Quote:

---

The pandemic and market forces.

---

Shutting down exploration, leases, and pipelines isnt normally referred to as "market forces"

tysker said:

---

Quote:

---

The pandemic and market forces.

---

Shutting down exploration, leases, and pipelines isnt normally referred to as "market forces"

---

The Biden administration has signed off on more leases than Trump in his first year

Bubblez said:

---

tysker said:

---

Quote:

---

The pandemic and market forces.

---

Shutting down exploration, leases, and pipelines isnt normally referred to as "market forces"

---

The Biden administration has signed off on more leases than Trump

---

Still not a market force. That's a regulatory hurdle or barrier to entry

Tony Franklins Other Shoe said:

---

So are we tearing off "I did that" stickers yet?

---

According to an OP yesterday, we should.

Bubblez said:

---

tysker said:

---

Quote:

---

The pandemic and market forces.

---

Shutting down exploration, leases, and pipelines isnt normally referred to as "market forces"

---

The Biden administration has signed off on more leases than Trump in his first year

---

That's because..there is a delay between the auction and the leases being signed off. Biden hasn't had a new auction yet and said he won't this year either, despite the law requiring it twice a year.

Have you answered the question yet: is Biden doing a good job with the economy in your esteemed opinion?

Bubblez said:

---

tysker said:

---

Quote:

---

The pandemic and market forces.

---

Shutting down exploration, leases, and pipelines isnt normally referred to as "market forces"

---

The Biden administration has signed off on more leases than Trump in his first year

---

Biden halts oil, gas leases amid legal fight on climate cost
Biden administration freezes new oil and gas drilling leases after court rules against key climate tool
Biden pauses new oil and gas leases amid legal battle over cost of climate change

Something doesn't add up.

Of course the White House says you're a Putin stooge if you blame Biden admin for inflation.

Joe Biden’s senior adviser at National Economics Council says GOP Sen. Rick Scott is ‘fully in lockstep’ with Putin for Joe Biden for inflation https://t.co/XtcWF5K32V

— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) April 12, 2022

The dotted line is Putin's invasion of Ukraine.

Oh, wait, it's not.

It's Biden's inauguration. pic.twitter.com/4JYsxGBqDd

— Brad Polumbo 🇺🇸⚽️ 🏳️‍🌈 (@brad_polumbo) April 11, 2022

Those of us who are members of the Fightin' Texas Aggie Class of 1981 remember
starting our careers under similarly "robust" economic conditions.

Bubblez said:

---

tysker said:

---

Quote:

---

The pandemic and market forces.

---

Shutting down exploration, leases, and pipelines isnt normally referred to as "market forces"

---

The Biden administration has signed off on more leases than Trump in his first year

---

You still haven't answer my question.

Do you think Biden is doing a good job with our economy? Are things going well with the U.S. economy?

Resident concerned moderate here. When reviewing economic data one has to consider what would've happened regardless of White House occupant.

M2 money supply February 2020: $15.5T
M2 money supply February 2022: $21.6T
+$6.1T, +39%

You can't add that much additional money into the economy in two years and not have substantial inflation. This is basic Econ 101 and all you have to do is draw supply and demand graphs. This unfortunately means that there's still quite a long way to go before prices match the money supply. This is further exasperated by the fact that debt is, by historical standards, very very cheap. So that means I can buy assets like stocks or real estate with borrowed money and the interest rate that I will have to pay it back with is probably less than it will grow just by inflation alone.

If you want to blame either political party there is the Cares Act (Trump), the American Recovery Act (Biden), the environmental policies of the Biden administration that limits supply of oil and gas, and hypothetical world where Trumps second term means that Vladimir Putin does not invade Ukraine and oil prices do not rise.*

*My personal opinion where is the odds somewhere at 60% no invasion, 40% invasion. I think it's somewhat arrogant to assume Putin was not highly interested in grabbing Ukraine ASAP regardless of US palace intrigue, and I don't think that Trump was especially enthusiastic about defending NATO and Eastern Europe. However, Trump was a wild card and a somewhat irrational actor in the eyes of the international community and that more likely than not would have deterred Putin.

Quote:

---

This is basic Econ 101 and all you have to do is draw supply and demand graphs.

---

Exactly right. Injecting way too much money (IMO) into the economy increased demand. That plus a decrease in supply was a recipe for disaster.

Bubblez said:

---

ac04 said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

This is a worldwide problem, certainly not limited to the United States. Global commodities have global impacts that can't be controlled domestically.

---

actually you can control it domestically as long as you don't slow down oil and gas exploration and production with arbitrary restrictions, shut down pipelines, delay permits for new pipelines and facilities, give favorable treatment to useless "green" energy initiatives that are unreliable and not economically feasible, etc.

prior to the ban on russian oil, we were importing ~30% more from them under biden than we did under trump. why do you think that happened?

