Kansas Crimson

KUTradition wrote: ↑Tue Nov 14, 2023 11:31 am https://fortune.com/2023/11/14/why-is-j ... class/amp/

Shirley wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 8:56 am Crude oil down another $2.45 today to ~ $74/barrel. Heading for its 4th weekly decline in a row.

Thanks, Brandon!

JKLivin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 9:19 am

Shirley wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 8:56 am Crude oil down another $2.45 today to ~ $74/barrel. Heading for its 4th weekly decline in a row.

Thanks, Brandon!

Weird. You'd think there was an election on the horizon and his approval numbers were in the toilet or something.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 9:34 am

JKLivin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 9:19 am

Shirley wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 8:56 am Crude oil down another $2.45 today to ~ $74/barrel. Heading for its 4th weekly decline in a row.

Thanks, Brandon!

Weird. You'd think there was an election on the horizon and his approval numbers were in the toilet or something.

So, unpack this for me. When there is bad economic news, it’s Biden’s fault. When there is good economic news, it’s election interference?

JKLivin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 9:46 am

jfish26 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 9:34 am

JKLivin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 9:19 am

Weird. You'd think there was an election on the horizon and his approval numbers were in the toilet or something.

So, unpack this for me. When there is bad economic news, it’s Biden’s fault. When there is good economic news, it’s election interference?

I think the news and data are manipulated to impact public mood and perception regardless of which faux party is in power. What is real is what individuals are experiencing.

JKLivin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 9:46 am

jfish26 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 9:34 am

JKLivin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 9:19 am

Weird. You'd think there was an election on the horizon and his approval numbers were in the toilet or something.

So, unpack this for me. When there is bad economic news, it’s Biden’s fault. When there is good economic news, it’s election interference?

I think the news and data are manipulated to impact public mood and perception regardless of which faux party is in power. What is real is what individuals are experiencing.

jhawks99 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 10:57 am

JKLivin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 9:46 am

jfish26 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 9:34 am

So, unpack this for me. When there is bad economic news, it’s Biden’s fault. When there is good economic news, it’s election interference?

I think the news and data are manipulated to impact public mood and perception regardless of which faux party is in power. What is real is what individuals are experiencing.

I'm experiencing lower gas prices

RainbowsandUnicorns wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:02 am

jhawks99 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 10:57 am

JKLivin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 9:46 am

I think the news and data are manipulated to impact public mood and perception regardless of which faux party is in power. What is real is what individuals are experiencing.

I'm experiencing lower gas prices

I wish I was smart enough to understand what is ultimately better for the entire country (not just the "consumer") - cheap gasoline or expensive gasoline?
Can/will someone with an IQ of more than 80 please chime in?

jfish26 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:17 am

RainbowsandUnicorns wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:02 am

jhawks99 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 10:57 am

I'm experiencing lower gas prices

I wish I was smart enough to understand what is ultimately better for the entire country (not just the "consumer") - cheap gasoline or expensive gasoline?
Can/will someone with an IQ of more than 80 please chime in?

Much more robust long-, medium- and short-haul public transit (rail especially) is what's best for the country.

But of course that would require massive public investment, and 1/3 of our country thinks public investment = Communism.

Which brings me around to answering your question: in my opinion, what would be best for the country is gas that is MORE expensive (because of increased consumption taxes that are used to fund (and also encourage the use of) rail and other public transit).

MICHHAWK wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:37 am uncle should run on that in 24. "i vow to deliver expensive gas and increased consumption taxes."

can you fit all that on a standard size yard sign.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:40 am

MICHHAWK wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:37 am uncle should run on that in 24. "i vow to deliver expensive gas and increased consumption taxes."

can you fit all that on a standard size yard sign.

Excellent contribution - and squarely responsive to what’s being discussed - as usual.

Shirley wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 4:31 pm It doesn't matter what we, or even someone with a high IQ like Psych, thinks. The question was answered decades ago in 1986, when republican Dick Cheney introduced legislation that was designed to raise the price of gas for all Americans:

In October 1986, when Dick Cheney was the lone congressman from energy-rich Wyoming, he introduced legislation to create a new import tax that would have caused the price of oil, and ultimately the price of gasoline paid by drivers, to soar by billions of dollars per year.

