The demand for oil is to blame for the high prices of gasoline. If there is no excessive demand for gas, the price will go down.
2007-05-22 00:12:55
·
answer #1
·
answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Neither one.
Hi here is economics 101 the President has nothing to do with oil prices.. see there are these things are refineries and people called refiners and they set the price to sell to the gas station who, in turn determines what price to sell the gas at to make a profit.
Maybe if the libs would let us drill in Anwar and off the coast of Florida gas prices would go down dramatically but they can't because then they'd have nothing to b i t c h about.... because if gas prices are low and gas is affordable and plentiful then they can't blame everything on big businesses.
And if we suppposedly went to war for oil like the libs say we did why have we not reaped any of the supposed benefits?? Maybe because we didn't! Maybe because of a threat against the country called Militant Islam and Al Qaeda. Maybe because like Clinton has said during his 8 years that Saddam had WMDs and he posed a threat.
Also Bush has been pushing for alternative fuels since 2001 BEFORE 9/11.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007540
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200401/pollack
Charlotte: go back to watching Rosie and believing what she says is Gospel truth. You're a complete moron. 19 Al Qaeda hijackers took planes and crashed them into the WTC and the Pentagon.
2007-05-22 09:48:19
·
answer #2
·
answered by Maria B 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Neither, no agency was established to secure USA energy needs into the future.
You would think after the 80's Iranian Oil embargo that the shortage of refineries would have been addressed. Not to mention the electrical grids and power generation and the natural gas. As goes the gasoline price so goes the economy, watch and see it's effect.
Our politicians are not looking out for our needs, they are lining their pockets. Dem's and Reps.
This refinery problem has been brewing for many, many years. We need a energy czar that isn't connect to the companies and who isn't a pawn of the ruling party.
2007-05-22 07:50:31
·
answer #3
·
answered by Red 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
It's not Bush at all, and the war in Iraq has some effect, but not significantly.
You also have to look at what else is going on in other oil production states and at the increased demand worldwide. There is unrest in Niger, there's madmen running Iran, Putin is trying to become Stalin Jr, there's the dictator Chavez in Venezuela, and there is the civil war in Sudan. All of these instabilities have led to increased prices in crude oil, also, currently about $65 per barrel.
Then you need to look at the increased consumption of gas by consumers. Vacation, boating, construction, landscaping & lawn care, recreational vehicles, etc.
Add in the changeover to government mandated summer "boutique" blends.
Stir with a touch of "down for maintenance" on our maxed-out refineries, and a pinch of speculation.
Viola!, you have the prices.
2007-05-22 07:43:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
Blame can be placed at several feet, but one of the greatest problems is the lack of refining facilities. There have been no new facilities built in many years and many of the older ones have had to go offline for repair and reconstruction. The lack of facilities has been caused by many things, but one of the most prominent is environmental groups. Several proposed facilities have been put on hold while going through long court cases. Several companies have simply given up because they can not spend the time and money waiting the cases out.
2007-05-22 07:20:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by udontreallydou 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Neither one. The price for a barrel of crude is less now than one year ago, so you can hardly blame big oil. The government does not set the gas prices. No refineries have been built in 32 years thanks to the Dems sea of red tape they created. Gas prices are controlled by speculators on Wall Street, which is set by supply and demand.
2007-05-22 07:28:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
The oil companies closed down profitable refineries in the 90's, then threatened Pat Robertson & others who wanted to buy them. Robertson warned that California gas would be 3.50 / gallon if they closed down the refineries & he turned out to be correct for once. Had those refineries not been closed, gas would NOT be nearly as high & the oil companies would not be posting record profits for the last 3 quarters.
2007-05-22 09:31:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by Wendy T 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
federal and state tax gouging double the price of fuel at the pump.
government regulation and price controls keep prices high (let the free market reign)
lib sponsored regulations and environmental lobbies keep new refinerys from being built, further driving up the price through limited supply. the alaskan pipeline has never operated above 40%, because there is no place to process it.
politicians like Joe Kennedy, who support enemies of the U.S., like Hugo Chavez, contribute to increased prices and destabilization.
2007-05-22 08:29:47
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Neither. The cost of a barrel of oil from overseas is decided in New York. What really gets me on this whole issue is that it costs 3 dollars to pump a barrel of oil out of Alaska, but 5 dollars to pump a barrel out in Saudi Arabia. Hmm.
2007-05-22 08:12:24
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
let's try china and india since there using so much more fuel than they use to theres not enough to go around anymore. i think its time we go back to alaska there are still alot of oil fields there that would support us for a 100 years
2007-05-22 07:14:31
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