---

The pandemic and market forces. Our shale is still more expensive to produce than what is coming out from most other parts of the world which hurt domestic production significantly with the last bust cycle brought on by the pandemic.

---

Any idea why this is the case? Maybe regulations? Maybe permitting? Maybe political environment?

I seem to remember PeePaw stumping on not giving the O&G sector any more breaks. How's that wind and solar stuff getting paid for?

Maybe all of that, but this is an ignorant take from somebody who has no background in oil and gas. I have read somewhere, and this could be completely wrong, that the kind of oil and gas that comes out of the ground in the US has different chemical properties and needs to be refined differently, and this process is slightly more expensive. If someone with more direct knowledge in the industry contradicts this I will be grateful for having been further educated.

the great thing for Biden is that in the next year inflation will only be 7%

so he can brag about lowering inflation rates

(sarcasm alert)

Malibu2 said:

---

Maybe all of that, but this is an ignorant take from somebody who has no background in oil and gas. I have read somewhere, and this could be completely wrong, that the kind of oil and gas that comes out of the ground in the US has different chemical properties and needs to be refined differently, and if this is slightly more expensive. If someone with more direct knowledge in the industry contradicts this I will be grateful for having been further educated.

---

You are right and to dumb it down (not implying you are dumb). There is a huge variability in depth, formations, extraction, recovery, etc. There are light crudes and there are heavy sour crudes. Refineries were built to run mostly on a certain blends and can tweak as needed. Domestically, we don't have the volume of sour crude that is required without overhauling some refining processes for most refineries.

Another wrinkle, the Chevron Pascagoula refinery is one of the newer major refineries on the gulf coast last I checked. It was built back in the 60s and still isn't completely land locked but is getting there. You just can't magically create space and infrastructure to modify your process. Then you are dealing with your social justice/environmental racism issues, massive permitting issues, bad press, etc., so new sites are not going to happen.

You do realize getting oil out of the ground in Venezuela and Russia for examples, would be much easier because of regulatory and permitting hoops compared to US? Ivan the EPA inspector is not going to care about the massive pollution potential because he doesn't exist or is paid off. It's why the green movement is OK with electric cars because none of them live near an open pit mine with tailings and child labor that are the basis for their precious batteries. Those things magically show up already installed in the car without seeing how the sausage is made.

LMCane said:

---

the great thing for Biden is that in the next year inflation will only be 7%

so he can brag about lowering inflation rates

(sarcasm alert)

---

Next year when Biden crushes inflation rates.

Quote:

---

The pandemic and market forces.

---

LOL...

Bless your heart.

tysker said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

This is a worldwide problem, certainly not limited to the United States. Global commodities have global impacts that can't be controlled domestically.

---

I would argue the US has been exporting its inflation for decades especially to China and Japan


As a totally off topic question, if global commodities prices have impacts that cant be controlled domestically, how should we view CO2 levels in this context?

---

I'm of course a liberal and think that human caused global warming is a thing and the sooner we can transition out of fossil fuels the better it will be for all of us. Just because **** hole countries can get away with polluting the environment doesn't mean we should do so here. There shouldn't be a race to the bottom of this just so we can be more competitive.

With that out of the way anyone who has done a cursory review of energy production and distribution understands that variable generated energy cannot meet the base loads required to run our economy. That's even setting aside the corrects facts that you were brought up about how green are the sources of green energy exactly, especially when thinking through things like child labor we're open pit mines. I want to transition off of fossil fuels but I also am not going to believe in unicorn farts as a solution. I would like to have nuclear energy production.

Malibu2 said:

---

Resident concerned moderate here. When reviewing economic data one has to consider what would've happened regardless of White House occupant.

M2 money supply February 2020: $15.5T
M2 money supply February 2022: $21.6T
+$6.1T, +39%

You can't add that much additional money into the economy in two years and not have substantial inflation. This is basic Econ 101 and all you have to do is draw supply and demand graphs. This unfortunately means that there's still quite a long way to go before prices match the money supply. This is further exasperated by the fact that debt is, by historical standards, very very cheap. So that means I can buy assets like stocks or real estate with borrowed money and the interest rate that I will have to pay it back with is probably less than it will grow just by inflation alone.

