Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Are you including me as a Biden defender? I was only defending the truth, with facts. I'm curious, how is the president responsible for gas prices exactly?
Hint: They aren't!
Completely incorrect - average cost of gas when Biden took office was $2.39/gal (not the $5 biden claimed) - it is currently $3.82/gal (not the $3.39 claimed) - about 60% increase. Gas prices were $3.53 when Russia attacked and rose about $0.50 in the week that followed and peaked at nearly $5 this last summer. The admin is responsible for at least some of the $1.24 increase in that first year and probably some of the increase since due to policies they implemented.
Biden did several things that directly impacted gas prices before Russia drove it higher. The very first day, he cancelled the Keystone XL pipeline and suspended a bunch of pending oil and gas leases that would increase production and reduce costs. Biden also sent unclear signals about fossil fuels to oil companies that may be looking for reasons to invest. All of those are costs that need to be recouped and cause existing wells to be more valuable, increasing prices.
The Environmental Protection Agency put in place new regulations governing methane emissions from oil and gas production, transmission, storage, and distribution that are expected to cost more than $1 billion a year. The Build Back Better included new taxes on natural gas, home heating and includes higher taxes on petroleum and manufacturing - you are paying for these bills in higher gas costs also.
Biden may not "control" gas prices but he clearly implemented many programs that drove gas prices up significantly. Biden's false claims about gas prices has been widely discredited by almost all news sources and factcheck sites.
Another thing to note is that the latest jobs report shows an increase in available positions. As with most false narratives you've shared so far, we still aren't showing signs of a recession.
We have already met the technical definition that indicates the US is in a recession - so not a "false narrative" to say that a recession is occuring. From investopedia "two consecutive quarters of decline in gross domestic product (GDP) constitute a recession" - Oxford dictionary has a similar definition " identified by a fall in GDP in two successive quarters" That occurred in the first 2 quarters this year.
As far as "signs" of recession - the indications are pretty clear that a recession is occurring. The 15 data points in the Forbes Advisor recession tracker had the following grades: Good: 5, Neutral: 1, Bad: 9 - while these items are not equally weighted, the overall signs are fairly clear. Bottom line is that other than jobs, most signs are of the recession continuing.
Completely incorrect - average cost of gas when Biden took office was $2.39/gal (not the $5 biden claimed) - it is currently $3.82/gal (not the $3.39 claimed) - about 60% increase. Gas prices were $3.53 when Russia attacked and rose about $0.50 in the week that followed and peaked at nearly $5 this last summer. The admin is responsible for at least some of the $1.24 increase in that first year and probably some of the increase since due to policies they implemented.
Biden did several things that directly impacted gas prices before Russia drove it higher. The very first day, he cancelled the Keystone XL pipeline and suspended a bunch of pending oil and gas leases that would increase production and reduce costs. Biden also sent unclear signals about fossil fuels to oil companies that may be looking for reasons to invest. All of those are costs that need to be recouped and cause existing wells to be more valuable, increasing prices.
The Environmental Protection Agency put in place new regulations governing methane emissions from oil and gas production, transmission, storage, and distribution that are expected to cost more than $1 billion a year. The Build Back Better included new taxes on natural gas, home heating and includes higher taxes on petroleum and manufacturing - you are paying for these bills in higher gas costs also.
Biden may not "control" gas prices but he clearly implemented many programs that drove gas prices up significantly. Biden's false claims about gas prices has been widely discredited by almost all news sources and factcheck sites.
Completely incorrect? Uh no. I gave a source to confirm that the president doesn't have much pull in gas prices. Prices are set primary by the UAE and supply/demand. YOU even confirm above that Biden doesn't control gas prices, so why are we arguing?
Biden's decision to cancel the Keystone pipeline had an effect on the available supply but if you remember there were A LOT of people who didn't want that pipeline. Biden was doing the democratic thing and protecting sacred land and the environment. The pipeline wouldn't have been operational until 2023 at the earliest so it wouldn't have had any impact on today's prices if it was approved. To count this in your argument would be a logic fallacy. It's a red herring argument that has no impact on the current issues with gas prices.
