It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do falling gas prices spell recession?

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 21 2011 @ 07:54 PM
link   
SAY WHAT!!!!!

I did a double take too... you are not alone...
My whole view of this is that this is pure propaganda...

Title of thread




Sick of high energy prices? You may soon have more relief than you'd like.

After two commodity price spikes in four years, $100-a-barrel crude and $4-a-gallon gasoline are starting to seem like the new normal -- the price we pay, unhappily enough, for an expanding economy. Every twitch in the Middle East sounds the alarm for a new oil shock.


so far what is the big deal....

OPEC controlling factor of America and the gov bowing down and kissing #$%

We knew this...




But those cursing the wallet-thinning impact of high energy prices should be careful what they wish for. Sagging economic expectations, after all, are the likeliest route to lower energy costs, as we have seen with the recent decline in oil prices.

Retail gas prices haven't come down much yet, averaging $3.91 a gallon at last check -- a sign, says oil watcher Richard Soultanian, that "maybe even the refiners don't trust the pullback in crude prices." But if current trends continue, the pullback could go further than people expect.

There are plenty of signs economic growth is slowing. U.S. gasoline demand has fallen more than 2% over the past year, suggesting that high prices have already started to weigh on the economy. Uber-bear David Rosenberg cites recent declines in architectural billings, small business optimism, house price and manufacturing indexes. Goldman Sachs strategists note that while manufacturing employment has rebounded, recent gains are proceeding at just a quarter of the pace of the average monthly manufacturing job loss (a depressing 52,000) over the past decade.


Let me get this straight...

Gas prices falling is bad

it will be because cost are high...


Note: we were ALL told earlier that the cost where high because the rise in cost of gas...

This sounds like psychological manipulation and you remove the reasons behind this...


Well let me put it another way...

This is part of an all out attack on the american way...

It is being lead by an un-named misguided anti- colonial leader..




Listen you lower pressures in a system from a higher point the system will not go into shock it will relax at first...

The cost of gas lowered, means that other prices must go down ( price gouging laws)

food, electricity, all consumer goods...

means more revenue for the states and feds......

(BTW WHERE are the states complaining on this....
)


I see this as what it is.... liberal propaganda.... ( well the price went down so we do not need to drill, ect...)




I want to add a prediction here... Using my superpower of common sense...

I see the challenger that calls this out on those in charge now having a new title in 2013...

President of the United States...




posted on May, 21 2011 @ 07:57 PM
link   
Lower gas means lower cost

lower cost mean competitors can lower prices to take customers....

lower cost mean you might get to eat something other then pb and j


And you want the kicker... if I was a democrat leader I would back this and more drilling ....

You know why...

The nation might could actually AFFORD Pelosi-care



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 08:03 PM
link   
ABC... Gas Prices.....




Oil Price Drops Below $100 a Barrel: Gas Continues to Go Up


Gas prices continue to rise -- even while the oil used to make it drops in price, say analysts.

The national average price for gas this week is $3.96, according to the Department of Energy.

Hawaii still has the nation's most expensive gasoline as of today, but the nation's heartland is catching up. In Illinois, the average price is $4.32 a gallon, according to AAA's Daily Fuel Gauge Report. That's even higher than the average in California, $4.27, which is known for its high pump prices.

Indiana is catching up with an average of $4.24 for regular gas.

At least drivers in those states are facing cheaper prices than those in Alaska. At one gas station in that state, gas was selling for $6.79 a gallon.

To top those prices, just head to the car rental counter. You may face $9.29 a gallon if you don't prepay for gas or fill up the tank yourself. With an 11-gallon tank in one car, for example, car renters could pay about $100. For larger vehicles, it could cost over $280.


read the whole article

I call BS...

it is part of grand strategy



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 08:03 PM
link   
my fox orlando



Gas prices going down? Not so fast

Updated: Tuesday, 10 May 2011, 9:47 PM EDT
Published : Tuesday, 10 May 2011, 9:47 PM EDT

ORLANDO, Fla. (WOFL FOX 35) - Some reports have indicated that consumers could see a roughly 50 cent drop in prices at the pump in coming weeks, but at least one central Florida economist says don't expect that to happen any time soon.