If you want to blame either political party there is the Cares Act (Trump), the American Recovery Act (Biden), the environmental policies of the Biden administration that limits supply of oil and gas, and hypothetical world where Trumps second term means that Vladimir Putin does not invade Ukraine and oil prices do not rise.*

*My personal opinion where is the odds somewhere at 60% no invasion, 40% invasion. I think it's somewhat arrogant to assume Putin was not highly interested in grabbing Ukraine ASAP regardless of US palace intrigue, and I don't think that Trump was especially enthusiastic about defending NATO and Eastern Europe. However, Trump was a wild card and a somewhat irrational actor in the eyes of the international community and that more likely than not would have deterred Putin.

---

Also, the Fed changed the definition of M2 money in May 2020. Not sure if your numbers are adjusted for that change, but if not, I'm guessing the increase in money supply is actually worse than shown in your post.

So let's get thinking forward here. What needs to be done to right the ship here, knowing the right answer likely still means pain for 12 months.

Quote:

---

I would like to have nuclear energy production.

---

LINO?

nortex97 said:

---

Gas: +48.0%
Used Cars: +35.3%
Gas Utilities: +21.6%
Meats/Fish/Eggs: +13.7%
New Cars: +12.5%
Electricity: +11.1%
Food at home: +10%
Overall CPI: +8.5% pic.twitter.com/oT8RxoYqfC

— God Assigned Your Gender (@oldarmy1) April 12, 2022

Thank a Democrat/moderate/independent voter you know today!

---

Gas is up more than 48%

It's near 100%

Malibu2 said:

---

I'm of course a liberal and think that human caused global warming is a thing and the sooner we can transition out of fossil fuels the better it will be for all of us. Just because **** hole countries can get away with polluting the environment doesn't mean we should do so here. There shouldn't be a race to the bottom of this just so we can be more competitive.

With that out of the way anyone who has done a cursory review of energy production and distribution understands that variable generated energy cannot meet the base loads required to run our economy. That's even setting aside the corrects facts that you were brought up about how green are the sources of green energy exactly, especially when thinking through things like child labor we're open pit mines. I want to transition off of fossil fuels but I also am not going to believe in unicorn farts as a solution. I would like to have nuclear energy production.

---

How on earth do you think we could possibly mine enough materials to make all of the batteries your wishes would demand? And then what type of power would you use to charge said batteries?

Do you wanna know how I know you didn't read my post?

Good job democrats. Anytime you give trillions of dollars to people so they do not have to work, bring in more dependents from south of the border, and force green energy, etc. it will not work for the economy. Just dumb reckless administration. Good job Biden.

riverrataggie said:

---

So let's get thinking forward here. What needs to be done to right the ship here, knowing the right answer likely still means pain for 12 months.

---

Biden Resigns
Harris Resigns
Pelosi Resigns
McCarthy takes over in January

Inflation is much, much worse IMHO.

I am in the Truck parts industry, and we have seen 45% increases since last year and we are being told more is coming.

Now some of the price increase is transportation, some is supply and some is shortages.

cevans_40 said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

I'm of course a liberal and think that human caused global warming is a thing and the sooner we can transition out of fossil fuels the better it will be for all of us. Just because **** hole countries can get away with polluting the environment doesn't mean we should do so here. There shouldn't be a race to the bottom of this just so we can be more competitive.

With that out of the way anyone who has done a cursory review of energy production and distribution understands that variable generated energy cannot meet the base loads required to run our economy. That's even setting aside the corrects facts that you were brought up about how green are the sources of green energy exactly, especially when thinking through things like child labor we're open pit mines. I want to transition off of fossil fuels but I also am not going to believe in unicorn farts as a solution. I would like to have nuclear energy production.

---

How on earth do you think we could possibly mine enough materials to make all of the batteries your wishes would demand? And then what type of power would you use to charge said batteries?

---

What about global warming necessitates the need to transition away from the greatest source of prosperity in human history? Because the party line says so?

Nuclear is great, but so are fossil fuels. If the U.S. went to 0 carbon emissions today, that would prevent 0.3 degrees of warming over the next 100 years. That number really makes you believe we need to transition away from our current energy sources because of global warming?

We've already started the discussion of raising hourly wages again. This is brutal.

I think this is mostly correct. In 2020 the government jerked around the labor market, money supply, and overall economy far too much to come out the other side without serious pain, regardless of who was sitting in the Oval Office at the end of January 2021.

That said, Biden is making it considerably worse, and he should thank his lucky stars that Machin tanked BBB for him. $4T of new money for labor market-distorting social welfare programs and Green New Deal crap would have supercharged this already terrible inflation. Not to Weimar Republic levels but 15-20%...? That seriously might have been on the table.

On a long enough time scale setting aside pollution arguments, it will eventually run out and we do use oil for things other than energy production. Thinking ahead to future human generations we should probably find a more abundant energy source that can fuel the economy, like say the atom, than fossil fuels. I'm also under no illusion that if the US does this by itself it will make much of a difference at all in total emissions.