Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
Have a look at this
Trump was President during the time when oil prices rose a whopping 32%!
Is that his fault?
Or, is it a complex web of economic factors?
Thank you for showing how backward conservative as in preserving the status quo; all types: R, D, I and others) logic is. Your position is "anti-future." Your concern is the price of one of the top things that threatens humanity- gasoline- instead of how humanity might save itself from having (< past tense; with an 'a') the proverbial nest.
I don't think it'll get much above $5/gallon. That's a mental threshold that's going to drive people nuts and there will be more widespread insistence on doing something about it.
I don't think it'll get much above $5/gallon. That's a mental threshold that's going to drive people nuts and there will be more widespread insistence on doing something about it.
Fun poll (hopefully); assuming gas prices won't just continue to creep up forever, at what level do you think they'll peak in this current global and political climate?
Given regional pricing differences and differences in types of gasoline - let's frame the poll towards the "National Average REGULAR Grade" price of gas (don't want to shock anyone with the costs of Premium).
I voted $6.50-7.00 because at that point the economy that runs on that fuel starts to break down.
I would expect the crash to happen late June or early July.
To put it in perspective, the breaking point in 2007 was about $4.00 a gallon ($5.50 today), but there is a lot more cash in the economy today than there was then, so stagflation could see the gas peak above $6.50 before economic collpase kills demand and drives prices back down.
Thank you for showing how backward conservative as in preserving the status quo; all types: R, D, I and others) logic is. Your position is "anti-future." Your concern is the price of one of the top things that threatens humanity- gasoline- instead of how humanity might save itself from having (< past tense; with an 'a') the proverbial nest.
That isn't true, AFA "negligible downsides," but it is refreshing to observe RWE so bent out of shape over the burden of
high fuel prices on the least privileged of the U.S. population! Now, if they would only translate the intense, frequent concern
they've been expressing into transportation infrastructure and zoning reforms, as well as abandoning their obsession with regressive
taxation as expressed in their proposals to lower or eliminate state income tax and their blocking of components of BBB intended to
relief some of the economic burden and threats to the health of the least wealthy.
Without additional statewide zoning reform, Connecticut’s housing, development, and...
www.ctpost.com
May 21, 2022
October 11, 2021"
"...
IAN PARRY: The prices of fossil fuels should reflect not only the costs of producing those fuels but also the environmental costs - the carbon emissions which contribute to global climate change and emissions, which cause local air pollution, which elevate the risks of heart and strokes and lungs - lung disease for people that are exposed to that air pollution.
CORNISH: So the idea that the cost, so to speak, is borne out just in other areas of life, maybe that people aren't making a connection to.
PARRY: Yes, that's exactly right. If we undercharge for the production and environmental costs, then there's excessive consumption of fossil fuels, and there's too little investment in clean technologies.
I heard a public radio piece this week on the percentage of household expense on motor fuel and it described a recent average household
rise from 5 percent to 7 percent. IOW, this is a hyper-partisan emphasis on one of the least pressing problems most of us are grappling with!
Many of the lowest-income households spend three times more of their income on gasoline than the average household.
www.aceee.org
"...Many of the lowest-income U.S. households spend nearly one-fifth of their income on gasoline—three times more than the average U.S. household,...
these data let us estimate real-world burdens without relying on modeled monthly gasoline expenditures. We analyzed data from both the national and metropolitan samples from AHS. The metropolitan sample contains data on 24 metropolitan statistical areas and represents approximately 28% of the total U.S. population. In the national sample, low-income households had an average burden of 13.8%, compared to just 4.1% for higher-income households. A deeper dive into how gasoline costs vary by income shows that this burden is even higher, 18.3%, for the very lowest-income groups, i.e., those that earn less than $20,800 annually, indicating a need for policy interventions that focus on this population.