''Let us rid ourselves of the fiction that low oil prices are somehow good for the United States,'' Mr. Cheney, who is now vice president, said shortly after introducing the legislation.

Oil prices had plunged to $15 from nearly $40 a barrel in the early 1980's, as Saudi Arabia flooded world markets, and Mr. Cheney argued the tax was needed to stabilize oil-state economies devastated as a result. But other lawmakers, including some Republicans, criticized the Cheney plan and similar proposals as ''snake oil'' that would throw 400,000 Americans out of work. They also said then, as President Bush does now, that higher taxes would stall the economy.

Renewed attention on Mr. Cheney's plan, which Democrats dusted off and talked about on the Senate floor last week, offers another wrinkle in this year's politicized debate about gas prices, which hit a record-high average of $1.76 last week for a gallon of regular. While gas prices may remain a presidential campaign issue if they do not decline, they are still well below the inflation-adjusted high of nearly $3 in March 1981.

[...]

Shirley wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 4:31 pm It doesn't matter what we, or even someone with a high IQ like Psych, thinks. The question was answered decades ago in 1986, when republican Dick Cheney introduced legislation that was designed to raise the price of gas for all Americans:

In October 1986, when Dick Cheney was the lone congressman from energy-rich Wyoming, he introduced legislation to create a new import tax that would have caused the price of oil, and ultimately the price of gasoline paid by drivers, to soar by billions of dollars per year.

''Let us rid ourselves of the fiction that low oil prices are somehow good for the United States,'' Mr. Cheney, who is now vice president, said shortly after introducing the legislation.

Oil prices had plunged to $15 from nearly $40 a barrel in the early 1980's, as Saudi Arabia flooded world markets, and Mr. Cheney argued the tax was needed to stabilize oil-state economies devastated as a result. But other lawmakers, including some Republicans, criticized the Cheney plan and similar proposals as ''snake oil'' that would throw 400,000 Americans out of work. They also said then, as President Bush does now, that higher taxes would stall the economy.

Renewed attention on Mr. Cheney's plan, which Democrats dusted off and talked about on the Senate floor last week, offers another wrinkle in this year's politicized debate about gas prices, which hit a record-high average of $1.76 last week for a gallon of regular. While gas prices may remain a presidential campaign issue if they do not decline, they are still well below the inflation-adjusted high of nearly $3 in March 1981.

[...]

JKLivin wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 6:34 pm

Shirley wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 4:31 pm It doesn't matter what we, or even someone with a high IQ like Psych, thinks. The question was answered decades ago in 1986, when republican Dick Cheney introduced legislation that was designed to raise the price of gas for all Americans:

In October 1986, when Dick Cheney was the lone congressman from energy-rich Wyoming, he introduced legislation to create a new import tax that would have caused the price of oil, and ultimately the price of gasoline paid by drivers, to soar by billions of dollars per year.

''Let us rid ourselves of the fiction that low oil prices are somehow good for the United States,'' Mr. Cheney, who is now vice president, said shortly after introducing the legislation.

Oil prices had plunged to $15 from nearly $40 a barrel in the early 1980's, as Saudi Arabia flooded world markets, and Mr. Cheney argued the tax was needed to stabilize oil-state economies devastated as a result. But other lawmakers, including some Republicans, criticized the Cheney plan and similar proposals as ''snake oil'' that would throw 400,000 Americans out of work. They also said then, as President Bush does now, that higher taxes would stall the economy.

Renewed attention on Mr. Cheney's plan, which Democrats dusted off and talked about on the Senate floor last week, offers another wrinkle in this year's politicized debate about gas prices, which hit a record-high average of $1.76 last week for a gallon of regular. While gas prices may remain a presidential campaign issue if they do not decline, they are still well below the inflation-adjusted high of nearly $3 in March 1981.

[...]

If you think I’m a fan of the likes of any member of the Cheney clan, then you really haven’t been paying attention.