« I'm not talking about the linens | Main | No, it ain't pretty (or easy) being me »


It's just one more thing to consider

by anna at 09:04 AM on September 25, 2004

Here's some food for thought, if not fodder for discussion: Whatever you might think about the war over in Iraq, the US's 2003 invasion of this sovereign (what does that word mean again, George W?) nation was the first such foray since 1972. In that case cowed US forces fled Saigon and soon thereafter North Vietnam conquered South Vietnam, which ceased to exist. Before that you have to go back to the early 50s, when North Korea attempted to take over South Korea only to be repelled by UN forces led by---you guessed it---US forces. Before that you must go back to the late 30s/early 40s when Nazi Germany was busily overrunning its neighbors including Poland and the cheese-eating surrender monkeys of France.

And how about this: When US forces came to save the day in 1941, we weren't the superpower we are today. In fact, our military spending lagged behind that of freaking Portugal! My how things have changed. My how much they stay the same.

Now could somebody please 'splain to me why I'm paying $2 a gallon for gas when we control the vast oil fields of Texas, Louisiana, Alaska and American Iraq (2nd largest in the world)? I'm just asking.

comments (10)

Oops, I forgot the US-led overthrow of the Taliban government in Afghanistan circa 2002. Good riddance. Except they are still there. Along with that pesky Osama, his yes-man Doc Zawahiri and Mullah Omar, of whom no pix exist. How can you hunt down a guy if you don't know what he looks like?

by anna at September 25, 2004 9:22 AM

"...why I'm paying $2 a gallon for gas when we control the vast oil fields of Texas, Louisiana, Alaska and American Iraq"
As I understand it, if you replace the question mark at the end of your question with a period, you'll have the answer (i.e. your question contains the answer to your question). We are paying two dollars/gallon because we have our hands deeper in control of oil than anyone else. We pay less for gas than everyone else, and in fact gas has never been so cheap. So we pay less than everyone else, and we're paying less and less as time goes by (i.e. if you consider the proportion of one's income devoted to buying petroleum for transportation, the numbers are as low as they have ever been).

by chris at September 27, 2004 4:26 PM

Yeah but it's all relative to your own experience. It seems like not so long ago Americans were paying $1.25 and that before we annexed Iraq.

by anna at September 27, 2004 6:16 PM

I'm well aware that the US pays significantly less for gas than most other nations - I'm not arguing that. But, Chris, given the steep rise in gas prices over the past five years I disagree with the second part of your comment. You may have statistic to back that up, but I'm just basing this on my personal experience. Five years ago, I'd regularly pay less than $1 / gal. Today, I'm paying a minimum of $2. That is a 200% increase in less than five years. While my personal income has more than increased by 200% over the past years, it isn't due to cost of living, or annual pay increase, but because then I was a student, and now I'm a professional. Even allowing for a very generous 5% cost of living increase, that would mean only about 120% increase in pay over the same period as we've seen a 200% increase in gas prices.

PS: If you have no idea what Anna's sovereignty comment refers to, than you've not likely heard the Bush "Sovereignty" Bushism. It is SO worth the listen.

by mg at September 27, 2004 6:34 PM

D'oh, stupid 404 page.

Right now Cat Stevens aka Yusef Islam is on TV bellyaching abotu being detained on a plane. What the hell was he coming to New York for? To sign a new record deal? I thought he'd renounced music. And now he says he's a victim of "racial profiling." Isn't he just an old white guy with an odd hat?

by anna at September 27, 2004 6:51 PM

Do'h. Shows how long I've been away from web stuff - I forgot the HTTP in my link. Idiot. I've since fixed the link above.

by mg at September 27, 2004 7:01 PM

What is the correct placement of the apostrophe in d'oh/do'h? Why does the word apostrophe always look mispelled, like neither/niether?

by anna at September 28, 2004 9:55 AM

Does Bush even know what sovereign means? It sounds like he may have no idea.

by Ezy at September 28, 2004 10:05 AM

Anna, I believe d'oh is the correct spelling. My understanding is that (annoyed grunt) is what was written in the script and d'oh was what Castellaneta came up with. Also, 'Yusuf Islam' is travelling in the states with his daughter, or, at least, those were their plans. Incidentially, no, he doesn't look like an old white guy. He looks like, well, like you would expect someone with the name Yusuf Islam to look like.

Chris, the reason the US pays (so much) less for gas than other nations (esp. European nations) has much more to do with taxes than with other factors. Yeah, we pay a little less to start with, and I'm the first to cry about imperialist blah, blah, blah as well, but most other countries tax the shit out of gas, whereas our own petrol taxes are fairly low by comparison. Also, there are more taxes levied along the steps of production, refiinement, etc by other nations than by us.

Right now, the price per barrel of crude is very, very high, and it's not surprising to see gas prices go up (although the delay between the change in the price of crude and the price at the pump is longer than you would expect), but what is probably a validation of your earlier sentiment is when crude prices decline and the price at the pump remains high too long. For instance, from January to March this year, gas companies gouged the fuck out us.

by Mike Sheffler at September 28, 2004 5:39 PM

Gas prices go up and down but have you ever noticed how it never quite goes down to the level it was before? It's like they've lulled us into a false sense of security with the higher prices.

by anna at September 28, 2004 6:12 PM

comments are closed