I went to the bottom and followed a link

My fox business- ...oil....




It happens every time the rising price of crude oil pushes a gallon of gasoline toward $4 in the U.S. -- the debate over the role of speculators in commodities markets grows louder and sharper.

Do speculators -- that is, traders who purchase futures contracts purely for profit and with no intention of taking delivery of the product -- play a necessary role in creating liquid markets for everything from oil to orange juice? Or do they manipulate prices for their own benefit often at the expense of consumers?


After reading these articles I am seriously considering clep all of this for my piled higher and deeper
edit on 21-5-2011 by ripcontrol because: not a double post now...



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 08:12 PM
link   
Prices are set by supply and demand. (And inflation but that's another story) Our production of oil peaked in 2005 and we haven't been able to increase it very much with alternatives since then. We all observed the effects of this in 2008 when oil prices hit all time highs of $148 US dollars a barrel.

Here is the daily production of oil plus condensate for the world notice no increase in production.

EIA crude + condensate, rounded off to nearest one mbpd & Annual US spot crude oil prices:

2002: 67 mbpd & $26



2003: 69 mbpd & $31

2004: 72 mbpd & $42

2005: 74 mbpd & $57



2006: 73 mbpd & $66



2007: 73 mbpd & $72

2008: 74 mbpd & $100



2009: 72 mbpd & $62



2010: 74 mbpd & $79



Before 2005 world oil supply always increased year over year except for a couple of years in the 1970's because of the OPEC oil embargo. The world has come to expect that oil supply will always increase year over year. This expectation creates additional demand every year, but what happens if one year out of the blue oil production cannot increase to meet demand. This is the moment peak oil theorists have been talking about for years and we hit that point in the 4th quarter of 2007 when demand was greater than supply. Economics 101 dictates that when this happens prices must increase.

Here's is Boone Pickens breaking down what I wrote above www.youtube.com...

This website and article are great resources in understanding the reality of peak oil.
edit on 21-5-2011 by epsilon69 because: spelling



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by ripcontrol
 


Is your headline kidding?

Falling prices only mean one things to the oil companies, that their profit ratios are diminishing as they bleed the public dry and if they lower the prices, they can reinstall the desired level of profit by increasing demand for the product.

Capitalism at work. Supply and demand. And there probably isn't a better system to present the needs of the masses to the masses--unless you have a tight govermental control system in place which ain't gonna happen here.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Nevermind........

edit on 21-5-2011 by Jetman44 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by epsilon69
 


OPECs back needs to be broken...

the idea is sound but flawed very flawed...

OPEC is an artificial manipulation entity... it acts as a oligopoly

oilgopoly




An oligopoly is a market form in which a market or industry is dominated by a small number of sellers (oligopolists). The word is derived, by analogy with "monopoly", from the Greek ὀλίγοι (oligoi) "few" + πωλειν (polein) "to sell". Because there are few sellers, each oligopolist is likely to be aware of the actions of the others. The decisions of one firm influence, and are influenced by, the decisions of other firms. Strategic planning by oligopolists needs to take into account the likely responses of the other market participants.



I believe in fact that they violate the sherman anti-trust act... another thread for another day...

this makes it not a free market but a highly manipulated one... hence the failure of what information is being used here... the market does not function in this case as the example is based on...



and this describes now perfectly




In an oligopoly, firms operate under imperfect competition. With the fierce price competitiveness created by this sticky-upward demand curve, firms use non-price competition in order to accrue greater revenue and market share.

"Kinked" demand curves are similar to traditional demand curves, as they are downward-sloping. They are distinguished by a hypothesized convex bend with a discontinuity at the bend–"kink". Thus the first derivative at that point is undefined and leads to a jump discontinuity in the marginal revenue curve.

Classical economic theory assumes that a profit-maximizing producer with some market power (either due to oligopoly or monopolistic competition) will set marginal costs equal to marginal revenue. This idea can be envisioned graphically by the intersection of an upward-sloping marginal cost curve and a downward-sloping marginal revenue curve (because the more one sells, the lower the price must be, so the less a producer earns per unit). In classical theory, any change in the marginal cost structure (how much it costs to make each additional unit) or the marginal revenue structure (how much people will pay for each additional unit) will be immediately reflected in a new price and/or quantity sold of the item. This result does not occur if a "kink" exists. Because of this jump discontinuity in the marginal revenue curve, marginal costs could change without necessarily changing the price or quantity.

