BOHICA

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

NBC News just said we should expect gas to rise to as much as $2.00/gal by summer. Bend over, here it comes again....

-- (@ .), February 16, 2000

Answers

When "sweetcakes" and I got married in 1973, I could buy gas for .25/gal and a new Plymouth, loaded, for $3500. So, gas @ $2.00/gal compared to cost of similar car sounds, well, reasonable. This is not to say I like it, but we are consuming fuel with our eyes closed to the future.....our kids future.

-- JB (noway@jose.com), February 16, 2000.

If I recall correctly one dollar in the early seventies went a long way. We need to look at the overall impact of what a spike in prices mean. Truckers and farmers will feel the effect immediatly. It will eventually trickle down to us. Anyone feel like getting trickled on?

-- David Whitelaw (Dande53484@aol.com), February 16, 2000.

I'm strongly in favor of cheap gas. But, even $2 a gallon is relatively inexpensive by world standards, and the rest of the world seems to survive it quite nicely.

And, while I haven't done the calculations, I suspect that even at $2 per gallon, fuel will still be less of a burden on most of us than it was in the mid-70's, both because of increased fuel efficiency in vehicles, and because the cost of gas has not kept up with the cost of inflation over the last 25 years.

In other words, just another bump in the always bumpy road of life.

-- E.H. Porter (just@wondering.about it), February 16, 2000.


Recession like the 70's, followed by an economic collapse, followed by a depression like the 30's.

The majority on this board predicted such an event, and here it comes. We knew it wouldn't take much.

-- (@ .), February 16, 2000.


And during the recession of the 70's a lot of people were predicting an economic collapse as well. Never happened. I don't know what the economy is going to do in the future, but whatever happens to it won't be caused primarily by Y2K or by $2 a gallon gas.

A lot of the predictions around here remind me of an old girlfriend of mine. She was a "doomer" long before such things were invented, and was forever predicting disasters. And, whenever a disaster occured, she was in a postion to say "I told you so," because she'd usually predicted it. But (like many of the posts on this board) she was right because since she'd predicted every conceivable disaster there could be, and some disasters do happen, by definition any disaster that occured fell within the scope of one of her predictions.

After all, even a broken clock is right twice a day (at least if it's an analog clock).

-- E.H. Porter (just@wondering.about it), February 16, 2000.



You can rationalize it any way you want. The end is still the same. The collapse is coming. You can either face it or live in denial.

-- (hal@gostek.org), February 16, 2000.

-- E.H. Porter

"And during the recession of the 70's a lot of people were predicting an economic collapse as well." Well for many people in the Pittsburgh area it was an economic collapse. You forget Mr. or Ms. Porter that many people suffered severely during the 70's in what is now the rust belt areas of the country. The only reason the term recession was coined during that time was depression was politically incorrect.

-- PA Engineer (PA Engineer@longtimelurker.com), February 16, 2000.


Hal -- Why's everyone so down on living in denial? It's worked for me for my entire life so far; why give up on a winning strategy? Plus, if I'm wrong, I'm not sure worrying about it is going to help much, nor are a few cases of bullets and tuna fish. 14 days of preps may (or may not) have been reasonably prudent, but if the entire global economy collapses, 14 days of preps will have all the long term value of spitting on a forest fire. On the other hand, if I'm correct, I'll have spared myself a lot of worry, concern and expense.

Denial really is the way to go, from both an economic and a mental health standpoint.

-- E.H. Porter (just@wondering.about it), February 16, 2000.


My dear Mr/Miz Porter,

Your words (the sounds you are making) sounds just like the grass hoppers chirping in the evening.

As for two weeks! LOL there is that much (really a small amount you know) behind the seat of my 4X4. And as for the other, I am not worried, not a bit. The stress is what kills you. If it comes..I'll get along. If I can't live forever, I'll get caught dead trying.

"As for me...I shall finish te Game"!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Shakey~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-- Shakey (in_a_bunker@forty.feet), February 16, 2000.


Shakey -- to each his own, I suppose. In a year or so, we'll know who's right. Although, I must admit that while I personally don't think the cost justifies the potential benefit, I can't disagree with the concept of long term preparedness. After all (as is pointed out around here a lot) there are a lot of potential disasters in the world besides those that are Y2K or computer related. Up here in Minnesota, everyone who's lived here for a while has had at least one event where a blizzard, windstorm or ice storm has cut of power for a number of days.

By the way, I like your "in a bunker" handle. Have you seen the movie "Blast from the Past." Out on video. Light comedy, but kinda cute bunker humor (set at the time of the 1962 Missile Crisis).

But, enough of that. This thread started out regarding a prediction of a global recession like that in the 30's. Unless you have ten years of preps, how will they help you through something like that.

chirp chirp.

-- E.H. Porter (just@wondering.about it), February 16, 2000.



My Dear Porter person During the last depression America was mostly a rural society. Everyone had a garden livestock etc. The people in the country did fine the city dwellers suffered. Unfortunatly the tables have turned and we in the rural areas will do what we can to help people. There are not enough of us small farmers left to help for long however. If you are not prepared for at least six months you my friend are a very foolish person or personette as the case may be.

-- David Whitelaw (Dande53484@aol.com), February 16, 2000.

$2 a gallon? Yeegads! That'll be almost a dime more than I paid the last time I bought some...(but I do admit to going for full service...)

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), February 17, 2000.

1. I saw $1.759 for 93 octane posted at Shell stationb off I-71 north of Cincinnati yesterday evening. It appears gas prices adjust on Wednesday following American Petroleum Institute's weekly inventory report which issues on Tuesdays. The 2/15/2000 report showed both crude and gasoline stock levels to have dropped althouth refinery utilization was up to 86%.

2. Stock levels were 282.84 million barrels for crude (23 yr low is 282.63 M bbls) and gasoline was 196.73 million bbls. on a previous post an inventory level of 185 million bbls of gasoline was iodentified as the point at which availability would be disrupted promting rationing and cutbacks.

3. A continuing crude price above $22 per bbl is definetly recessionary as it impacts other economic activity. A recession being a reduction in GNP versus a depression being broad inability of debtors ability to pay their creditors.

-- Bill P (porterwn@one.net), February 17, 2000.


Please, can someone provide a link to those refinery utilization figures. Are they updated daily/weekly/monthly?

-- Duke1983 (Duke1983@aol.com), February 17, 2000.

Bill,

That was very informative, and I appreciate your research and the time you spent to post it.

Thank you.

Although, I'm wondering about something, you said: " A continuing crude price above $22 per bbl is definetly recessionary as it impacts other economic activity."

You posted that as a statement, not an opinion. Can you show us where it says $22 per bbl is recessionary? And, can you show us how long it would have to be (at any price) to be recessionary?

-- (LL@with.oil), February 17, 2000.



Moderation questions? read the FAQ