ACEEE’s analysis also confirms that Black, Hispanic, and Native American communities bear greater gasoline burdens than their white counterparts. Nationally, Native American households experience the highest burdens at 10.9%, followed closely by Hispanic and Black households at 9.2% and 9.1%, respectively. These burdens vary quite a bit geographically. For instance, Black households in the South Central United States (Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana) see much higher burdens than in other parts of the country. The COVID-19 pandemic has likely made some of these differences even starker.
Access to public transit and other mobility options can help address high transportation expenses for low-income households. However, public transit saw a steep drop in fare-based revenues before and during the pandemic. As a result, transit agencies have been forced to roll back service and infrastructure expansion. Because public transit disproportionately serves low-income residents and commuters of color, these changes have a direct impact on the affordability and accessibility of transportation for the most economically vulnerable households.
That isn't true, AFA "negligible downsides," but it is refreshing to observe RWE so bent out of shape over the burden of
high fuel prices on the least privileged of the U.S. population! Now, if they would only translate the intense, frequent concern
they've been expressing into transportation infrastructure and zoning reforms, as well as abandoning their obsession with regressive
taxation as expressed in their proposals to lower or eliminate state income tax and their blocking of components of BBB intended to
relief some of the economic burden and threats to the health of the least wealthy.
Without additional statewide zoning reform, Connecticut’s housing, development, and...
www.ctpost.com
May 21, 2022
October 11, 2021"
"...
IAN PARRY: The prices of fossil fuels should reflect not only the costs of producing those fuels but also the environmental costs - the carbon emissions which contribute to global climate change and emissions, which cause local air pollution, which elevate the risks of heart and strokes and lungs - lung disease for people that are exposed to that air pollution.
CORNISH: So the idea that the cost, so to speak, is borne out just in other areas of life, maybe that people aren't making a connection to.
PARRY: Yes, that's exactly right. If we undercharge for the production and environmental costs, then there's excessive consumption of fossil fuels, and there's too little investment in clean technologies.
I heard a public radio piece this week on the percentage of household expense on motor fuel and it described a recent average household
rise from 5 percent to 7 percent. IOW, this is a hyper-partisan emphasis on one of the least pressing problems most of us are grappling with!
Many of the lowest-income households spend three times more of their income on gasoline than the average household.
www.aceee.org
"...Many of the lowest-income U.S. households spend nearly one-fifth of their income on gasoline—three times more than the average U.S. household,...
these data let us estimate real-world burdens without relying on modeled monthly gasoline expenditures. We analyzed data from both the national and metropolitan samples from AHS. The metropolitan sample contains data on 24 metropolitan statistical areas and represents approximately 28% of the total U.S. population. In the national sample, low-income households had an average burden of 13.8%, compared to just 4.1% for higher-income households. A deeper dive into how gasoline costs vary by income shows that this burden is even higher, 18.3%, for the very lowest-income groups, i.e., those that earn less than $20,800 annually, indicating a need for policy interventions that focus on this population.
ACEEE’s analysis also confirms that Black, Hispanic, and Native American communities bear greater gasoline burdens than their white counterparts. Nationally, Native American households experience the highest burdens at 10.9%, followed closely by Hispanic and Black households at 9.2% and 9.1%, respectively. These burdens vary quite a bit geographically. For instance, Black households in the South Central United States (Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana) see much higher burdens than in other parts of the country. The COVID-19 pandemic has likely made some of these differences even starker.
Access to public transit and other mobility options can help address high transportation expenses for low-income households. However, public transit saw a steep drop in fare-based revenues before and during the pandemic. As a result, transit agencies have been forced to roll back service and infrastructure expansion. Because public transit disproportionately serves low-income residents and commuters of color, these changes have a direct impact on the affordability and accessibility of transportation for the most economically vulnerable households.
Do you respond to everything with a wall of text? You have written so much that I can’t even respond to what you’ve written within the character limit. Shorten this out a bit.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
www.forbes.com
(< past tense; with an 'a') the proverbial nest.
fortune.com
www.ctpost.com
en.wikipedia.org
www.aceee.org