The motivation behind this kink is the idea that in an oligopolistic or monopolistically competitive market, firms will not raise their prices because even a small price increase will lose many customers. This is because competitors will generally ignore price increases, with the hope of gaining a larger market share as a result of now having comparatively lower prices. However, even a large price decrease will gain only a few customers because such an action will begin a price war with other firms. The curve is therefore more price-elastic for price increases and less so for price decreases. Firms will often enter the industry in the long run.


note the last part
edit on 21-5-2011 by ripcontrol because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 11:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Aliensun
 


your preaching to the choir with me...

you can get an amen...



the title was the title of the article



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Jetman44
 


all opinion welcomed...

most will be argued with...




posted on May, 22 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by ripcontrol
 


How exactly do you propose we break up OPEC? They have what we need and short of military force they would laugh in our face at attempts to break them up, because guess what if we don't buy their oil our economy will collapse; civil unrest will kick in; and China will pick up the slack and it's economy would grow at an unprecedented rate.

OPEC holds all the bargaining chips and the U.S with its weakening global influence does not have the strength short of war to do anything about it.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by epsilon69
 


Proper pre planning prevents piss poor performance

the great seven P's


To borrow a quote from road house

"We politely ask them first..."

when they say no

"We politely ask again"

when they say no

"We ask again..."


Of course remember we have the most powerful military in the world... and one of the most powerful spy agencies....

They all meet together in one location.... We have this conversation with them at this location...


Remember OPEC is a bunch of criminals and should be treated as such....



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ripcontrol
 


Threaten WWIII while you're at it. The Chinese and Russians would never let the United States take OPEC's oil by force, they have drawn a line in the sand. Remember this? Bombers to Venezuela

What about this Russia Iran Nuclear deal. It seems to me like the rest of the world has said enough to U.S imperialism over a finite resource that we all require to keep domestic and international peace, not to mention is required to feed the 7 billion people alive. Food riots in middle east.

The U.S could theoretically "deal" with OPEC the way you said but thermonuclear war would likely be the result. Even the neocons were not stupid enough to invade Iran because they new what the result would be. This same result is also likely if the U.S invades Pakistan, a nation with a nuclear arsenal now being backed by the Chinese.

You and our politicians think alike. You both think that the U.S can do what ever it wants whenever it wants and thinking like that will lead to the destruction of all life on this planet if it is allowed to continue. Instead of killing all life on this planet, you should use your energy and remaining years to find way to live without cheap oil (perma-culture, local farming, alternative energy). Does that sound reasonable to you; Caesar?



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by epsilon69
 


you assume...

The title is not Ceaser it is evil overlord

they are human and quite greedy...

did you ask if I was cutting them in... nope...
Why should those little guys control it when the US, Russia, UK, Japan, China, Germany, and Israel are the powers....

Our economies should not be tied down to these weasels... I am not bringing about your precious WWIII , its bad for business...

what you refuse to see is the fact you have been sold a bill of goods...

All the tech is at least three to ten years out... you are dreaming...


BTW yes I intend to finish up formation of my company by next month... part of what you say is below what I will be making money on....

hydroponics on an industrial scale... 3 yrs

Vast reservoirs of water, 4 to 5 yrs

Stable bee colonies, 2 to 3 yrs


ect...


The company is aiming for water control and food production control....

you asked....
edit on 23-5-2011 by ripcontrol because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by epsilon69
 


also reasonable has nothing to do with it...

and thank you I am thinking about joining the rigging contest of 2012...


I would also suggest if your are so passionate about what you think will work... but together a business plan and submit me a copy

I would love to invest in company that promises to bring those to market in the next year....



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by ripcontrol
I see the challenger that calls this out on those in charge now having a new title in 2013...

President of the United States...


Then that would be Ron Paul.

He's been calling them out for over 20 years.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Freenrgy2
 


using a recent lesson I got reminded of....

He needs to slow his roll on pick his shots... then yeah definitely it would be mister president



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join