The build back better plan was designed to tax our way out of inflation, in addition to the rising the interest rates. Both are aggressive measures necessary to ease inflation. Energy has always been one of the easier things to tax and this is no different but you are correct that the extra taxes are directly related to the presidents decisions, along with the rest of congress who had to approve it. Still, it was not a direct tax on gasoline. Perhaps the methane tax will affect gas prices in the long term but it's impossible to predict how much. Regardless, it still doesn't impact current prices so please stop giving straw man arguments that have no impact on the debate at hand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddeemo
We have already met the technical definition that indicates the US is in a recession - so not a "false narrative" to say that a recession is occuring. From investopedia "two consecutive quarters of decline in gross domestic product (GDP) constitute a recession" - Oxford dictionary has a similar definition " identified by a fall in GDP in two successive quarters" That occurred in the first 2 quarters this year.
As far as "signs" of recession - the indications are pretty clear that a recession is occurring. The 15 data points in the Forbes Advisor recession tracker had the following grades: Good: 5, Neutral: 1, Bad: 9 - while these items are not equally weighted, the overall signs are fairly clear. Bottom line is that other than jobs, most signs are of the recession continuing.
We just had a quarter of growth so no, we are not in a recession under your own definition, that's what my point is. I would say it's likely we will enter a recession but I can't say when. Here is a quote from Forbes Advisor, your own credited source;
The 15 data points in the Forbes Advisor recession tracker had the following grades:
Good: 5
Neutral: 1
Bad: 9 The economy may not officially be in a recession, but it’s not looking good. Remember that not every data point we rank above would be weighted equally in deciding whether the U.S. is in recession.
The strongest parts of the economy are concentrated in the labor market, thanks to low unemployment and many unfilled jobs.
Were we in a recession in the past two quarters? Many economists say defining a recession as just two quarters of negative growth isn't enough to measure. It needs to coincide with a loss in jobs or wage growth, neither of which was occurring in those same quarters. I'll call it a "recession light" for now. Not saying a full blown recession isn't coming. In fact, I would say a recession is likely and since an economy is a slow moving machine I blame the war in Ukraine and sanctions, COVID lockdowns, and completely out of control spending by the feds as the main culprits. I am not going to blame Trump or Biden directly for such things. It's government intervention worldwide that caused it. Many economies locked down during COVID and we are in a globalized economy. You can't do something that drastic and not end up hurting at the end. Some of the measures taken by the fed have helped delay the inevitable but I still think a recession is coming.
Last edited by ChiGuy2.5; 11-02-2022 at 09:14 AM..
Biden wasn't handed a recession. The economy was humming along for Trump's first three years and then the Covid panic set in.
What Biden did Day 1 of his mis-administration is shut down the Keystone pipeline project and inform the oil and gas industry that he would be putting road blocks in their pathway. And the USA went from being energy independent under Trump to dependent under Biden.
Slow Joe's begging of a reluctant Saudi Arabia to pump more IN TIME FOR THE MIDTERMS is just one of the many facts of Biden's utter incompetence.
Biden IS to blame for the inflation and the recession we are currently in.
You nailed it.
While Biden is at the helm, he has made bad business decisions, one after another.
Some people don’t realize that the United States of America is a business. Biden has zero business accumen. He doesn’t know how to run a business. He doesn’t know how to negotiate with suppliers.
He’s just a guy, who has no clue what it takes to run a successful business. A kindergartner has as much experience as Biden does, when it comes to the private sector.
Lately, he biggest challenge has been which flavor of ice cream to choose at 31Flavors. (And this is a toughy for him, too.)
Maybe the ice cream thing is the limit of his capabilities…
You nailed it.
While Biden is at the helm, he has made bad business decisions, one after another.
Some people don’t realize that the United States of America is a business. Biden has zero business accumen. He doesn’t know how to run a business. He doesn’t know how to negotiate with suppliers.
He’s just a guy, who has no clue what it takes to run a successful business. A kindergartner has as much experience as Biden does, when it comes to the private sector.
Lately, he biggest challenge has been which flavor of ice cream to choose at 31Flavors. (And this is a toughy for him, too.)
Maybe the ice cream thing is the limit of his capabilities…
Bad decisions or not, the USA is NOT a business. I don't know of any business that has it's own currency and is able to run a deficit. I don't know of any business that can manipulate it's revenues through new taxes.
I don't know what makes a businessman bad or good. Hell, I don't know what makes a politician good or bad. I do have my opinions on what economic and social policies are good or bad but if the USA were intended to be run like a business neither of those things should matter to it...
