we would be thinking about this as another blip...an admitidly large blip, but a blip non the less. I think there would have been less of the current panic because now it seems like we're going from one crisis to another. I think consumer confidence is somewhat shaken by going through the high energy prices and then imediately adding the credit crisis. I think we're still to a large extent a consumer driven economy. The combination of the energy prices followed by the perceived credit crunch may shock some people to save more like the depression did for my grandparents, but long run is that a bad thing? I also think the energy crisis has only been postponed a little. We could have delayed it with lower gas prices, but the world needs new energy sources and uses. I didn'treally answer your question did I? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 Yes to an extent. Would it changed the outcome of the election? Doubtful and the more I think about it the GOP may be better off if they purge the liberals and moderates out of the party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Brown Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I have also noticed, here at least, that the stores and malls seem to have more people at them the last few weeks. Hmmm....... everything i've seen in malls and stores recently has been on sale. its a good time for people to shop because stores have been forced to throw everything on sale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebornempowered Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 everything i've seen in malls and stores recently has been on sale. its a good time for people to shop because stores have been forced to throw everything on sale Cool. I haven't been in the stores. I was just going from the look of the parking lots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.