Hawkeye wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 12:12 pm
I’m hearing you say that voters will vote for Biden if he puts them through more pain than not. Interesting theory.
Then you have misinterpreted what I'm saying. I'm saying that if Biden gets gas down enough, he'll get more votes.
You’ve stated that Biden has forced gas prices up. That the increases are his fault, more or less. Your clarification above only makes sense if you abandon those earlier assertions. Otherwise, what you’ve said comes down to (1) Biden making gas prices go up, then (2) bringing them down enough to make more people vote for him.
If Biden caused gas to go up more than he made the price decline afterwards, then Biden voters end up supporting him for putting them through more economic pain than not. Even if the price comes back down to the
same level as before the increase, voters will have paid more during the time of higher prices … which represented economic pain.
Is that how you see it?
You’ve mentioned the EPA again. When you make these types of claims, I ask you to point out what the EPA has done under Biden that is having a deleterious effect on … anything. You never seem up for answering that question. How about today?
I've pointed this out many times. Biden's pledge to end fossil fuels has spooked investors. You can't get people to invest money into drilling or fracking oil when you plan to outlaw it in a few years. That means high gas prices for the Democrat masses. There aren't enough liberal economic elites to win an election on $5/gallon gasoline.
As Binger would say, you’ve inserted a few presuppositions in there. To start, no one - not Biden, especially - has proposed that fracking be completely banned. Fracking is responsible for a huge amount of current US production. What Biden proposed was no
new fracking on
new leases issued for
Fed land and had no effect on existing leases, or on
private land.
Consider, also, that your statement implies a serious problem. If you suggest that US production will be terribly adversely affected by not being able to continually issue fresh permits on new Fed land leases, then you’re implying that our supply isn’t keeping up with demand. That should tell you that we have serious energy supply issues down the road and need to look at other ways to avoid your impending shortages. In other words, that ‘drilling ourselves out of the problem’ isn’t going to be realized, and a total dependency on gas may not be smart or manageable.
But current fuel prices aren’t driven by investors, anyway. Current pricing is driven by brokers, traders, and
current supply. To imply that the big money won’t invest into Big Oil because of anything that Biden has to say about fracking is ignoring the reality of what has actually/always driven pricing at the pump. And to assume that producers and refiners don’t have plans lined up for a future that may see less extraction is to accuse the entire industry of being incredibly short-sighted and devoid of vision.