I'm genuinely curious what bad BUSINESS decisions he has made? What are the business decisions that presidents have to make?
Bad decisions or not, the USA is NOT a business. I don't know of any business that has it's own currency and is able to run a deficit. I don't know of any business that can manipulate it's revenues through new taxes.
I don't know what makes a businessman bad or good. Hell, I don't know what makes a politician good or bad. I do have my opinions on what economic and social policies are good or bad but if the USA were intended to be run like a business neither of those things should matter to it...
I'm genuinely curious what bad BUSINESS decisions he has made? What are the business decisions that presidents have to make?
Be happy to help you out.
The decisions that a sitting President makes ARE business decisions. He(or she) must negotiate agreements (deals) with foreign entities. Those would be called "competition." These can be anything from nuke arms sales to monetary agreements. (Also, other Countries to keep nuke arms out of the hands of those that want to kill us.) Sadly, this list is always growing, but I digress.
You mention above..."don't know of any business that can manipulate it's revenues thru taxes." I'm trying to think of a large employer that does not do this. Either thru losses, depreciation, or other costs.
As far as having one's "own currency" you're totally missing the point. (The Bureau of Engraving & Printing, prints $529 million a day, btw.) They use 18.5 tons of ink, per day. Let that sink in.
Since you've pointed out obvious differences, let's try for some similarities.
Both US Gov't and businesses are taxing authorities.
Both US Gov't and businesses have employees.
Both US Gov't and businesses have " P & L" statements.
Both US Gov't and business have competition.
Both US Gov't and businesses have a "President" that is ultimately responsible for the "health" of that entity.
Think of a "board of directors" as cabinet positions.
There's probably millions more examples, but I gotta catch final jeopardy. Have a good evening!
The decisions that a sitting President makes ARE business decisions. He(or she) must negotiate agreements (deals) with foreign entities. Those would be called "competition." These can be anything from nuke arms sales to monetary agreements. (Also, other Countries to keep nuke arms out of the hands of those that want to kill us.) Sadly, this list is always growing, but I digress.
You mention above..."don't know of any business that can manipulate it's revenues thru taxes." I'm trying to think of a large employer that does not do this. Either thru losses, depreciation, or other costs.
As far as having one's "own currency" you're totally missing the point. (The Bureau of Engraving & Printing, prints $529 million a day, btw.) They use 18.5 tons of ink, per day. Let that sink in.
Since you've pointed out obvious differences, let's try for some similarities.
Both US Gov't and businesses are taxing authorities.
Both US Gov't and businesses have employees.
Both US Gov't and businesses have " P & L" statements.
Both US Gov't and business have competition.
Both US Gov't and businesses have a "President" that is ultimately responsible for the "health" of that entity.
Think of a "board of directors" as cabinet positions.
There's probably millions more examples, but I gotta catch final jeopardy. Have a good evening!
The president doesn't have to negotiate arms deals with other entities, that's actually handled by the department of defense. The president only has to determine whether or not the pentagon is allowed to sell those arms to that country. The president is far too high level to sit in meetings and determine how many arms or at what price. There is no negotiations being had.
Writing off assets for depreciation is not making any change to the revenue the company posts. That's not at all the same thing. Depreciation is used to recuperate upfront costs you pay for an asset over time. That tax write off would not show up in revenues. Product losses are also a write off, not the same as a revenue.
Being able to control your own currency is exactly the point we are discussing. You claim the government is like a business and one of the major reasons it isn't is because it controls it's own currency. How is that missing the point? A business cannot print more money when it needs it to invest in things. The government is able to fund it's own expansion projects without the need of investors or banks, that's huge! I don't know how that would be missing the point.
The only thing business acumen can benefit the president is in their soft skills. Stuff like the ability to present in front of large groups and be a likeable personality.
Let me break down this last part:
Both US Gov't and businesses are taxing authorities. - Businesses do not tax anyone. Have you ever been taxed by a business?
Both US Gov't and businesses have employees. This is true!
Both US Gov't and businesses have " P & L" statements. Not true. The US Government does not turn a profit, that's on purpose actually. The government has revenues and expenses like a business. However, as I mentioned before they do not need to turn a profit because they control their own currency. Governments are better off operating at a loss because it means they are injecting currency into the economy. If a government did truly make a profit it would actually shrink the available money supply and cause deflation. So governments CHOOSE to operate at a loss and grow the deficit to keep a slight inflation. That's the sweet spot in economics.
Both US Gov't and business have competition. I can see what you're saying here but it's not the same. Sure, we need to compete globally for exports and imports but governments don't need to "compete". Tax revenue is guaranteed regardless so it's not like government could go bankrupt if they don't compete.
Both US Gov't and businesses have a "President" that is ultimately responsible for the "health" of that entity. A president has a term limit whereas a CEO or president of a company wouldn't. Thats a significant difference when you consider that 4 years isn't a very long time to get much done. Also the motivations for the two are totally different. The president needs to satisfy their constituents and lobbyists (policy focused) whereas a CEO would need to satisfy it's board and stockholders (primarily money driven).
Think of a "board of directors" as cabinet positions. I disagree. I would think the C suite would be the cabinet positions as they directly support the president in his duties. If anything the presidential "board of directors" would be their constituents or those who they made promises to when running for office. It's the presidents job to carry out their vision of what the country should be.
This guy, Biden, is Jimmy Carter 2.0 and I was under 10 at the time. Biden is far, far worse and a narcissist.
He is just an absolute disgrace. I'm not a republican or democrat but Hillary is smiling somewhere knowing even though she covers things up and lies she is not a radical nor bullied by those who control Biden. Choosing Hillary doesn't look so bad now.
Yeah, the federal deficit fell because several large Covid spending programs ended. Biden trying to take credit for this is like a guy who takes credit for improving his family finances by giving up hookers and heroin.
Completely incorrect? Uh no. I gave a source to confirm that the president doesn't have much pull in gas prices. Prices are set primary by the UAE and supply/demand. YOU even confirm above that Biden doesn't control gas prices, so why are we arguing?
You said - "how is the president responsible for gas prices exactly? Hint: They aren't!"
That statement is completely incorrect it implies that Biden has NO role in the current high gas prices - I explained why he does have a significant role. Biden impacted the supply and demand - the US went from net exporter to net importer - that is part of the supply and demand. Gas prices are significantly impacted by other factors than supply and demand such as cost of exploration, refining, transportation and regulations - all things that Biden impacted. Gas prices are NOT set by UAE because they do not control the US market by any means and would have close to zero power in US prices if we were still a net exporter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGuy2.5
The build back better plan was designed to tax our way out of inflation, in addition to the rising the interest rates. Both are aggressive measures necessary to ease inflation. Energy has always been one of the easier things to tax and this is no different but you are correct that the extra taxes are directly related to the presidents decisions, along with the rest of congress who had to approve it. Still, it was not a direct tax on gasoline. Perhaps the methane tax will affect gas prices in the long term but it's impossible to predict how much. Regardless, it still doesn't impact current prices so please stop giving straw man arguments that have no impact on the debate at hand.
The BBB is a complete disaster of a bill - it is the primary cause of inflation and does not do what you seem to think - it is not a "straw man" to point out things that directly or indirectly impact gas prices - which is both inflation and new taxes on businesses that drill for and refine gas. Get over it - it was the wrong bill at the wrong time and only someone that is biased would defend it - it made things much worse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGuy2.5
We just had a quarter of growth so no, we are not in a recession under your own definition, that's what my point is. I would say it's likely we will enter a recession but I can't say when.
You said "As with most false narratives you've shared so far, we still aren't showing signs of a recession." I just showed that was not true - by the textbook definition 2 quarters of down GDP defines a recession (also one does not end with a single positive quarter so not correct to say it is over). I also showed that Forbes recession tracker showed many signs of Recession. I could show others also - from CNN "There’s now a 98% chance of a recession, according to research firm Ned Davis, which brings some sobering historical credibility to the table. The firm’s recession probability reading has only been this high twice before."
Very wrong to say "False narrative" and "we still aren't showing signs of recession" - there are many signs of a recession in progress or will be soon. Also realize that there are other ways to define a recession, the 2 quarters is the textbook one but economists look at other data in determining. My main objection was your calling it false info and denying the signs and the high likelihood of a recession. So while some have not declared it yet, there are many signs that we are in a recession or close and Biden is at fault for at least part of the high gas prices and the reason we are looking at a recession.
The original article was a joke - they are trying to claim the deficit fell when it is really deficit not increasing as much because of programs expiring - that is NOT a deficit falling.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
